Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Bolton Pleads Not Guilty In First Court Appearance; Trump Commutes Prison Sentence Of Former Rep. George Santos; Trump Says, I Think Putin Wants To Make A Deal On Ukraine; Israel: Red Cross Receives Body Of Another Hostage. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired October 17, 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]

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN HOST: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Bianna Golodryga in for Jake Tapper.

This hour, President Trump's former national security adviser, John Bolton, making his first court appearance today after being indicted by a federal grand jury. Bolton pleading not guilty to 18 charges in his classified documents case. A former attorney for Trump joins me live in moments to react.

Plus, breaking in the nation's capital, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy emerging from a two hour long meeting at the White House and declaring, we trust the United States, this as he asks for more weapons and more security guarantees in his war against Russia.

And more than 2,500 demonstrations are planned across the 50 states tomorrow for No Kings protests against the Trump administration. What we're learning about the events and why Republicans are calling to protest anti-American.

The Lead tonight, President Trump's former national security adviser, John Bolton, pleading not guilty to all 18 charges against him in his first court appearance today. Prosecutors say Bolton shared more than a thousand diary-like pages containing classified information with family members who had no security clearance throughout his tenure, using personal email accounts, while Bolton claims he's just the latest target in Trump's weaponization of the Justice Department.

So, let's bring in CNN's Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez to explain more. So, talk us through what happened in the courtroom today, Evan.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Bianna. This was a very brief hearing, about 20 minutes, and, you know, a lot of it was very perfunctory. It was John Bolton being read his rights essentially, and that he understood these very serious charges that he's facing. The judge advised him that he faces up to ten years in prison if he is convicted. They also restricted his travel. He's not allowed to travel internationally during the time that this case is going forward.

We don't yet have a trial date. And given the fact that this involves classified information, what we saw in court is, you know, it appears that there's going to be some lengthy proceedings over how that information is shared with the defense.

And, look, the defense as you pointed out, is already going to the obvious part of this, which is the criticism of the administration and the Justice Department in this era given the prosecutions of James Comey, the former FBI director, the case that was just brought up against Letitia James, the New York attorney general. And as you saw from Bolton's own statement yesterday, he pointed out that the president is trying to intimidate his critics.

And one of the things that I think is very interesting about this indictment, it's 26 pages, and in there, there is a reference by prosecutors to the Signal gate controversy. You remember, Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, and other top officials were sharing details of a military operation in Yemen in real time on Signal, the messaging app, which is not a government app, it's not secure. And he was sharing it allegedly with his spouse and with other people, including a reporter.

And so the fact that that is in there, in this case, it kind of gives you a sense of where this case is going because we know the defense is going to make an issue of the fact that, you know, the government never tried to investigate Pete Hegseth for this -- for that breach, but yet they're going after John Bolton. Expect to hear a lot more about that in the coming months. Bianna?

GOLODRYGA: All right. Evan Perez, thank you so much.

PEREZ: Sure.

GOLODRYGA: I want to bring in former Justice Department prosecutor Jim Trusty. He's also a former attorney for President Trump. Jim, it is good to see you.

So, as Evan noted, this indictment is quite lengthy and delves into details of what Bolton is alleged to have shared. It reads, frequently, Bolton hand-wrote these notes on yellow notepads throughout his day at the White House complex or in other secure locations, and then later rewrote his notes in a word processing document on an electronic device. Often Bolton's notes describe the secure setting or environment in which he learned the national defense and classified information that he was memorializing in his notes.

So, at first glance, what do you make of these allegations?

JIM TRUSTY, FORMER CHIEF, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIME AND GANG SECTION: I make them out as very devastating. I mean, look, this is a speaking indictment. It gives a lot of information on kind of two fronts. The first is that John Bolton was the national security adviser. As someone who regularly commented on T.V., criticizing others for not handling classified material or national defense information the right way, he had a particularly easy to establish knowledge of the rules when you deal with NDI with this type of information, very sensitive information. You know, and the policy here is we don't want to have people using Gmail or AOL accounts to set up their kiss and tell book, because somebody might hack it. And that's exactly what happened here. Of all things, the national security adviser doing thousands of pages of contemporaneous notes gives that up effectively to Iran. That was the hack that happened with Iran. And then even then, when he was talking to the FBI, he didn't say anything about, by the way, I have thousands of pages of sensitive materials that they were able to access.

So, he had warning shots in terms of the SCIF being removed from his residence. They said, give us anything you have. He didn't do it. And he had a terrible moment when he started to write this book where Judge Lambert from D.C. said, you know -- and the government was seeking a temporary restraining order, which they got against him, and he said -- the judge said to Bolton, you are endangering the security of the United States and you're risking indictment. But he just plowed ahead. So, it's an amazing moment and a powerful indictment. Again, not the trial yet, but very powerful evidence summarized in this indictment.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And with regards to the hack, he says that he was forthcoming and shared all that information with the FBI. But as we've noted, this case centers on the mishandling of classified documents. If that sounds familiar, it's because it is, we're quite well-versed in that you resigned from President Trump's legal team around his classified documents case in Florida in 2023.

So, from what we've seen so far, how do you think this case compares to the president's?

TRUSTY: Well, it doesn't, I mean, look, the president actually had the lawful authority to possess the documents that he had when he took to Mar-a-Lago. He was still president. The materials that were actually recovered from Mar-a-Lago, it was part of what we see with every modern day president is that they have some materials that are still marked classified. Many of those documents are almost meaningless, and he had the Presidential Records Act protecting him from any sort of prosecution at the same time.

So, Bolton doing a kiss and tell book where he decides to essentially launder information off of sensitive documents into a personal account is is just a radically different component. It's -- look, it's a lot more like a Petraeus moment or a Comey moment, or a Joe Biden moment where people decide they want to make a million dollars, as he did on a signing bonus off a book, by essentially betraying secrets.

So, you know, this is good for the goose, good for the gander. You can't be the national security adviser criticizing everyone for their handling of these types of documents while you're trying to cash in by using those documents.

GOLODRYGA: So, there may indeed be something substantive here, and the prosecutors, we should note, did not leave this case as they did with others. But my colleague, Elie Honig, noted that in an article this morning for New York Magazine that this case is different from those who were also former critics of the president, like James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, for several reasons and explains here's why.

The Bolton case appears to differ in kind from the recent prosecutions of Comey and James. This one relates to far more serious conduct and it arose under less dubious circumstances. Ultimately, this is a problem Trump has created with his payback spree. It's increasingly hard to tell the bogus cases against his political antagonists from the valid one.

Is this a valid argument just from an optic standpoint?

TRUSTY: Well, he is making a political point more than a legal one, and I like Elie and I get the point. But, look, the reality is, you know, whether you're Abbe Lowell, or Atticus Finch, you're not going to be able to point to Letitia James or point to James Comey and say those cases are wrong, so therefore, this case is wrong against me. You know, he's in a professional environment in the Greenbelt courthouse. I worked there for ten years. You have a U.S. attorney, Kelly Hayes, who is a career prosecutor, who knows what she's doing. Look, I mean, all of the kind of histrionics about this is all politics, as John Bolton himself said the other day, it's just not going to fly.

It's extremely hard to establish some sort of vindictive or selective prosecution because you have to start with a comparison that's apple to apple, not apple to orange. Where has there been a national security adviser who hoarded materials like this for a personal book? They're just not out there. So, he is not going to get any traction on a constitutional-based dismissal, but he might get some fireworks, some political hay out of making the types of comments like that basically Elie just did.

Jim, if I can get you to respond to some breaking news that we are just getting now, we're learning that President Trump is commuting the sentence of former Republican Congressman George Santos. Santos is currently in prison for aggravated identity theft and wire fraud charges. You'll recall his colorful pass, a lot of -- his resume was embellished as he was a congressman and was elected to that. What is your immediate reaction to this? Do you agree? I guess the president has the liberty to commute people, but was this the right decision?

[18:10:02]

TRUSTY: Yes, I don't know. I mean, look, the whole pardon process got kind of different from what we've seen over the years when you had Biden commute everybody on federal death row except for three, and where he started giving out pardons to, quote, nonviolent people, that included a woman I prosecuted for three murders called the Black Widow. So, I don't know. I'd have to actually see the details.

I'm happy to think that the President is comfortable with pardon power in certain cases, but, you know, George Santos is not the top of my list in terms of sympathy. You know, I've got some other folks out there that are probably a little more deserving, but maybe there's more to the story that I don't know yet.

GOLODRYGA: So, let me just ask you legally, because he's just been commuted, how soon could we see him out of prison?

TRUSTY: That's a great question because the Bureau of Prisons, and probably during a shutdown doesn't help, can be a little bit sluggish. Sometimes it takes some aggressive lawyering to say, hey, the president just issued this commutation. I would tell you, I don't think it'll be much past Monday, but there's no guarantee that he'll be walking out tonight.

GOLODRYGA: Wait, so you think because of the government shutdown, that could delay him leaving prison now?

TRUSTY: I saw delays on that long before there was a shutdown. There's just kind of a bureaucratic inertia sometimes where they can't believe somebody's been pardoned or commuted, and it just takes a while for all the right people to talk to each other. So, if you're the lawyer, you're getting on the phone right now, you're pestering the heck out of everybody you can to try to make it happen tonight rather than like Saturday or Sunday or Monday.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Jim Trusty, thank you so much.

TRUSTY: All right, good to see you.

GOLODRYGA: You too.

Much more on the president's action in the Santos case coming up.

Plus, President Trump and Zelenskyy both making statements tonight after meeting at the White House for hours today. So, is the United States about to give Ukraine even more weapons? And what about that Trump Putin meeting? We'll talk about it all up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

GOLODRYGA: Back with our World Lead, optimism at the White House today during a working lunch between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, as Trump says he thinks he can convince Russian leader of Vladimir Putin to end the fighting and offered new insight into the next Trump-Putin summit and Budapest in the next few weeks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: It'll be a double meeting, but we will have the President Zelenskyy in touch. There's a lot of bad blood with the two presidents, and I'm not speaking out of turn when I say it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: CNN's Matthew Chance is live in Moscow for us. So, Matthew, you were in Alaska for the last Trump-Putin summit. What's changed since then that might make this one different?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, Budapest is certainly, from my point of view, a lot closer. But in terms of what else is going to have change, well, it's unclear at the moment. I mean, there's a few things I suppose you could point to. The idea that, you know, Putin and his military have not made the kind of military advances that they anticipated they would make on the ground inside Ukraine during their summer offensive. There's been increased economic pressure in Russia with the success of Ukrainian drone strikes on oil facilities and things like that, there have been fuel shortages, and so that's adding a pressure onto it.

I think, to some extent, President Trump is reinvigorated as well after the success diplomatically that is enjoyed sort of in the Middle East with the Israeli ceasefire in the release of the Israeli hostages. But in terms of, you know, what Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, is prepared to accept, I'm not sure anything's changed at all. Certainly, publicly, the Kremlin hasn't indicated it's prepared to compromise on any of its core military objectives.

You know, President Trump in a Truth Social post, which we've all seen by now, saying that he thinks that the conflict should freeze along the lines where the frontlines currently are, at least sort of hinting at that. That may well be acceptable to the Ukrainian side if there are security guarantees and if there's the backing of Ukraine's European supporters.

But it's not clear at all whether that's going to be acceptable to the Russian side. Vladimir Putin's made it clear he wants all of the territory he's annexed and to say over the future of foreign policy decisions of Ukraine. Bianna?

GOLODRYGA: Yes, both Zelenskyy and Putin congratulating President Trump for that ceasefire in Gaza.

Matthew Chance and Moscow for us, thank you so much.

Joining us now is Garry Kasparov. He is the chairman of the Renewed Democracy Initiative and publisher of the nextmove.org.

Garry, you have a new piece in the next move in which you say that even though today's meeting between Zelenskyy and Trump happened, Putin was ultimately still on top of mind. And here's what you wrote. You said, there's no way around it. Putin takes precedence over Zelenskyy and Trump's mind. No grinning photo ops are going to change that. But this handicap doesn't mean Ukraine has to lose. Kyiv and its allies still have options.

So, lay out those options for us.

GARRY KASPAROV, CHAIRMAN, RENEW DEMOCRACY INITIATIVE: Look, Zelenskyy has no other choice but to please Trump by giving all sorts of compliments. I'm not sure whether he believes it or not, but, you know, that's a harsh reality. So, we saw Marie Corina Machado, the Noble Peace laureate. You know, she had to dedicate her prize to Trump again, hoping that Trump could help Venezuelan opposition. Again, that's more of American problem, you know, that's the president is looking more like, you know, an authoritarian leader of the banana republic. But America's still the most powerful country in the world, and the landscape needs this support. But, unfortunately, again, this is that Trump has something else in mind. Everything Trump does is about Trump. And it's two criteria, money and glory, both personal. And I think the whole idea about Tomahawks was Trump's, you know, message to Putin that unless you come up -- come back with a better deal, and when I say deal, it's not about Ukraine, it's not about Russia, it's not about America, it's about Witkoff. And in this case, Witkoff -- sometimes Witkoff and Jared Kushner as an envoy to the Middle East, they're making a deal.

[18:20:06]

Trump is making deals and he's not even secretive about it.

So, the whole idea of the meeting in Budapest, I think, it's an insult to Europeans. I recommend my article that they grow some spine and will make sure that Putin doesn't land in Budapest. He cannot. There are European regulations, rules, and Putin as a war criminal, cannot travel to European country.

GOLODRYGA: I would be shocked if they actually prevented that. We shall see. But the president conceded today that perhaps Putin is, in fact, playing him to buy more time but that he ultimately thinks he wants to make a deal to end this war.

But here's what stood out to me in an article from the Financial Times. It writes, the Russian president appears to have calculated that as long as he has the upper hand on the battlefield, there is no need for him to make any concessions, even as his war economy is sputtering. This isn't about money for Putin, it's his legacy. He wants to go down as the best Russian ruler since Peter the Great. This quote was from a senior European official. So, which assessment do you think is closer to reality in your view?

KASPAROV: No. It's not about, you know, comparing Putin to Peter the Great or other Russian czars or leaders. Putin made war the main algorithm of his power, so he cannot end the war. So, even if we have a temporary end of hostilities called ceasefire, I still doubt about it, that doesn't mean the end of the war. Because Putin's war is not just against Ukraine, it's not about Ukrainian territory. It's about destroying Ukrainian statehood. That's -- he has been saying it and he's propaganda emphasized it 24/7. And also it's a war against European Union and NATO as an organization. Putin wants to push NATO back to 1997 borders. That's the strategic goal, and it has not changed.

So, no matter what Trump does, you know, it's not going to change Putin's strategic objectives. I think now we are talking, and I believe we'll find out quite soon that it is -- there's another deal behind closed doors, and that, that deal has nothing to do with geopolitical realities. It's more about, you know, Trump personal interest, as I believe you know you can find it at any so-called peace deal that Trump has concluded.

GOLODRYGA: Right. Well, we know that before a meeting between Trump and Putin, his secretary of state is expected to meet with Russian counterparts as well. Garry Kasparov, thank you so much, good to see you.

KASPAROV: Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Well, new fallout today from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, as Prince Andrew gives up his royal titles, saying the continued accusations against him, which he denies, are distracting from the work of the royal family. We'll get more from our team on the ground in London after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

GOLODRYGA: We are back with the world lead. Prince Andrew announcing today that he'll no longer use his royal titles or honors, including the Duke of York, saying, after discussing with the king and family, they've concluded the accusations against him distract from the work of his majesty the royal family. Now, Andrew vigorously denies allegations against him, including those tied to his relationships with Jeffrey Epstein and a reported Chinese spy.

CNN's Max Foster is at Buckingham Palace with more on this. So, Max, Andrew has been out of public life since 2019. So, what exactly does this announcement mean?

MAX FOSTER, CNN ANCHOR AND ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: He is even more out of public life basically. So he did retain titles like the Duke of York. He was a member of Garter, which is a highest order of chivalry. He still keeps those titles under this agreement. To strip him of them would've been a long process going through Parliament, and he's basically conceded in this big discussion that's been had with the royal family recently, and he's made it easy for them effectively by saying he just won't use those titles anymore.

He's still Prince Andrew, that's a birthright, but there are various titles he can't use anymore. He's also not being invited to family Christmas. And the messaging there is that you're not going to see him at all at any royal event. He was being seen at family events where you had cameras, not state events, but now he's not even allowed to go to them.

So, as I understand it, this comes from discussions particularly with the king and Prince William. And it was clear what the king wanted going into them because out of them, he said he's glad with the outcome. So, Prince Andrew has no public role or any privileges anymore.

GOLODRYGA: And, Max, remind us of some of the details surrounding these allegations.

FOSTER: Well, they go back a decade when Virginia Giuffre claimed that she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and forced to have sex with various people, including Prince Andrew. There are other allegations she made of abuse as well against Prince Andrew, which she always denied. And it just has haunted him. And the story keeps coming back and the family just felt they couldn't keep this scandal going on any longer because it was reflecting on their work.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Max Foster with the latest from Buckingham Palace, thank you so much.

And more now on the breaking news, just out of the White House, President Trump is commuting the prison sentence of disgraced former Congressman George Santos.

We'll be right back with more on this breaking story.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

GOLODRYGA: All right. Turning to that breaking news in our Politics Lead, President Trump just this hour commuting the sentence of former Republican Congressman George Santos, who is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence for aggravated identity theft and wire fraud charges.

Let's get straight to CNN's Kristen Holmes at the White House. Kristen, a bit of a Friday night news dump, I guess, we could describe it from President Trump. Did he say why he chose to do this?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, it seems pretty unexpected actually, because President Trump has been lobbied on this by both Santos as well as other members of Congress, like Marjorie Taylor Greene, for some time, and he has always evaded answering the question of whether or not he would pardon or commute a sentence for George Santos.

It does appear looking at George Santos' Twitter that he wrote an open letter from prison recently, as recently as this week. But if you're asking President Trump why he did it, he is linking this to Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut and saying that Blumenthal lied but never had to go to jail. And, of course, Santos lied, but did have to go to jail. And then, really, essentially saying that because Santos is a Republican, that maybe he should be -- have his sentence commuted.

This is also not the first of these former Republican politicians that he has pardoned or commuted their sentence. He did so for Representative Michael Grim, he did so for a Connecticut governor, among others, all Republican -- failed Republican politicians who had been convicted of crimes.

When it comes to Santos himself, as we know, he had been convicted of seven years for -- to a seven-year sentence. This says, according to Donald Trump, that as soon as he signs this pen, he is no longer going to be in any -- it says, releasing George Santos from prison immediately.

[18:35:08]

That's what happens as soon as he signs this commutation. Of course, I'm sure there's a lot of that has to happen in between then. But this is a lengthy screed here about Blumenthal. I will note. It was just earlier this month, maybe two weeks ago, that President Trump said he was going to look into Blumenthal. He was going to do some kind of investigation into him because he had clashed with Attorney General Pam Bondi. It's something he has brought up a lot.

Unclear whether or not this actually has anything to do with Blumenthal, but this is how President Trump is translating this. We'll wait to see reaction from Santos and other lawmakers who, of course, expelled him from the House of Representatives because he was found guilty of fraud, as well as stealing other identities, posing as donors to make donations among other things. So, we'll wait and see what the reaction is to this.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. He didn't have any fans, we should note, in the Republican Party. So, this is quite interesting.

Kristen Holmes from the White House for us, thank you so much.

Joining me now as Democratic Congressman Ted Lieu of California. So, Congressman, breaking news Friday evening, your reaction to President Trump commuting George Santos' sentence.

REP. TED LIEU (D-CA): Thank you, Bianna, for your question. My first reaction is, wow, the president really wants to distract from the Republican shutdown and the Epstein files.

Let me remind American people what disgrace former Congressman George Santos was convicted of among crimes, including identity theft, obtaining unemployment benefits through fraud, charging credit cards without authorization. He was sentenced to 87 months in prison. And now Donald Trump's action is thrusting him into a limelight and making him begin the face of the Republican Party. And I'm more than happy to talk about this commutation and what this action means because it's really the embodiment now of what the Republican Party stands for.

GOLODRYGA: How are you expecting some of your Republican colleagues to respond to this? Because as we noted, there wasn't much love lost within his own party as well.

LIEU: Well, as you had mentioned early on, some of the members of the Republican Party pushed for George Santos to get a commutation. I imagine many of them will be silent because they are very afraid of saying anything that might possibly offend the president. And so we're going to see a whole bunch of silence. That would be my guess.

GOLODRYGA: Well, you mentioned this as possibly a distraction of the government shutdown. Let's talk about that, because today, the Senate staffers were told that they won't be getting a paycheck on Monday and they won't be paid now until the shutdown ends. We don't know when that could be. Do you think this could motivate some senators to find a shutdown solution more quickly?

LIEU: I sure hope so. Democrats in the House were in D.C. this week working on behalf of American people. House Republicans were again on vacation for a third straight week. That's completely unacceptable. And I note again that Republicans control the White House, the Senate and the House. If Donald Trump simply gave the order to his Republican House and Senate leaders and said, end this shutdown, they would do it.

GOLODRYGA: Okay. We could stay on this topic, but there's so much news to get to. I do want to get your response to President Trump's former national security adviser, John Bolton, pleading not guilty to all 18 charges against him. Now, the DOJ is accusing him of mishandling classified documents. Unlike the cases against Trump's other political adversaries, many legal experts think there may be some validity to this case. You yourself are a lawyer. What do you think?

LIEU: When I served the active duty United States Air Force, I had a security clearance. And through training and other briefings, it was very crystal clear that mishandling classified information is a very serious crime. Donald Trump did that, and that's why he was indicted.

GOLODRYGA: All right, Congressman, I didn't mean to interrupt you. The president just landed in Florida, and I believe he's about to speak with reporters. Let's listen in.

Okay, we don't have his audio. There you see the president.

Congressman Ted Liu, I appreciate the time, a lot of news to get through. Thank you so much.

Well, coming up why the governor of Texas is now deploying his state's National Guard to Austin. We'll give you more details there after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

GOLODRYGA: All right. Welcome back. To discuss the breaking news in our Politics Lead, President Trump this hour commuting the sentence of former Republican Congressman George Santos, who is currently in prison serving a seven-year sentence for aggravated identity theft and wire fraud charges, back now to the panel.

Mo, your reaction?

MO ELLEITHEE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GEORGETOWN INSTITUTE OF POLITICS AND PUBLIC SERVICE: Look, this is a guy who, as you said, identity theft, wire fraud, a professional grifter. If you voted for Donald Trump because you thought he was going to drain the swamp, because you believed him when he said he wanted to level the playing field for everyday Americans, like today is another example of why you should be disappointed.

He just seems to go out of his way time and time again to show that he will do whatever it takes to support those who support him and punish those who oppose him. It's -- I wish I could say I'm surprised by this. I'm not. But it's yet another example of him going against exactly what he said he was going to be as president. GOLODRYGA: So, T.W. do you think George Santos was deserving of this commutation? He wasn't exactly the most beloved figure in America, much less Congress.

T.W. ARRIGHI, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Maybe not beloved, depending on what circle you ran in. I think -- I thought his cameos were very funny.

Look, I don't know the exact petition put forward to the president. Obviously, George Santos was convicted of a number of crimes.

[18:45:03]

And if the president thought the DOJ thought that it was an overreach or it was targeted at him, it's within the president's right to commute a sentence. The president -- that authority lies with the president alone and his judgment alone.

GOLODRYGA: Okay. So let's now turn to what we're expecting to see in cities across the country, millions turning out for this weekend's No Kings event, protesting the Trump administration. You had the Republican Texas governor, Greg Abbott, deploying his state's National Guard to the capital of Austin and even posting on social media, saying anyone destroying property or committing acts of violence will be swiftly arrested.

In response to this, the top Democrat in the House state and the Texas state house, Gene Wu, responded by saying, quote, "sending armed soldiers to suppress peaceful protests is what kings and dictators do, and Greg Abbott just proved he's one of them."

T.W., your reaction to what were seeing from the governor and how the Democrat there responded.

ARRIGHI: My question to Mr. Wu is, was Tim Walz a dictator when he sent it in response to the protests in 2021, or Tony Evers a dictator, when he did the same?

Look, Greg Abbott is trying to avoid the issues of the past, the destruction of the past with these protests. It is absolutely within his rights to protect property. We are all for free speech. But what about the rights of the business owner who gets their store torched, or the homeowner who gets their windows broken? When do we start saying we got to protect them, too?

I think Greg Abbott is getting ahead of this and making sure we don't have those problems.

We've seen in protests recently on the left that they have turned destructive or violent. I think it is wise to protect the citizens and protect the people in that protest. I think it's the right idea.

GOLODRYGA: So as opposed to exercising their constitutional right and perhaps responding if things do get violent, Moe, it appears that Republicans, as we just heard from T.W., are getting ahead of this and already calling this antifa-driven, that these ralliers hate America. Here's how one of the kings organizers is responding to these

Republican attacks.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EZRA LEVIN, NO KINGS ORGANIZER: Why are they coming at us now? And it's because they are worried that they are losing their grip on power. They are worried that other people in blue states, red states and purple states, in rural communities in Trump country are going to see the public doesn't support this, and that makes them scared.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Mo, your reaction is this how you think its making Republicans feel? Or Democrats having an effective narrative here?

MO ELLEITHEE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GEORGETOWN INSTITUTE OF POLITICS & PUBLIC SERVICE: I'm old enough to remember, that Republicans criticizing Hillary Clinton for calling Trump supporters deplorable. And when they blamed Democrats' use of the word fascist on other recent violent acts, and maybe right to do so, but to now call what are overwhelmingly peaceful protesters, antifa driven speaker today said they hate America, that's -- you know, that's a way to turn off a lot of people. And it's using the same tactics that they just a short time ago denounce.

And I'm also old enough to remember on January 6th when protests at the Capitol turned violent and destructive and the president refused to send in the National Guard and ended up pardoning those very same violent protesters. So I'm a little skeptical of their rhetoric and their reasoning here. I remember driving around in the D.C. suburbs during the last No Kings rally.

Those were peaceful protesters, little old ladies, suburban parents and their kids out waving signs, exercising their disapproval and dissatisfaction with this president and his approach to governing. But if this president and his supporters want to continue to try to intimidate and silence peoples right to do that I think there's going to be a reckoning come election day.

GOLODRYGA: T.W., what do you think? Are Republicans scared?

ARRIGHI: No, I think the people who make up the No Kings rally are made up of people on the fringe of the left. Yes, I am sure there are old ladies and children, and I denounce political violence of any kind on the right or the left. But I think what the speaker was getting at is that the Democratic Party is being held hostage by a radical element that does harbor ill will toward many of the institutions of the United States.

Zohran Mamdani has had to walk back 15 different crazy things, he said, speaking out against America or talking to a guy who said nine 9/11 was a good thing. Peace is always great. You have the right. Peaceful violence is -- political violence is never an answer.

[18:50:03] GOLODRYGA: Well, let's hope for a peaceful weekend ahead. Thanks to you both.

Well, breaking news from the Middle East. Israel says Hamas has just handed over the body of another deceased hostage. But more than a dozen still remain in Gaza. The brother of one of those hostages joins me next, as his family is still awaiting for closure.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:54:46]

GOLODRYGA: Breaking in our world lead, Israel says it received another body of a deceased hostage. If the identity is one of the 19 deceased hostages still in Gaza, it would mark the 10th return to Israel. Hamas says it needs special equipment to find others.

[18:55:00]

Israel accuses Hamas of violating the ceasefire agreement. As this dispute continues, so does the relentless cycle of grief for families.

For the Adar family, Hamas killed Tamir Adar, a son, brother, husband and father.

Tamir's brother Nir joins us now.

Nir, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us.

I can only imagine how harrowing this week has been for you. I saw reports of your mother saying how your family can only deal with the loss of your brother once his body is found. I've heard similar statements from other parents like Ronen and Orna Neutra, who are waiting to properly bury their son Omer, who was an American-Israeli killed on October 7th. Just seeing all of the emotions this week, in particular the return of the live hostages, some of the burials and memorials for those deceased hostages whose bodies have been returned.

Can you talk to us a bit about the emotional rollercoaster this has been for you this week?

NIR ADAR, BROTHER'S BODY STILL HELD IN GAZA: That's exactly what I wanted to say, that it has been a rollercoaster. And first of all, we are extremely happy to see the families reuniting with their loved ones. And -- but on the same time, we're still waiting for our loved ones. We are full of fear and anxiety and stress.

We don't know where it's going to -- as you said, it has been a roller coaster. The days are really long, each and every minute, anything can change. And we don't know anything. And we must stay strong.

But it's really hard. It's really, really hard because for now, we feel like we have left behind. The deal is signed and I want to thank the American government and President Trump and the mediators and the state of Israel. But for us, the deal hasn't happened because there was a deal. But my brother is not here. And another 18 people. When Hamas kidnapped these people, they kidnaped also our families. So, we are not -- I'm not fighting only for my brother. I'm fighting for bringing back my family from Hamas tunnels actually the terror we experienced on October 7th didn't end there. We were experiencing -- we are experiencing this terror until these days.

GOLODRYGA: Yeah, I've heard that from so many Israelis that October 7th has continued for the past two years, even though for thankfully, many of those hostage families, they had their loved ones come back. 20 of them alive. So far. Not all of the 28 bodies of the deceased have been returned. And you mentioned that anything could change any minute.

We're hearing that Hamas has said that they will release the remains of one of the hostages sometime tonight. This is coming after pressure from both Israel and the United States. Israel is saying that according to their own intelligence, they believe Hamas has access to several other bodies.

Has your family been updated at all about whether or not that could include your brother?

ADAR: I didn't got any news for the about the next release, but the thing is that the deal said that all 48 hostages was supposed to release within 72 hours. There are many, many hours and days after. So, Hamas broke the deal.

So actually, for us, there was no deal. My brother is not here.

GOLODRYGA: And I was so moved when I read that your nephew Assaf, who was just seven years old on October 7th, 2023, still asks you when is his dad coming home after his dad promised him after putting them in a safe room, that he would be back in two minutes?

I hope that happens. I hope that that happens very soon, so that you and your family can finally have a proper burial for his father, for your brother. May his memory be a blessing.

Nir Adar, thank you so much for the time today.

And coming up Sunday on "STATE OF THE UNION", Republican Senator Katie Britt of Alabama and DNC chair Ken Martin. That is Sunday morning at 9:00 Eastern and again at noon.

You can follow me on X and Instagram @biannagolodryga. You can follow the show on X @TheLeadCNN.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.