Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Palace Removes Prince Andrew's Title, Evicts Him from Royal Residence; Trump Instructs Pentagon to Start Testing Nuclear Weapons; Mysterious Interstellar Comet Arrives at Closest Point to Sun. Vance Fails To Denounce Antisemitic Remark At Conservative Event; New Netflix Series Highlights A Real-Life Presidential Tragedy. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired October 30, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to the Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

This hour, dramatic new fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal, King Charles is stripping his brother, Prince Andrew, of his title and his royal mansion amid renewed scrutiny of Andrew's friendship, shall we say, with late convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. We're going to go live outside Buckingham Palace with all the breaking news.

Plus, President Trump says the U.S. is going to restart nuclear weapons testing. The last time the U.S. did this was in 1992.

[18:00:00]

So, why the sudden announcement and does President Trump really understand what he's asking for here?

Also, it's the rare space object taking the internet by storm. NASA is calling it an incredibly rare interstellar comet that started from outside our solar system, but at least one astronomer is saying this could be alien technology.

And it's the true story of an unlikely president and the man who killed him, the creator of a new series coming to Netflix is here to explain how a series based in the 1800s is still so relevant today.

The Lead tonight, breaking news from across the pond, King Charles is stripping his brother, Andrew, of his title, he's no longer Prince Andrew. He's also kicking him out of the royal mansion, his royal mansion, according to a late night announcement from Buckingham Palace. The move comes as Andrew's relationship with notorious pedophile Jeffrey Epstein is back in the spotlight after the posthumous memoir of Epstein and Prince Andrew accuser Virginia Giuffre, which that memoir included her renewed claims that Andrew sexually assaulted her when she was a teenager. Andrew has repeatedly denied those crime.

CNN's Max Foster is standing by outside Buckingham Palace. Max? Max?

Okay, we're having some audio problems with Max there. And so we are going to bring in CNN's Royal Historian Kate Williams. Kate, as we wait for us to get our comms back with Max, has anything like this ever happened before in recent royal history?

KATE WILLIAMS, CNN ROYAL HISTORIAN: This really is unprecedented, Jake. This is a huge move from the Royal family. Just recently, the king announced that Andrew was stepping back from the title Duke of York, just a few days before Mrs. Giuffre's memoir was published, Nobody's Girl. But that simply, I think, wasn't enough of public opinion. And now we have Andrew being evicted pretty much from royal lodges, 30-room mansion in Windsor Great Park on the crown estate and losing the title of prince.

Now, we have had people in the past losing the title of prince or princess. Henry VIII said his daughters were no longer legitimate after he annulled the marriages with their mother's, Catherine of Aragon (INAUDIBLE), but he changed his mind later. And also in 1917, there was a deprivation of Titles Act through Parliament about German members of the royal family, descendants of Victoria, Queen Victoria, who were fighting in the German army in World War I. So, they were deprived of their titles of prince.

But this is unprecedented. There's no suggestion of legitimacy, and there's no suggestion that Andrew is fighting with an enemy army. This is simply the case that, as Buckingham Palace's statement says, he's conducted these errors of judgment. That's their wording. Many of us would say that what Andrew has been accused of, which, of course, he's denied, is quite shocking. And, you know, these really do -- these are really criminal acts.

TAPPER: Yes. The thing is, though, none of this is new. I mean, Virginia Giuffre made her charges a long time ago, that famous BBC interview that created an entire movie called The Interview, in which he had no good explanation or credible answers about his relationship with Virginia Giuffre. That was years ago too.

A few weeks ago, Andrew said he would stop using his titles and, of course, he officially removed himself from public life in 2019. There must be something else going on, don't you think, I mean, conversations behind the scenes. What do you think they looked like among the royal family to make them come to this conclusion? Do you think they discovered something that we don't know?

WILLIAMS: Yes, I think you are right, Jake. Essentially, as you say, this has been going on for so many years. I mean, in fact, it really has been going on, hasn't it, since 2011, that infamous photo of Epstein, after he'd been accused of procuring young girls and that photo of him and Prince Andrew walking round Central Park. I mean, it was just shocking. And then the Emily Maitlis this interview, the exposition of this photograph you're showing now with Andrew with Virginia Giuffre that she's written about in her memoir, and he's had to step back from being a working royal.

But I simply think the fact was it wasn't enough. I think that Mrs. Giuffre's memoir coming out just a week -- not even two weeks ago now, that the idea, I think, really the royal family, not just the revelations in there, and it's a really tough read. I've been reading it. It's very devastating what she's been through, but also the fact that once her memoir is out there, other people will come forward. And our Sunday newspaper here in the U.K. has actually found someone who was sent by Epstein to have dinner with Prince Andrew. Now, she won't speak other than through her lawyers, but Virginia Giuffre has been very clear there are other young girls, other young women who are procured by Epstein, who were trafficked by him. There are many other women out there who know more to say. And the fact is that, possibly, I think these revelations are coming. And, certainly, when the Epstein files, if the Epstein files are released, they will be very damning.

And simply the swell of public opinion here in U.K. is absolutely against Andrew.

[18:05:02]

The idea that just stepping back from Duke of York title was enough, simply it is not. The people, public wanted him no longer to be prince and they wanted him out of Royal Lodge. So, the royal family has had to act quickly. It's damage control.

TAPPER: Kate, stand by. I want to -- I think our comms with Max Foster outside Buckingham Palace are resumed. Max, if you can hear us walk us through this decision.

MAX FOSTER, CNN ANCHOR AND ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Kate was talking about that public pressure. I think it completely caught everyone off guard. Politicians started getting involved. It did focus, as Kate says, around the title, but actually the fact he had this huge mansion, and he insisted on staying in there and they were starting the process of seeing whether or not there was a way of getting him out effectively.

Politicians coming out quite loudly, particularly conservatives, which is really unusual to speak up on a royal issue, they'll normally leave it to these guys at the palace, and Charles felt that and he saw it evolve. He says he was always planning to do more, according to the sources I've been speaking to, and now we've got to the point where we were talking last week, weren't we, Jake, about how these titles he has, Andrew agreed to stop using them. Charles has gone this extra way, actually taking them away from him. And he's spoken to the chancellor and said, you know, let's find a way of stripping him of them completely.

So, now he is just Andrew of Mountbatten Windsor, that is his name, and he's being evicted effectively from that huge mansion. Where does he go? Sources telling me he's going to be given a house on King Charles' private estate at Sandringham, and it looks like he's going to get an income from King Charles as well.

So, I'm not entirely sure this is going to solve it for the public who's so adamant about Prince Andrew being sent away as far as possible, because they're still going to say you're still paying him, so you're still supporting him. And, you know, all this talk of a cover-up is a problem for the king, but he seems to be doing as much as he feels he can.

TAPPER: Kate, six years ago, in 2019, then-Prince Andrew said he would cooperate with law enforcement investigations into Jeffrey Epstein in the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York. U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman reached out to Prince Andrew's team. This is what U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman told me about what happened next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEOFFREY BERMAN, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK: His lawyers gave us the runaround. We even filed an MLAC (ph) request, which was an official request to interview a foreign witness with the government officials in the U.K., and that got stonewalled.

He said he was willing to give it to us. He didn't give it to us. He stonewalled us. And as of the day I left, he was stonewalling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I guess I have a lot of questions about that, Kate. One of them is, why do you think he never cooperated? And another is, why wasn't that sufficient for the British family, for the royal family to get -- to take such a step? I mean, you're not even cooperating with law enforcement?

WILLIAMS: Yes, that's it. You're not even cooperating, as you say, Jake, and you are lying, essentially lying to use a severe word. You're lying and saying that you have, you're saying that you will. And people thought that he was going to, and, of course, the U.S. authorities, as you say, said he hasn't.

Now, that is really quite shocking. But we have seen Prince Andrew telling lies throughout all of this. In 2019, in that interview he gave to Emily Maitlis of the BBC, that famous interview, he said he didn't see Epstein after the sex allegations came out. Now, we recently had revelations that he -- when the allegations came out, he actually wrote to Epstein, sent an email and said, let's play again soon, I mean, terrible, and we are all in this together.

So, Andrew has told repeated lies. He hasn't cooperated because simply he doesn't want to get involved in a criminal trial. He doesn't want to be asked these questions. It's very interesting, isn't it, Jake, that Andrew used to be known as Air Mars Andy for all his traveling. Now, he's never left the U.K., as far as we know. He's not going to New York anytime soon because he will be asked to come in.

TAPPER: And, Max, King Charles obviously had to make this decision about his own brother. Walk us through the family politics here.

FOSTER: Well, I've spoken to a few people. They're talking about welfare of individuals. They're saying they've had to take into account the welfare of individuals because of the huge amount of pressure on them, you can only imagine. They're talking about Andrew and Sarah Ferguson here. I asked about Sarah Ferguson, his partner, his ex-wife, what's going to happen to her? They're saying she's going to have to make her own arrangements, so she's pretty much sent out there. Maybe she'll be able to stay on this other house that Andrew's promised in Sandringham. I think a big part of the debate has been around the girls, usually in Beatrice, and they are going to be allowed to keep their titles. So, I think they were part of this negotiation and the parents wanted to make sure they were going to be okay. They still have, you know, quite prominent state apartments, one down the road here in St. James', one at Kensington Palace. So, they're being protected here.

But the politics is that it's his brother we're talking about, King Charles' brother.

[18:10:02]

And so in terms of sending him out completely into the cold, that hasn't happened. He has been given a house and he is going to get an income from the king. So, that's the -- you know, that's the compromise here for the king. But he's a monarch and he's also having to deal with public pressure.

TAPPER: All right. Max Foster and Kate Williams, thank you so much, I appreciate it.

President Trump says the U.S. military is going to restart nuclear testing, which the U.S. has not even done since 1992. Does the president even know what he's asking for here? This hasn't been done in decades.

Plus, a federal judge signals that she may intervene as millions of low income Americans are set to lose food stamp benefits in just two days. That story's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our World Lead, President Trump may have just pulled the rug out from 30 years of U.S. nuclear policy. Last night, he posted this on Truth Social, quote, because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War, that's the Pentagon, to start testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis. That process will begin immediately.

Now, Trump there seems to be referring to Russian and China, countries that he says are in second and third place when it comes to U.S. nuclear capabilities, respectively.

[18:15:07]

We should note the last time the U.S. tested nuclear weapons was in 1992 under George H.W. Bush.

Joining us now is Michael McFaul, former US Ambassador to Russia under President Obama. He has a brand new book out that's called Autocrats Versus Democrats, China, Russia, America, and the New Global Disorder.

So, first of all, Michael, thank you so much for joining us. It's great to have you here. I want you to take a listen to Vice Admiral Richard Correll testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VICE ADM. RICHARD CORRELL, U.S. NAVY: I believe the quote was, start testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis. Neither China nor Russia has conducted a nuclear explosive test. So, I'm not reading anything into it or reading anything out to it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This is what's so confusing about this announcement by President Trump, Russia and China are not testing nuclear weapons, right. So, the admiral there, the vice admiral trying to seem chill about it. Are you feeling similarly chill?

MICHAEL MCFAUL, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA: First, let's be clear. It's a really bad idea. We don't need to do it. That's why we haven't done it since 1992. And if we begin to test our nuclear warheads, that will encourage China to do it. And we are way ahead in testing. They've only done it, you know, I think around 50 tests. We've done thousands. We don't want them to close that gap.

So, I think it's a really bad idea and it would have to be done underground. You know, which state wants to do that? But the second thing is I do think the president's probably confused. It's one thing to explode nuclear warheads. It's another thing to test their delivery systems. And I think he might be confused. He saw that Putin threatened to test a couple of their new delivery systems, and so maybe that what he was referring to, and I hope it dies away because it's a bad idea. It's not in America's national interest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, Putin, as you note, he, just yesterday claimed that an experimental nuclear-powered underwater torpedo, called the Poseidon, had been successfully test launched for the first time. They're also testing nuclear readiness, which is, again, not the same thing as testing nuclear warheads. How do you think the Kremlin is reacting to President Trump's announcement?

MCFAUL: Well, Putin loves to saber-rattle and he loves to threaten to use nuclear weapons. He even did that most dramatically in the fall of 2022 when his army was losing in Ukraine. I think that's a very dangerous precedent to get into threatening each other. I write about that in my book where we did that in 1962. Let's not repeat it with either Russia or China.

But he's very proud of his new delivery systems. This Poseidon missile has been in works for decades. I remember learning about it when I worked at the White House. And he thinks by doing that, it's one of the few instruments of power that puts them on the same stage as the United States. Because when we talk about the economy and we talk about other metrics of power, they're a distant third and sometimes even not in the top ten.

TAPPER: So, President Trump has in the past talked about denuclearization, about reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world. Obviously, that was in the past. You know the chief U.S. negotiator for the 2010 new START Treaty, which reduced Russia and the U.S. overall deployed nuclear warheads to the smallest number since the nuclear age began. Are you worried that the announcement from President Trump about new testing of nuclear weapons puts this treaty in jeopardy?

MCFAUL: I am. The new START Treaty, that was a great achievement in the Obama administration. I worked on that as a White House official. We got rid of 30 percent of the nuclear weapons in the world. I think that's good for America and good for the world. And the president should -- instead of thinking about nuclear testing again, he should try to figure out how to stretch that treaty out. It expires next year.

And, Jake, you know, my views on Vladimir Putin and his horrific, atrocious war of imperialism in Ukraine, and we should be doing more to push back on that. I wish the president would give the Ukrainians more and better missiles. But at the same time, I still think it's in everyone's interest to continue the new START Treaty, and the president should focus on that rather than talking about new nuclear tests.

TAPPER: I mean, they like to call him the president of peace. And, well, we'll leave it there.

Ambassador Michael McFaul, the new book again it's called, Autocrats Versus Democrats, China, Russia, America, and the New Global Disorder. Thank you so much, Michael. Good to see you, as always.

A mysterious interstellar visitor is speeding past the sun. Why this truly rare object is gaining so much attention on the internet and from scientists.

[18:20:01]

That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: The truth is out there. In our Out of This World Lead, astronomers and the internet are abuzz with curiosity and various theories about a rare and mysterious object from outside our solar system currently speeding past the sun. So, what exactly is it? Why is there so much excitement and speculation?

CNN's Tom Foreman is here with me at the Magic Wall to give us some answers. There's so much speculation. What do we know about this?

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We know it's a really big, really fast comment called A.I. Atlas, and it's passing through from out in space very far beyond where we normally are. It is getting a lot of attention because these are observation from other satellites, not only on Earth, but from one going to Jupiter and some looking at Mars, and they've managed to get some pictures of this and get some idea of what it is and where it's going, and that's why it's exciting.

[18:25:03]

It's unusual.

TAPPER: But it's not just common folk like us.

FOREMAN: No.

TAPPER: Scientists and astronomers who are really fascinated by this.

FOREMAN: Yes.

TAPPER: Excited.

FOREMAN: And they're excited about it because, I mean, look here, I mean, here it looks like a termite crossing a marble countertop, but nonetheless, that's the actual image.

Here's what we know about it. This is the -- it was first spotted on July 1st. It's when we say three interstellar, that means it's only the third interstellar object known to pass through our solar system, meaning it came from outside and it was called Atlas because of Chilean observation station called Atlas. And 170 million miles from Earth will be here at its closest point. But, as I mentioned, very fast, 130 thousand miles per hour, very big, about three and a half miles across, they think, a little hard to tell.

TAPPER: So, we had on this scientist from Harvard who has this theory that this is potentially alien technology. That's one of the things out there. And this is a Harvard scientist saying this.

FOREMAN: Yes. Because he is got this scale that he's put together to say what's unusual about.

TAPPER: Well, can we rule it out?

FOREMAN: There are -- well, we will get to that. First of all, it is unusual. Look, it doesn't really have much of a tail. As I said, it's very big. It's very fast. These images from the various observational systems out there can only tell us so much about it. They're excited about it. The other scientists are excited about it because they're saying this may have come from way out on the edge of the Milky Way galaxy. This could be 11 billion years old, whereas our solar system's about 4.6 billion.

And if you look at it closely, maybe you'll find clues about what else is going on in the universe out there. Also it is doing some unusual things. It doesn't really have a tail like we would normally see on a comet. It's giving off different gas and water mix than what we're used to. As I said, it's very, very big. It's traveling very, very fast.

And there are some things about its behavior that makes some people say, well, that's kind of strange. Does that mean it's an alien spacecraft? I don't know. But I will say this, that if it does land and you see anything like this --

TAPPER: Okay, yes. I think it's very clear that aliens would look exactly like us dressed up as aliens.

FOREMAN: Yes. And all I know is I don't think this is going to happen, but if it does, you say, klaatu barada nikto.

TAPPER: Yes.

FOREMAN: That's what I'm told.

TAPPER: Just watch out if they have a cookbook that says, to serve men.

FOREMAN: It's people.

TAPPER: Tom Foreman, thanks so much.

FOREMAN: You're welcome.

TAPPER: Coming up, you may know him from The Big Lebowski or True Grit, but actor Jeff Bridges is also the founder of the End Hunger Network. And as we prepare for SNAP benefits to end Saturday because of the government shutdown, he is going to join us with a message to lawmakers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

TAPPER: In the Politics Lead, legal intervention could be on the way ahead of Saturday's expiration date for SNAP food assistance benefits. A federal judge saying she'll act to compel the Department of Agriculture to use its $6 billion contingency fund towards SNAP. But that money could still be delayed and Americans who rely on federal aid are now turning towards other resources for help getting food on the table next week.

CNN's Danny Freeman is at a food pantry in Delaware County outside Philadelphia. Danny, what's the impact been like there?

DANNY FREEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And, Jake, frankly, the impact has been very fast and very stressful here for so many in this community. We spent much of the afternoon at Loaves and Fishes. It's a food pantry here, like you said in Delaware County and Delco. And we saw firsthand just a number of people coming out here to their food distribution this afternoon, specifically because they were fearing these SNAP benefits running out when the new month begins.

The pastor here said that they have seen an increase of 30 percent in terms of families who have been coming out needing that extra support. He also said that he's had trouble because it's happened so quickly keeping parts of his pantry stock.

The other thing too, Jake, is that he said it actually scared him last week because it felt similar to the pandemic and the demand that they saw then. But the key difference he said between then and now is that then there was the promise of federal help. And, of course, the challenge here is that federal help is going away. Now, I want you to take a listen to what two women told me who were coming to get help here at the food pantry. And mind you, the first woman you're going to hear from is a mother of four.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KHLOE MCGEE, SNAP RECIPIENT: It is a lot. It is just like a piece of your livelihood getting taken away granted I don't want to be on SNAP benefits the rest of my life, but it has carried us over this fall. So, yes, it's a big impact.

PAMELA KELLY, SNAP RECIPIENT: We don't know what we do. But just wouldn't pray to God that these politicians would make up their minds, whether it's Republican or Democrat, who would need to come together and fix these issues.

FREEMAN: Yes. It seems like it's it -- for you, it's less about even one side or the other. Just like, please, both of you come because this is not sustainable?

KELLY: Exactly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: And now, Jake, I'll note we've seen governors from other states and other smaller municipalities step up and try to fill in some of the gaps left by this, again, potential expiration of SNAP benefits. We're expecting to hear more from Governor Shapiro on perhaps one of those types of efforts tomorrow afternoon. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Danny Freeman on the ground at a Delaware County food bank, thanks so much.

Joining us now is actor and activist Jeff Bridges. He's the founder of the End Hunger Network. Also with us Billy Shore, the executive director of Share Our Strength, which also works to combat hunger in the United States. Both of you, welcome back to The Lead.

Jeff, we're talking to you and Billy because we spent many days here talking to members of Congress, many of whom can't seem to see past the politics of the shutdown to offer much in the way of meaningful advice for people struggling with the impacts of the shutdown right now. Can you tell us about the resources available for families who rely on food stamps or SNAP?

[18:35:00]

JEFF BRIDGES, ACTOR: Yes. Well, that's what's kind of bizarre. I was just talking to Billy about this, but I understand there's $5 to $6 billion available even while, you know, the government is shut down to provide people with food who need it. Talk a little bit about that, Bill.

TAPPER: Yes, Billy, just to -- we've -- and we have covered this, but the Department of Agriculture has this $6 billion contingency fund, and until September 30th, they said the fund could be used to help with any shortfall given a government shutdown, but now they've completely reversed course and they say, oh, no, we can't use it for that, even though appropriators in Congress are telling the Department of Agriculture, we can use the money that way, we can use it so that people don't go hungry. What do you make of the Agriculture Department's decision?

BILLY SHORE, FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE CHAIR, SHARE OUR STRENGTH: Well, Jeff used the word bizarre a moment ago. I'll use it in this context as well. I think a lot of pressure is going to increase on USDA. That's what these funds are for. As you know, Jake, and as I think you pointed out the other day, it would only extend benefits for a few weeks, but that could still be critically important to families who are, you know, right on the cliff now and getting pretty desperate. We've heard from so many people who are worried about, you know, how this is going to work out.

And there is no replacing SNAP. It's our largest federal food program. And so it's absolutely critical. And you know what's so interesting right now is everybody is stepping up, except the federal government. Governors are finding funds to, you know, increase grants to food banks. Mayors are doing the same thing. Nonprofits are doing it, Share Our Strength will allocate a million dollars over the next few weeks. The federal government's the only one that seems to be not responding to this crisis.

TAPPER: Jeff, as someone who's --

BRIDGES: And SNAP -- Oh, I was just going to say, SNAP has never been shut down, has it? You know, no matter if the government is shut down or not, it's never been shut down.

TAPPER: No, it hasn't. And as someone who's devoted so much time and advocacy work to end hunger, and we've talked about this, how sad it is that in the wealthiest country in the world, we still have so many Americans dealing with this, how does it make you feel to see members of Congress who can't seem to see past the politics of it all when it comes to hungry children, literally hungry children?

BRIDGES: Yes. It's so bizarre here in this wealthiest country in the world. We have enough food. We have enough money, we have enough programs to end childhood hunger and to use feeding kids as a weapon, you know, going back and forth doesn't make any sense. You know, Billy and I have been traveling all over the country talking to governors and mayors in the states themselves, and Republicans, Democrats, independents, they all agree that, you know, we should feed our kids. There's no reason not to do that. And to have the feds getting in the way of this thing is -- talk about bizarre, it certainly is.

TAPPER: So, Billy, Democrats say that the shutdown fight is over the Medicaid cuts, the healthcare cuts in the Republican One Big, Beautiful Bill, and we should note that some of those cuts include the fact, at least according to the Congressional Budget Office, that SNAP participation cuts made in this bill will mean SNAP participation will reduce 2 million people participating over the next decade. How is your organization preparing to weather that potential uptick in need? SHORE: Well, we're doing everything we can to work with state and local governments so that they will have more of the resources they need to make sure that at least every dollar, every eligible person is enrolled in this program. You know, some of this is going to be based on error rates, payment error rates, and we're going to be working with states to reduce their payment error rates so they have more SNAP dollars available.

But, you know, Jake, it's almost like these decisions are being made, these deliberations are being conducted by people who have never stood in a food pantry. I mean, you have, Jeff has, my wife and I were in one last Friday. It's heartbreaking when you see a mom in there with her children trying to distract them so that they don't realize where they actually are, or a middle aged man comes in for the first time and is asking, you know, what am I permitted to take? How does this work here?

If any of our members of Congress spent time in these food pantries or, you know, food banks, they would have a different sense of urgency than they're showing right now.

TAPPER: Jeff, any last words before we say goodbye?

BRIDGES: Well, just that this is such a solvable problem and I want to let people know out there that please support your local food banks and resource centers in your towns, but also, you know, go to nokidhungry.org to find out how you might affect the federal government on this.

[18:40:02]

TAPPER: Two of my favorite people in the world, Jeff Bridges and Billy Shore, thank you so much.

BRIDGES: Nice day with you, Jake. Hey, Bill.

TAPPER: Ahead, the criticism, the vice president, J.D. Vance, is getting from some conservative Jews about what he did not say after taking a question from a student at Ole Miss.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Our Politics Lead now, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is fuming after his Republican counterparts held a Republicans-only briefing on the strikes by the Trump administration against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): If you are sitting in this room getting clearly what had been prior gang of eight level classified information, didn't somebody raise their hand and say, well, holy crap, we're the Democrats. We got a ham handed, oh, maybe you're right, whatever. I say bullshit.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: All right, my panel joins me now, same gang. Xochitl, is this, do you think, the White House trying to keep Democrats in the dark or are we just like beyond the age of bipartisan consultation?

[18:45:06]

XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think we're beyond the age of Congressional consultation, to be honest with you. I think there are a lot of Democrats who are upset that Congress was not briefed or did not authorize, what the White House -- the White House took action.

And I honestly think that the fact that the White House hasn't been able to answer basic questions about the operation and not only who they shut down, et cetera, I think that's where the frustration is at.

But I do think that in this partisanship that we're at, the White House wants to give Republican Republicans their talking points on the strikes, and they don't care about having to brave Democrats. This is all about politics.

TAPPER: One of the only Republican voices sounding the alarm about just the precedent that is being set here with these strikes is Rand Paul. But Democrats were invited to a briefing, we should note, today by the Pentagon.

And one Democratic congresswoman summed up what she learned this way, quote, they said that they do not need to positively identify individuals on the vessel to do the strikes, adding that that was in part why administration could not actually hold or try the individuals that survived one of the attacks because they could not satisfy the evidentiary burden.

That's weird to me because they're saying we didn't have enough to hold them. This is why the two survivors were sent back to Ecuador and Colombia. But we had enough to kill them?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, there's a duality to this. There's one process. Should the Gang of Eight be informed by the executive branch? Traditionally speaking, I'm going to say yes. I believe in process.

But two -- but two, there is a political component that Xochitl just mentioned at the tail end of her remarks. And that is, if you're a Democrat, do you really want to be out there arguing and campaigning against potential strikes, against drug cartels, where a million plus Americans have died as a result of the drug crisis? People have lost their children, kids have lost their parents.

To me, that's not a good political position to be in, Jake.

I think Republicans have the upper hand here. That's why the White House is going about this the way they are, and I think it's effective.

HINOJOSA: But there are other ways to fight things like fentanyl, and that is giving more resources to DEA not firing the prosecutors on those cases. Other ways, if they are serious about combating fentanyl, they would do that here. It doesn't seem like that.

This seems more of like a move to show strength more than anything else.

SINGLETON: Which, as you know as well as I do in politics, people respect that versus this complicated, convoluted argument that Democrats may make about lets fund this, lets fund that. People want to see actions and results. And that's what the administration is doing.

TAPPER: Vice President J.D. Vance was in -- was at Ole Miss doing a Turning Point USA event when he was asked by student about Trump's support of Israel. Now that's all legitimate questioning, support of any ally or whatever is fine. But in the question, the student also said this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STUDENT: I'm just confused why this idea has come around considering the fact that not only does their religion not agree with ours, but also openly supports the prosecution of ours.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Okay, so first of all, the notion that Judaism openly supports the prosecution or persecution, as he probably meant of Christians is false. That is not true. There is nothing in Judaism about that.

Vance talked about America first and responded to the whole idea of the America-Israel relationship, which again, fine. But then when it came to the question that was antisemitic in nature, this is all he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

J.D. VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Now, you ask about, you know, sort of, Jews disagreeing with Christians on certain religious ideas. Yeah, absolutely. It's one of the realities is that Jews do not believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. Obviously, Christians do believe that. There are some significant theological disagreements between Christians and Jews.

My attitude is, let's have those conversations. Let's have those disagreements when we have them. But if there are shared areas of interest, we ought to be willing to do that, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, this prompted a lot of criticism of J.D. Vance, including from conservative leaning, politically conservative Jewish commentators such as, quote, he said nothing to reject the insane notion that Judaism persecutes Christianity. From our friend Jonah Goldberg: Vance is such a profile in cowardice.

From others: Tonight, Vance had an opportunity to denounce antisemitism amid its historic surge. J.D. Vance chose not to.

Shermichael, you don't have to defend anything that you don't want to defend. I'm not asking you to speak for it, but I mean, there was an opportunity there for J.D. Vance that he did not take.

SINGLETON: This is a very interesting paradigm shift right now within the Republican Party, but also among Democrats, where in the past, I would argue, both parties, you saw an older generation that was very pro-Israel, specifically on the Republican side, you saw this sort of evangelical Zionism, right? That really sort of relegated how Republicans viewed and treated Israel as it pertains to international policy, coming from the United States.

Younger conservatives, non-establishment conservatives don't share that worldview at all.

[18:50:04]

TAPPER: But I'm not even talking --

SINGLETON: At all.

TAPPER: I'm just talking about antisemitism. The debate, the debate about Israel. Fine. Have at it. Who cares? I mean people care, but like that's fine. It's all within the realm of possibility.

But the idea that, like somebody says, Judaism is about persecuting Christians, that is not true.

SINGLETON: But, Jake, this again, this goes to the overall point that I was trying to make. There is significant skepticism about the United States engagement with Israel beyond just Israel as a -- as a country. I'm talking about Judaism, Zionism, et cetera.

You know, where I stand on this issue, but this is something that I've spoken with a lot of younger conservatives about. And there is real concern about our ties to that part of the world, whether legitimate or not. And I think J.D. Vance is trying to balance that.

HINOJOSA: Well, I don't understand what J.D. Vance is trying to do, but I also don't understand is someone who is potentially running for president of the United States. You think that his team would be quick to clean that up if he wasn't going to go ahead and respond on his own? And so, I'm just not sure he's ready for prime time. I'm not sure what he was thinking here, but I think he has a right to be criticized. And honestly, I'm not sure what his team is doing. Not quickly going out and saying actually what he really meant, and disavowing it.

TAPPER: And I should note, I did reach out to Vice President Vance's office to get a response on the record, and they did not provide one. Thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

Coming up next, it's the true story of the unlikely president and the man who killed him. "Death by Lightning" doesn't come out for another week. But we got a sneak preview. We're going to tell you all about this fascinating series in moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:55:45]

TAPPER: In our pop culture lead, a new Netflix limited series is based in the 1800s but feels incredibly relevant to today. The show is called "Death by Lightning". It follows the life and assassination of the 20th U.S. President James Garfield, who fought for the Union in the Civil War and then fought against corruption in the U.S. government.

But just months into his presidency, Garfield was assassinated. Here's a little preview of the new series.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jim, you're their leader. Your job is to inspire hope.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Perhaps I can't change anything.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You will not run from the battle. Go show those bastards who we are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Joining me now is Mike Makowsky, the creator of "Death by Lightning".

Mike, congratulations. Part of the reason this feels so relevant today is because obviously, the rise of political violence in the last few years, we've had the two assassination attempts on President Trump, the murder of Charlie Kirk, and on and on and on.

But you started working on this six years ago. Why?

MIKE MAKOWSKY, CREATOR, "DEATH BY LIGHTNING": I have to confess, like most Americans, I knew almost nothing about James Garfield before picking up Candice Millard's book, "Destiny of the Republic". Buy two, get one free table at my local Barnes and Noble. And I found myself so blown away by -- I mean, it's true stranger than fiction story that is tragic, equal parts tragic and absurd and bizarre.

And I found myself so drawn to this figure. One of the great what ifs of American history is, is, you know, what would have happened if James Garfield had been able to live out his full term, and he was truly just a remarkable, remarkable individual. Grew up in abject poverty and rose up the ranks purely on merit. War hero, as you said, fiercely intelligent, ahead of his time on civil rights and questions of universal education as a means of achieving racial equality in our country.

I just found myself really drawn to him.

TAPPER: There's a name that viewers are going to hear a lot in this story. Charles Guiteau. That's the man who shot and killed President Garfield. Here's a sneak peek of him in the series.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. President, I'm begging you, tell me how I can be great.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Men like us, we have to claw our way up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can make an impact.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Tere is a greater destiny out there for me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This will show him. And the rest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: And before killing him, Guiteau was actually one of Garfield's biggest admirers. Sadly, we see this. We saw this with Selina, right? Killed by somebody who was the president of her fan club.

How did that relationship dissolve?

MAKOWSKY: You know, it's fascinating. He very much saw himself in the image of Garfield. Garfield being this poster boy for the American dream and Guiteau having failed at everything he had ever set out to do, including for a time being a member of America's first free love commune in Upstate New York, the Oneidas.

But he wound up really gravitating to Garfield and even campaigned for him, stumped for him, believing that if he could just seek five minutes with his hero, that Garfield would recognize that they were kindred spirits and offer to invite him into the fold. He expected he legitimately expected a consulship to Paris. And when he was continually rebuffed by the Garfield administration and finally by Garfield himself, he -- something in him snapped, and you know, obviously to destructive and tragic ends.

TAPPER: We only have 30 seconds left. What is it like trying to bring a president an entire era to life when not one single person alive today ever met him? Or was part of that time?

MAKOWSKY: It was just a really, really special endeavor. And, you know, you feel the weight, you know, being there on set and, you know, just it's pretty insane. And such a privilege that somebody was crazy enough to let us go make a show about James Garfield in the year of our Lord, 2025.

TAPPER: It's great. Congratulations, Mike Makowski. "Death by Lightning" premieres on Netflix next Tuesday. If you haven't heard in the U.S., you can now stream the lead live or

catch up later whenever you want in the CNN app, you can also see exclusive reporting and read unlimited articles. Watch our award- winning original series and films and much more. To learn more, visit CNN.com/watch.

If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD.

Meanwhile, you can listen to the show once you get your podcasts.

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