Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Trump Meeting With National Security Team On Venezuela; Mangione Defense Seeks To Have Key Evidence Tossed In State Case; White House Says, Jared Kushner To Join Top U.S. Negotiator In Moscow; Tomorrow's Tennessee Special Election Tests Democrats' Momentum; Senator Schumer Says His NY Offices Received Bomb Threats. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired December 01, 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 HOST: Welcome to the Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

This hour, President Trump and his top national security officials meeting behind closed doors about the next steps for Venezuela.

[18:00:06]

This comes as lawmakers from both parties are raising grave concerns about a follow up strike, a double tap, on an alleged drug vessel in the Caribbean where the U.S. military killed survivors of the first strike. I'm going to ask a former U.S. Army Ranger who now serves in Congress about this in moments.

Plus, accused killer Luigi Mangione appearing in a New York courtroom today as his attorneys try to get key evidence thrown out from his murder case. This comes nearly one year after his arrest and charged with killing the UnitedHealthcare CEO on a Manhattan sidewalk. Did the judge give any clues as to how he will rule on this evidence?

Also, we're just hours away from the special House election in Tennessee, one that some polls suggest is proving to be closer than either side expected. President Trump won the district by 22 points last year. So, why are Republicans now pouring money into the race? Do Democrats really have a chance?

And the New York offices of Senator Chuck Schumer are receiving multiple bomb threats today. Schumer saying the email threats included the subject line MAGA and came from an email address alleging that the 2020 election was rigged, which, of course, it was not. He's going to join me live ahead as police carry out security sweeps at his offices.

The Lead tonight starts at the White House with a high-stakes meeting in the Oval Office as President Trump and his cabinet are facing, expanding criticism over aggressive tactics in targeting alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean. Sources tell CNN that the first of these strikes, which The Washington Post reports Secretary Hegseth ordered to kill everybody on board was a so-called double tap, killing survivors clinging to the wreckage after the initial strike.

The White House insists that the admiral in charge was the one who ordered that second strike. Republicans on Capitol Hill say they're looking into this directive with vigorous oversight.

Here's how independent Senator Angus King of Maine, who caucuses with Democrats, put it earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ANGUS KING (I-ME): If the facts are as have been alleged that there was a second strike specifically to kill the survivors in the water. That's a stone-cold war crime. It's also murder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This just one day after Trump insisted he didn't know anything about Hegseth's order and said he, quote, wouldn't have wanted a second strike.

CNNs Kaitlan Collins is at the White House. Kaitlan?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake. A lot of questions about these strikes that are intensifying here at the White House, and it also comes as the president right now is set to meet with his team inside the Oval Office to talk about what they are doing when it comes to options that are on the table for Venezuela.

Obviously, the president has been ramping up pressure. He himself has been alluding to direct military action there. And so those are the key questions that have been facing people, including the president, his defense secretary, the Joint Chiefs chairman, and the secretary of state, we all know, were scheduled to be in this meeting, which the White House confirmed earlier today that it will be taking place. They said it'll be on many matters but did confirm, as we had heard, it was primarily centered around what the president's options are, Jake, when it comes to Venezuela and what that's going to look like.

And so this is happening as today the briefing, basically, a large majority of the questions were about the justification for these strikes, comments like that from Angus King and other lawmakers who were demanding answers and saying that they are worried a war crime was committed as these strikes on these boats were taking place inside the Caribbean, as they've been talking about trying to stop narcotics from making their way to the United States.

And when they were asked, Jake, about the technicalities here, who actually ordered this strike and the second follow-up strike that the White House did confirm today had happened, this is what Karoline Leavitt, the press secretary, told reporters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Does the administration deny that second strike happened or did it happen and the administration denies that Secretary Hegseth gave the order?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: The latter is true. With respect to the strikes in question on September 2nd, Secretary Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct these kinetic strikes. Admiral Bradley worked well within his authority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: So, you heard the direction there from the White House in terms of the layers at the Pentagon of how this went down. That comes, Jake, after you rightfully mentioned those comments from the president himself last night that stood out where he basically made clear that he had a conversation with Secretary Hegseth about this, and he said that Secretary Hegseth told him he did not order the deaths of those two men.

It still raises a lot of questions, Jake, about whether they knew that those two people were still survivors after the first initial strike, and then the second strike was ordered, or if the second strike just happened to comply with what the directive was for the first strike overall.

So, those are key questions, Jake. And it also comes as we talk about this meeting on Venezuela that the president is having right now with his top advisers. He just confirmed he did have a call with Venezuela's Maduro.

[18:05:02]

He wouldn't say it went well, Jake, but he also did not say that it went badly.

TAPPER: All right. Kaitlan Collins at the White House, thank you. And don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. It's tonight and every weeknight 9:00 P.M. Eastern only on CNN.

Let's go to Caracas Venezuela next, where we find CNN's Stefano Pozzebon. And, Stefano, we're seeing videos of these huge pro- government, pro-Maduro rallies there today.

STEFANO POZZEBON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes indeed, Jake. I think that today the government really wanted to send a message of defiance. Maduro himself, for example, spoke for several hours today. He was flanked by all the top officials from his government, saying that they are not bending down from the pressure coming down from Washington. It really sent a message of stability.

We spoke with several of his supporters. What we saw today was, Jake, frankly, the power base of this government. We're talking about public employees, workers unions, for example, people who depend on government benefits to make it through their daily lives. And this is a movement, Jake, that has been in power here in Venezuela for more than 25 years. They told us that they consider this just the latest in a series of confrontation between Washington and Caracas, and they don't expect their leaders to leave power anytime soon, frankly. Jake?

TAPPER: There were rumors that Maduro fled the country, but then he showed up at a public event yesterday, right? POZZEBON: Yes, exactly. It is remarkable what happened last week, Jake, because Maduro is a president and a leader who spends hours on television almost over on a daily basis. He likes to rule on television, making decisions and calling up ministers and announcing the government plans directly live on Venezuelan public T.V.

We had not seen him for a few days last week, starting -- the last appearance was on Wednesday. Then on Thursday, he delivered a message, but from an undisclosed location. It was probably a recorded message, and then we didn't see him on Friday. On Saturday, he sent a voice message, which is frankly the type of message that you sent when you don't want people to know where you are.

The fact that he appeared once again on Sunday and even today exactly sends the message that I was trying to portray before, the message of stillness, the message that he's unshakeable and standing up to the pressure. Jake?

TAPPER: Stefano Pozzebon, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

Now to Capitol Hill, CNN's Manu Raju just caught up with the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Roger Wicker. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. ROGER WICKER (R-MS): I've spoken to the secretary of defense and will be speaking to the admiral that was in charge of the operation.

The secretary did indicate, which has now been in the news media, that there was a second attack.

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Were there survivors who were killed in that second attack?

WICKER: I don't have that information.

RAJU: Do you worry that --

WICKER: But I do think we'll get that information and we're certainly going to -- we're going to have available to us all of the audio and all of the video.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Chairman Wicker did not directly answer when Manu asked him whether or not he thought the second strike on those survivors was a war crime.

Joining us now, Democratic Congressman from Colorado Jason Crow, who's on the House Armed Services Committee and the House Intelligence Committee. He also served as a U.S. Army Ranger deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Congressman, what do you make of Chairman Wicker's comments there?

REP. JASON CROW (D-CO): Well, all of this, Jake, just illustrates in great clarity the untenable and horrible situation that Donald Trump and this administration continue to put our service members in, when you have no clear strategy, when you're given very little to no guidance and you're putting people in a situation where the law is very unclear. You're putting our service members in positions where they are at great risk.

Which is exactly why I and several of my colleagues a little over a week ago put out a video reminding our service members of their obligation to follow the Constitution, to have fidelity to their oath, and to abide by the law, because this administration continues to put them in terrible positions. And then the second somebody calls foul on it, they seem to hang people out the drive.

TAPPER: So, the strike -- this double tap strike took place on September 2nd. Your video was at the end of November. Did you know about this? Had you heard about this and the questions of the legality of that particular strike?

CROW: No, our video is not aimed at any one particular example or circumstance or attack. Our video was about the overall lawlessness of this administration. Time and time again, over years, President Trump has said things and has asked the military to do things that would be unlawful and unconstitutional, whether it's shoot protesters in the leg in Lafayette Square, whether it's go to war and napalm the city of Chicago, whether send our troops to polling stations, which would be a violation of U.S. criminal law.

[18:10:05]

And now in a very legally ambiguous situation in the Caribbean, he continues to run fast and loose with the law, to run fast and loose with the security and the responsibility the commander-in-chief has to our service members, and I'm going to stand by them. I'm going to be very clear what their obligations are, and I will defend our service members and I will stand by those who are fulfilling their duty.

TAPPER: And we should note it's not just Democrats or liberal progressive legal commentators who are being critical of this specific operation. Conservative Legal Commentator Andy McCarthy wrote an opinion piece in National Review, in which he said in part, quote, if this happened as described in The Washington Post report, it was at best a war crime under federal law. Adding, even if you buy the untenable claim that they are combatants, it is a war crime to intentionally kill combatants who have been rendered unable to fight, unquote. Do you agree with that?

CROW: Yes, that's right. I mean, this is training that combat soldiers, sailors, Marines that you get in your training before deployment. You understand the difference between combatants and non- combatants. You understand when somebody's trying to surrender or has been rendered combat ineffective, that they're no longer a viable target. You understand the difference between what is a viable military objective versus a protected cultural site or a religious site. You actually get this training. This is a part of being a service member. It's a part of being ordered into combat. It can be tough, it can be challenging, but it is actually an essential part of the job.

But, again, this administration continues to put people in these situations and bend or break the law. So, you know, why am I not surprised that after years of threatening to break the law or even breaking the law in many instances, we are once again in a situation where they have put our service members in this position.

TAPPER: So, after you and Senator Kelly and others put out that video telling troops that they should not obey illegal orders, President Trump went after you. And you posted some shocking recordings of threats you received after Trump reacted to that video. Here's part of those recordings.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I hope whoever blows your (BLEEP) brains out records it because I would like to watch, you stupid (BLEEP).

You deserve to die. I hope you all get murdered. I hope you all get (BLEEP) throat slashed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You disgraced America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: That's just some of it. Why did you decide to share these threats?

CROW: Well, because America needs to know, everybody needs to know what this president is trying to get people to do. You know, this president is reckless beyond belief. This president doesn't understand the impact of his words and his actions. And even if he did, he does not care, which is even worse, right?

This president called for my execution, for my hanging, for my arrest, and is even weaponizing the FBI to this day against me and the others who simply remind people of their oath to the Constitution, who remind people of their legal obligation, which, to Donald Trump and in Trump world, is a great sin, right, because they cannot tolerate people that have fidelity to anything other than Donald Trump.

Well, guess what? He picked the wrong person to pick a battle with and to pick a fight with. My obligation is to the Constitution. I've taken many oaths. I will not back down. I will stand by our service members and I will continue to do so. And he's not going to threaten me. He's not going to intimidate me, and he is not going to get me to bend down. I will be unrelenting in my pursuit of the truth in this instance, and my fidelity to my oath and to the Constitution.

TAPPER: Former Army Ranger, Democratic Congressman from Colorado Jason Crow, thank you, sir. I appreciate your time.

CROW: Thank you.

TAPPER: Much more ahead on the lead tonight, including what we learned when accused murderer Luigi Mangione appeared in court today as his lawyers tried to get some key evidence thrown out in his murder case.

Plus, the White House acknowledging today it is also targeting legal immigration as part of President Trump's intensifying crackdown. I'm going to ask former Homeland Security officials from both Democratic and Republican administrations about these new moves ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, Luigi Mangione, the 27-year-old accused of murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in the streets of Manhattan one year ago this Thursday, is back in court this week. His defense team is seeking to have key pieces of evidence tossed from his state murder case, a handgun, a loaded magazine and a notebook with writings that authorities call a manifesto, ones that prosecutors allege tie him to the killing. His defense argues that police searched his bag without a warrant.

Joining us now, John Richardson, he's the author of the new book, Luigi, the Making and the Meaning. John, thanks so much for joining us. What do you think this move from Magione's attorneys signals about their strategy overall?

JOHN H. RICHARDSON, AUTHOR, LUIGI, THE MAKING AND THE MEANING: So, thanks, Jake. I mean, I got to say I'm not a lawyer, so I'm a reporter, it's awkward for me to comment on that. But, you know, they're doing what it seems like they're doing what attorneys do, which is try to get evidence thrown out, try to delay, try and, you know, hope for the best.

TAPPER: So, Mangione's attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, filed before the trial to prevent the prosecution from showing the contents of her client's writings in the hearing, worried that it could taint the jury poll, she objects to those who call it a manifesto. From what you know of the writing, is it a manifesto?

RICHARDSON: I have to go with her on that. It doesn't really read like a manifesto. I mean, for me, one of the most interesting things that came out of today was that he asked the police for an opportunity to make a statement to the public.

[18:20:02]

Because, I mean, my whole book, the reason I called it Luigi, the Making and the Meaning, is I was trying to figure out like, first off, how did -- where did he come from, what did he read, what radicalized him, that kind of thing, what were his concerns, and also like how did he fit, what did it mean, how does he fit into the culture, and is this part of a broader pattern, which it seems to be.

But you know, the problem is that if it's a manifesto, quote/unquote, it's not a very good one, and it doesn't really make clear what he was thinking. So, you know, I don't think it's effective as a manifesto. And I think, like, to me, the mystery is why he had that stuff on him in the first place. And was he intending to give it to the police? Was he hoping to get caught? Was he hoping to turn -- thinking of turning himself in because he threw a lot of stuff out? Why wouldn't he throw out the gun? It's weird and mysterious, like so much of this case, really, mysterious.

TAPPER: Why do you think he has become such a cultural phenomenon? I mean, he is an accused murderer. And I think there are a lot of people who are just horrified by the fact that anybody thinks that he is, you know, some sort of Robin Hood or some sort of noble figure. What do you make of it all?

RICHARDSON: Right. Well, sure. I mean, it is -- I mean, he killed the father of two children, you know, a man just walking to work, shot him in the back and it's a horrible thing, allegedly killed. But, you know, the reason people who want to say murder is bad and this is a terrible thing and we shouldn't do these things, which is a platitude are sort of like overlooking why this case is different and unique. I mean, most of these killings are pretty unpalatable. They're in a church or in a synagogue, or they're in a school. You know, maybe they have a philosophy behind it, but, you know, nobody really cares.

But this was different. This seemed to be like the rare, idealistic, trying to do something good kind of killing. I mean, I feel nervous even saying that, but that's the fact, I think. You know, when I looked at his track record, it really seemed like he was trying to figure out what was wrong and trying to -- like with climate change and artificial intelligence and the world that we live in. He had the concerns of a typical young person, which makes it even more agonizing that those concerns would bring him to this point. So then you think, was he crazy? Was he -- you know, none of those things really click in.

One of the things I do in the book is talk about the peaceful environmentalist theory. I mean, a lot of his writings focus on climate change. Although he is not a donor (ph), he is interested in nuclear power, it is all very like non-cliched. I mean, it's complex.

But, you know, in trying to solve these problems, like the peaceful environmentalist, the scientist went through all the crimes that ever were committed by environmentalists, and it basically comes down to sabotage, not to murder. The only murderer in environmentalism is pretty much Ted Kaczynski, which is sort of part of the stuff I discussed a lot in the book, because that's what sort of pulls Luigi into his story and I think he is unique.

TAPPER: Okay, Luigi, the Making and the Meaning, is available now. John H. Richardson, thank you so much.

Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, are getting ready to meet with Vladimir Putin as they try to negotiate an end to Russia's brutal war against Ukraine. We're going to go live to the Ukrainian capital ahead of that key meeting, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00] TAPPER: In our World Lead, several high-stakes diplomatic peace talks over ending Russia's war in Ukraine are ongoing. And according to a White House official, President Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, is traveling to Moscow, joining Trump's top negotiator, Steve Witkoff. Witkoff is expected to meet with Russia's Vladimir Putin.

CNN Chief International Security Correspondent Nick Paton Walsh is in key Ukraine for us. Nick, where do the negotiations stand right now?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we don't know exactly what it is that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner present to Putin in the coming hours, but it is the product of hours of negotiations with Ukraine's team in Florida, including we've learned a Monday morning Miami early second meeting between Witkoff and the top Ukraine negotiator Rustem Umerov, clearly hammering out details down to the last minute.

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Paris meeting the French president, Emmanuel Macron, discussing the details of this proposal with Witkoff on the phone and the U.K. prime minister as well, clearly briefing allies there and clear in public that its territorial concessions that are going to be the key sticking point here, for many months a red line for Ukraine, although it does sound as though the concept of territorial swaps is becoming more frequently discussed in the noise we've been hearing around these particular negotiations as indeed too vitally important for Ukraine, if any of that is to be entertained, security guarantees potentially as well, possibly from the United States and Europe as well.

Is any of this going to be enough to sway Putin, who's been public on his demand for all of Donetsk region to be given to him without a fight in exchange for peace?

[18:30:03]

That's unclear. We'll find that out in the hours ahead. Jake?

TAPPER: Does Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy feel pressured to make a deal even if it's not one that he finds acceptable?

WALSH: I think unquestionably, Jake. That is what really has changed. It's not just because of the position on the front line that he's in. And make no mistake that is bad on multiple different points. Russians moving forwards in slow, incremental amounts, but make no mistake at the direction of travel here, particularly today, the Russians claiming to have taken the strategic hub of Pokrovsk. They've been fighting for it for many months, lost thousands in that particular fight.

And, of course, it's massively convenient that ahead of the meeting in the Kremlin, they claim to have made that particular gain, something Ukraine will surely push back on, but also Zelenskyy himself under increased domestic political pressure. Friday, his chief of staff and top negotiator resigned after his home was searched by anti-corruption investigators. That has left Zelenskyy weak domestically really for the first time since the war indeed began. That's likely playing on his mind as well.

And don't forget, Jake, we had a Thanksgiving deadline for a peace proposal. That has whizzed past into this new phase of negotiations. But, clearly, in the backdrop of all of this, Zelenskyy acutely aware of President Trump's impatience for peace here and the damage that might do to Ukraine's support and position if they don't try and find something.

Ultimately, though, the question is, does Putin want peace? And I think many see the barrages Ukraine sustaining every night here, one last night killing four in Dnipro with a ballistic missile and think the Kremlin does not want peace, particularly unless it sees grossly favorable terms to itself.

TAPPER: Nick Paton Walsh in Ukraine, thanks so much.

As President Trump ramps up his immigration crackdown in the wake of the National Guard shooting in D.C., I'm going to be joined next by two men who work at the Department of Homeland Security, one under a Republican president, one under a Democratic president, to get their thoughts on the new policies, and if they think it'll work.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

TAPPER: In our National Lead, cities nationwide are bracing for an intense crackdown on immigration in the wake of last week's shooting of two National Guard members in Washington, D.C. The Trump administration's plan is two-pronged. One, launch an inter-agency federal investigation into the shooting and the shooter's past while also directing senior officials to stem migration in general into the United States.

Ken Cuccinelli was President Trump's former acting Deputy Secretary for Homeland Security, John Sandweg, is the former acting director of ICE under President Obama. Thanks for joining us.

So, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about what the administration is doing now in the wake of this horrific shooting. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEAVITT: We have paused all asylum adjudications, and then of course the special immigrant visas, which we know many Afghans utilize to come into the country under the Biden administration have also now been paused.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Ken, do you think that's a good idea?

KEN CUCCINELLI, FORMER ACTING DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION: Yes, I thought it was a good idea years ago and not just for Afghanistan, of course, the shooter was Afghani. But there are a number of countries, particularly in the Middle East, where we don't have a practical ability to vet people.

So, we can have a process set up. But if you don't have a process set up that involves reliable sources of information that are thorough on the other end, which doesn't exist in good chunks of the Middle East, then we shouldn't be accepting people from those countries. And that finally seems to be the step that this administration is moving toward.

TAPPER: Obviously, the special immigrant visas that Karoline Leavitt was referring to there, those are four individuals who served -- Afghans who served with the U.S. in Afghanistan. John, if you were still working at ICE, what changes would you support?

JOHN SANDWEG, PARTNER, NIXON PEABODY: Well, Jake, I think certainly it makes sense to take a hard look at the vetting operations and make sure nothing failed here. I'd be especially concerned about stove piping. I mean, these guys go through biometric, biographic background checks with multiple agencies. Certainly, the concerns we've seen historically where there've been vetting failures in the U.S. have been certain agencies, intelligence agencies don't want to disclose additional data that they have.

But I'll tell you, Jake, the other thing I look real hard at here is, was this a vetting failure at all, or was this, as Secretary Noem said, a potential radicalization after he entered the United States? And in that case, what concerns me is have we weakened our capacity to detect? So, when it becomes radicalized after they in the U.S., by pulling these FBI agents off the JTTFs, or pulling special agents from Homeland Security Investigations or ICE criminal investigative agents away from their national security work and furtherance into this routine immigration enforcement and mass deportation effort, those are the agencies that would detect whether a threat develops in the United States.

And I'm not saying they would've detected this, but certainly I'd say that had we have them operating in their national security functions of full capacity, we'd have a better chance of detecting this before the shooting happened.

CUCCINELLI: Well --

TAPPER: Go ahead, Ken.

CUCCINELLI: -- respectfully, you know, when the Biden folks were dumping people into this country, the idea that we could be rolling a continuing vetting process over numbers that large really is not practical. It wasn't doable before that point in time. The Department of Homeland Security was starved of the manpower by Congress that it needed to do that kind of vetting. The better long-term solution is keeping anyone out who we aren't quite certain is safe to bring in.

Now, John makes the very good point that Kristi Noem made. There is the other question radicalization within the United States. But let's not kid ourselves about the capacity of the Department of Homeland Security following an invasion, a voluntary allowed invasion by the last president. Those numbers are just overwhelming. And until we start removing millions of them, DHS will not be able to keep up with the vetting necessary to continually keep this country safe.

[18:40:00]

TAPPER: John, what's your response to that? I mean, obviously a lot of the individuals that were brought in from Afghanistan after the war was brought to at its ignominious end were individuals who had worked with the United States and were, you know, possibly going to be murdered by the Taliban if they stayed behind.

SANDWEG: Yes. Jake, I think it's important not to conflate two issues. I agree with Ken that we had the system overwhelmed. The numbers we were seeing at the border were simply too great. Fortunately, those numbers are now down to zero, credit to the Trump administration for that. But at the same time, I think we have the capacity to do the recurrent vetting.

What concerns me though, again, vetting, when we say vetting, all we're talking about is running biometric and biographic information through U.S. government holdings, intelligence holdings, but also, critically, the holdings of domestic law enforcement agencies whose job it is to detect terror threats in the U.S. And my point, Jake, is that we've diminished our capacity to collect that information.

This is now September '25. His asylum application was granted during the Trump administration. He's been in the U.S. nine months. During that time, we pulled FBI agents, like I said, diverted their attention away from their core functions, and ICE agents away from their core national security and public safety criminal investigations to doing, you know, Home Depot parking lots. And what I'm saying is we have diminished our capacity to detect new threats.

So, it's not so much a vetting thing as it is -- capacity inside the United States. Yes.

TAPPER: Yes. John, your audio and video's going in and out a little bit. We're out of time, anyway. So, thanks to both of you, I really appreciate it.

President Trump won Tennessee's Seventh Congressional District by 22 percentage points last year. So, why are Republicans spending so much money into the special election there tomorrow? We're going to go live to the campaign trail, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:30]

TAPPER: In the politics lead, cue the election music. Yes. The CNN election jam.

Tomorrow night, one last special house election is the final chance this year for Democrats to prove that their momentum is no fluke, as Republicans are now fending off a potential upset in what's usually a very reliably red district. It includes parts of Nashville, Tennessee.

CNN's Eva McKend is on the ground in these final hours of campaigning in this special house race.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

EVA MCKEND, CNN NATIONAL POLITICS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A special election Tuesday in a heavily Republican congressional district in Tennessee is emerging as an unlikely political battleground, with Democrats eyeing an upset.

AFTYN BEHN (D), CANDIDATE FOR TENNESSEE'S 7TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT: I don't care who you voted for, I don't care what political party you belong to. But if you are upset about the cost of living and the chaos of Washington, then I'm your candidate.

MCKEND (voice-over): Democrat Aftyn Behn, a state representative and progressive organizer, is centering her campaign on affordability, seeking to harness the party's momentum after big wins in Virginia and New Jersey last month. But in a district that Donald Trump carried by 22 points last year, Republican Matt Van Epps, a former Army helicopter pilot running with the president's endorsement, is seen as the favorite even as both parties expect a closer result.

MATT VAN EPPS (R), CANDIDATE FOR TENNESSEE'S 7TH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT: We need all Republicans in the Tennessee seventh congressional district to put on their jersey, get on the field and get out and vote for us.

MCKEND (voice-over): The seventh district is largely rural, including parts of Nashville, but stretching from the states border with Kentucky in the north to Alabama in the south.

The election here drawing national attention, with Trump holding a virtual rally today for Van Epps and House Speaker Mike Johnson joining the Republican nominee on the trail.

Behn is receiving help from the party's leaders, such as progressive Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and former Vice President Kamala Harris.

Since the primary last month, more than $5 million has been spent on advertising in the race, fueled by outside groups, with Republicans accounting for more than 3 million and Democrats about 2.1 million.

BEHN: I'm a very radical person.

MCKEND (voice-over): The GOP advertising has focused on portraying Behn as out of step with the conservative-leaning district. Behn says Republicans are trying to distract from cost of living concerns.

BEHN: As an activist and organizer, a lot of those comments have been taken out of context and/or mischaracterized. I just feel like the Republican apparatus is breathing down my neck, but it's because they don't have a plan to make health care more affordable.

MCKEND (voice-over): Republicans believe the districts partisan lean, along with Behn's progressive profile, will tilt the race in their favor. SCOTT GOLDEN, TENNESSEE REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIR: She is pretty far away

from the mainstream of even Tennessee Democrats, much less Tennessee Republicans. But you know, those are going to be for the voters to decide.

MCKEND (voice-over): While Democrats who have overperformed in special elections this year are hoping to send a message heading into next year's midterms.

JIM COOPER (D), FORMER TENNESSEE REPRESENTATIVE: It's a very important chance for Tennessee voters to really speak loudly and clearly and say, hey, we're upset. We need some help.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MCKEND (on camera): And, Jake, what is remarkable is that Speaker Johnson not in Washington right now, on the first day back from the Thanksgiving recess. He is here in Tennessee, barnstorming the state with a dozen events. He says today, and I put that question to him, is this a warning sign for the GOP that they have to campaign so hard here in this district that went big for Trump? He downplayed it, said he would be here anyway.

But it really speaks to the tight margins in the House right now, especially with Marjorie Taylor Greene set to retire next month -- Jake.

TAPPER: All right. Eva McKend in Tennessee's seventh district -- thanks so much for that report. Have fun in Nashville.

Tonight, police are investigating multiple bomb threats made against the offices of the Democratic leader of the senate, Chuck Schumer of New York.

Senator Schumer is going to join us live in moments to tell us the details.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:53:33]

TAPPER: In our politics lead, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York, said his offices in Rochester and Binghamton and Long Island all received bomb threats.

In a statement, Leader Schumer says the threats contained, quote, "The email subject line MAGA and from an email address alleging the 2020 election was rigged. Local and federal law enforcement responded immediately and are conducting security sweeps. Everyone is safe," unquote.

And Leader Schumer joins us now.

Senator, we're glad everyone is okay. What more are you hearing from law enforcement about these threats? SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): Well, we've asked the FBI, Jake, to undergo

a full investigation, find out who did this. Obviously, it's someone intent on doing a lot of harm, and we need to get to the bottom of this now.

Thank God everybody's safe. I want to commend law enforcement. We had federal law enforcement as well as local law enforcement from Binghamton and Long Island. They had the dogs there right away. We evacuated people as quickly as we could.

And thank God no one was hurt. But this is not the end of it. We've got to find out who did this and how dangerous this person obviously is, and make sure they never do it again.

TAPPER: Was there -- I mean, the bomb threats obviously are horrific no matter what, but did they was anything found, any incendiary device?

SCHUMER: Not yet, but the investigation is still ongoing. You know, the bomber, the threat person who made the threats said that he had hidden the bomb, but they've done a very thorough investigation.

[18:55:00]

They think the buildings are safe.

TAPPER: I want to ask you about today's Oval Office meeting about potential U.S. military action against Venezuela. You have warned that senators will force another vote under the War Powers Act to block military action in Venezuela, if Trump goes any further.

Are you hearing privately from any Republican senators who might be concerned about military action against Venezuela? Tell us more.

SCHUMER: Yes. First, the bill is bipartisan. It's Rand Paul, Tim Kaine, myself. And I think now, Senator Schiff and we are hearing in this area there are a lot of Republicans who are troubled. Frankly, there are Republicans who don't have faith in Hegseth and in what is going on there as well.

And so, we are seeing for the first time some of our key Republicans who are defense hawks, really worried about what the administration is doing in both the Caribbean and in Venezuela.

TAPPER: You've also called on the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, to testify before Congress about what the White House admitted today happened, which was that follow up strike, the double tap on an alleged drug trafficking boat in the Caribbean on September 2nd. You called on Hegseth to release the full tapes of the attack.

We heard earlier in the show, Chairman Wicker saying that he is seeking those tapes as well.

SCHUMER: Right.

TAPPER: What sort of action are Democrats prepared to take to try to make -- make this happen, to getting those tapes?

SCHUMER: Well, we hope that we can bring before the committees bipartisan, as you said, Senator Wicker has been very much involved here and get the top military people to testify. And we hope that they will release the tapes.

You know, Hegseth is hiding something here, and he's known to be a liar. He said that "The Washington Post" story had no validity. And today, the White House directly contradicted him, that it did. And if he has nothing to hide, if he said he did nothing wrong, if he said no laws were violated, release the tapes. That's the first step.

And second, we need to bring top military brass before the committees to testify as to what they knew happened and how it happened.

TAPPER: I want to also ask you about the Obamacare subsidies that are now set to expire at the end of this month. It's December 1st. It's going to expire December 31st.

Obviously, that will send premiums skyrocketing. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries says that House Speaker Mike Johnson tanked Trump's counter health care proposal. There was some talk of Trump talking about a short extension of these subsidies.

Do you agree that Trump tanked this proposal? I'm sorry. Do you agree that Speaker Johnson tanked the Trump proposal? And is there any bipartisan fix in sight?

SCHUMER: Well, look, here's the bottom line, Jake. The Republicans are a total mess on health care. They don't know what to do. More than half the House members are against anything in ACA. Any extension of the ACA premiums.

So, to avoid the great harm that people will face their premiums going up $500, $1,000 a month. How is the working family going to pay for that?

They have different views as to what to replace ACA with. They're not even ready with the proposal. And furthermore, they're all hung up on the issue of extending the Hyde Amendment, which precludes abortions from the federal government, federal money from being used. Now they want to stop the states from doing it as well.

So, they can't even come to an agreement themselves. So, Johnson is a mess. Trump is a mess. They don't know what to do when the American people are left hanging out, because this is going to be one of the greatest increases in their cost of living that they have seen in a very long time.

TAPPER: I have --

SCHUMER: Go ahead.

TAPPER: I have heard from Democrats who say that Obamacare is not functioning as well as it should, and obviously health insurance premiums, not just in Obamacare, but throughout the country for everyone, are skyrocketing. Does there -- is there room for bipartisan work there on -- on the fact that health insurance companies are making record profits and increasingly, Americans can't afford insurance?

SCHUMER: Well, there the bottom line is there's such a division between the parties. Republicans want to make people pay more. One of their major proposals is privatize the whole thing, which will raise people's costs. What Democrats want to do is lower peoples costs.

The first step, of course, is the ACA -- extending the ACA premiums, which were totally, unlike the Republicans, were totally united on that issue from one end of the party to the other. And then we want to make health care more effective and cheaper for the average American. Just the opposite of what -- the most of the Republicans want to do.

If they want to come to us and say, we want to work with you to lower premiums. I mean, to lower costs to make health care better. Fine. But right now, they're headed in the opposite direction.

TAPPER: All right. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York -- thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us. We appreciate it, sir.

SCHUMER: Jake, nice to talk to you once again. Thank you.

TAPPER: And you can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, X, and on the TikTok @JakeTapper.

You can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.