Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Hegseth Says U.S. Has "Only Just Begun" Sinking Alleged Drug Vessels; Putin Meets Trump Envoys Witkoff, Kushner For Ukraine Peace Talks; Dells Give $6.25 Billion To Create 25 Million "Trump Accounts"; Witness: Walshe Searched Online For Best Ways To Dispose Of A Body; Trump Appears To Doze Off Throughout Cabinet Meeting; New Documentary Shows Never-Before-Seen Footage Of Sean Combs Prior To His 2024 Arrest. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired December 02, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:00:18]

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right, thanks very much to my panel. Really appreciate y' all being here. And for you at home, don't forget, you can now stream The Arena Live. Catch up whenever you want in the CNN app. Just go ahead and scan the QR code below. There's also a QR code for the podcast.

And of course, Jake Tapper now standing by for The Lead. Hi, Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Thanks, Kasie. We'll see you back in The Arena tomorrow.

HUNT: Have a great show.

TAPPER: Wake up, Mr. President. The Lead starts right now.

From the man who coined the term Sleepy Joe, President Trump appearing to doze off during his own cabinet meeting while just minutes earlier we learned new details about that second follow up strike on the suspected drug.

Plus, on this giving Tuesday, how about $6 billion, billion with a B from the Dells, the couple behind one of the biggest tech companies in the world making a mega donation towards Trump accounts for kids.

And he's been trolling Sean "Diddy" Combs for years. And now rapper 50 Cent is dropping his Netflix doc. The revealing scenes that have Diddy's lawyers taking legal action.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. We're going to start in our podcast Politics Lead. The Trump administration today in a two-hour plus long cabinet meeting defended military strikes of questionable legality against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean. Even amid growing bipartisan concerns on Capitol Hill that follow up strike killing survivors on September 2 may have constituted a war crime, one that the Secretary of defense seems suddenly eager to note that he did not specifically order. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We've only just begun striking narco boats and putting narco terrorists at the bottom of the ocean. We always have the back of our commanders who are making decisions in difficult situations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: OK, so that last part is Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth referring to Admiral Frank Mitch Bradley, who at the time of that second strike was commander of Joint Special Operations. The White House also says that Hegseth authorized Admiral Bradley to conduct those strikes and kill everyone on board.

Here was Hegseth himself on Fox. However, just one day after that strike.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HEGSETH: I watched it live. We knew exactly who was in that boat. We knew exactly what they were doing and we knew exactly who they represented.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Today, Hegseth was asked if he knew that there were survivors while he watched it live.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HEGSETH: The first couple of strikes, as you would, as any leader would want. You want to own that responsibility. So I said, I'm going to be the one to make the call. I watched that first strike lock. As you can imagine, at the Department of War, we got a lot of things to do. So I didn't stick around for the hour and two hours, whatever, where all the sensitive site exploitation digitally occurs.

So I moved on to my next meeting. A couple of hours later, I learned that commander had made the -- which he had the complete authority to do.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So you didn't see any survivors, to be clear, after the first?

HEGSETH: I did not personally see survivors, but I stand because the thing was on fire.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Republican Senator Roger Wicker, the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, demanded that Hegseth release recordings of these strikes, which could immediately show how everything went down.

Let us not, of course, forget the initial response to the story. In his statement Friday, Hegseth slammed the, quote, fabricated inflammatory and derogatory reporting about this incident, while the Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said, quote, the entire narrative was false.

Now, of course, they are admitting to the strike and the follow up strike and seemingly putting it all on Admiral Bradley. All of this sure to ignite even more questions as the U.S. is considering taking further military action, not just against boats in the Caribbean, but against Venezuela itself.

I want to bring in CNN anchor and chief White House correspondent Kaitlan Collins. So the administration's position right now appears to be the buck does not stop with the Secretary of Defense when it comes to the order of the second strike.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, those comments really stood out today because it was probably the most we've learned about what actually was happening behind the scenes as this strike was going down and what exactly Secretary Hagseth saw, because remember, President Trump on Air Force One on Sunday was saying he didn't know about a second strike. He said, I wouldn't have wanted a second strike.

And then when he was asked about that again today, he repeated that he didn't know. He said that he was relying on what Hegseth was telling him. And then Hegseth saying, I was in the room for part of it. I wasn't in the room for all of it when that is the critical second strike.

[17:05:00]

And now the timeline of what elapsed in between the first and the second one. How much time is a big question. And when the reporter tried to clarify, Hegseth did not say how much time it elapsed between those two. But him going out of his way to say that he wasn't in the room while also defending Admiral Bradley, I think really stands out given -- I think the White House realizes there are real questions about this on Capitol Hill and how this went down, not just from Democrats, but from Republicans, too.

TAPPER: I have some questions myself. I'm sure you do as well, Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Yes, well, and I think in terms of how the decision was made when it came to the second strike and whether they knew there were survivors, he is saying he did not know. And so he is obviously -- while defending Admiral Bradley, he is also putting the onus on him in terms of the fact that there were survivors clinging to the wreckage of that boat before they conducted the second strike here.

I'm not sure if that's going to be sufficient for these Republicans like Wicker who have been asking for more information. But I think the fact that he went into that level of detail does show you basically that they are registering the level of concern and scrutiny that it may be coming from Capitol Hill on this.

TAPPER: Yes, Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. Independent Senator Angus King, who caucuses with Democrats, said two

days ago that if the second strike was intended to kill survivors, it would be, quote, a stone cold war crime. Kaitlan's going to ask him what he thinks now, given the new developments. Senator Angus King, her guest tonight on The Source of Kaitlan Collins, that's tonight at 9:00 Eastern only here on CNN, although you can also watch it on the new CNN app.

Let's discuss all this with Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of the great Commonwealth of Virginia, who serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. So Senator, what do you make of Secretary Hegseth saying today that he not only did not order the second strike, a follow on strike, that he did not even see a second strike or see any survivors?

SEN. TIM KAINE (D-VA): Well, Jake, look, I think all of these operations are illegal because there's been no congressional vote to authorize war in the Caribbean, the Pacific or against Venezuela. So let's start there. But let's drill down on the second strike.

The Defense Department's own law of war manual specifically says that it would be illegal to shoot survivors of a shipwreck. And we have prosecuted people from the Nuremberg trial forward, if they attack wounded combatants on the field, you do not have a license to wantonly slaughter wounded combatants.

And as far as I read, Secretary Hegseth, he's not denying that he gave the kill everybody order that would be a war crime if he did. He's now trying to push responsibility off on his Special Forces commander, Admiral Bradley.

But I think that most people read his statements, you know, saying that the whole thing was fabricated last week to now acknowledging it's true, acknowledging it's true and pushing it off on a subordinate. Real leaders don't push off responsibility onto their subordinates.

TAPPER: You've said you plan to file a resolution demanding no military action against Venezuela war like military action against Venezuela without congressional approval. You think it will pass? Can you explain who you think, what Republicans will vote with Democrats on it and what exactly the resolution would do?

KAINE: Jake, I think you'll see in the next few days the filing of two different resolutions. One, no war in Venezuela without congressional approval, and the second, dealing with no more strikes international waters without the approval of Congress.

We have tried these resolutions before. They're privileged, meaning we will be guaranteed a vote within 10 calendar days. It can't be hidden in a committee. It can't be filibustered. Simple majority vote, up or down. We were not able to get more than two Republican votes in the earlier iteration. We need at least four.

But the facts have dramatically escalated, including a lot of reporting about deep concerns within the Pentagon and deep concerns among our allies like the U.K. about the legality of these strikes and the latest news about the return to kill these two folks clinging to a life raft, straight up. If that is true, that is a war crime.

TAPPER: President Trump ended today's Cabinet meeting by escalating his inflammatory rhetoric against Somalis in Minnesota, including Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Somalians ripped off that state for billions of dollars. Billions every year. Billions of dollars. And they contribute nothing. The Welfare is like 88 percent. They contribute nothing. I don't want them in our country. I'll be honest with you. OK. Somebody said, oh, that's not politically correct. I don't care. Their country stinks, and we don't want them in our country. I could say that about other countries, too.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What's your response to that, Senator?

KAINE: What a sick and diseased guy. They contribute nothing. You know, I have friends and family in Minnesota who talk about the Somali community with a lot of pride and affection.

[17:10:03]

If there's bad apples in that community or any community, they ought to suffer legal consequences justified by their actions. But to use a broad brush to paint Somalis is negative. Jake, you know Virginia pretty well. We were one out of 100 foreign born when I was born in 1958. We're one out of nine foreign born now. And we've gone from bottom quarter per capita income top quarter per capita income because our immigrant communities in Virginia and in this country have been a source of great richness and innovation.

It's like the transfusion in the nation's bloodstream at 250 that's kept us young. So don't use the broad brush to go after all Somalis and say they contribute nothing. That kind of a statement is a -- it's just a symbol of a sad and diseased mind.

TAPPER: Today President Trump was asked about the high cost of living during that Cabinet meeting. He said he inherited the worst inflation in history and quote, the word affordability is a Democrat scam, unquote. What's your response to that?

KAINE: I think every Democrat running for office in the United States in 2026 should run that quote. Affordability is a scam, affordability is a hoax. Affordability is a Democratic issue. If you're a hardworking everyday person and you've watched food prices go up, energy prices go up, health care go up, building supplies go up, toys go up, electronic components go up, and you have a president like Marie Antoinette saying everything's fine, they should run that ad, that presidential quote in every campaign ad in 2026.

TAPPER: Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia. Thanks so much, sir. Appreciate it.

KAINE: Absolutely.

TAPPER: The glaring mistake in today's Cabinet meeting that seems to punctuate all the questions for the Pentagon right now. I see that it says Secretary of War on Pete Hegseth's nameplate.

But first, the major meeting in Moscow. Wrapping just moments ago the President's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, his special negotiator Steve Witkoff, and Russian leader Vladimir Putin. What we're learning about the closed door discussions in these attempts to finally bring peace to that region. CNN's live in Moscow and Ukraine, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:16:02]

TAPPER: Breaking our World Lead, Russian leader Vladimir Putin's nearly five hour long meeting with U.S. Negotiators Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner just wrapped up. They discussed President Trump's 28- point peace plan. Just before the meeting, Putin accused Europe of wanting to start a fight.

Meanwhile in Dublin, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he's quote, waiting for signals unquote from the U.S. delegation and is ready to meet with President Trump. We're covering the story as only CNN can. CNN's Nick Paton Walsh is in Kyiv, Ukraine. CNN's Matthew Chance is in Moscow, Russia.

Matthew, before the meeting we hear that Kushner and Witkoff took a stroll through Red Square and Witkoff ate some caviar. A Kremlin aide just finished speaking about the meeting. What have we learned?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that meeting lasted nearly five hours. There's been that Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov. He sat at the right hand of President Vladimir Putin throughout that meeting on that table and he just came out and gave a sort of a summary of the sort of the mood inside the room.

He said the talks were useful, that they were constructive, that they were highly substantive. He said that this was an opportunity for joint work on achieving a long term peaceful settlements of the Ukraine crisis. He did say that compromises had not yet been reached and he ruled out, said that there wasn't going to be a meeting at this stage planned between President Trump and President Putin.

He went on to say that some points they were agreed on but not on others. And of course they also talked about, he said -- what he said were enormous prospects for the future economic cooperation between the two countries.

So, you know, just general sort of diplomatic language there to describe these nearly five hours of talks behind the closed doors of the Kremlin, but no detail revealed to us by that Kremlin aide about what exactly the issues were that were presented to the Kremlin by Steve Witkoff, the special envoy of President Trump, and by Jared Kushner, of course, President Trump's son-in-law, who was also at these talks in Moscow for the first time. The whole reason they were here though was to present the Kremlin with

the sorts of workarounds, the sorts of potential compromises that they've been speaking with the Ukrainian side about for the past week or so in Geneva and more recently in Florida at the weekend, sort of trying to sort of come up with language, come up with creative ideas that could tiptoe and circumvent around Ukraine's red lines on issues like its desire to join the NATO military alliance in the future and other issues as well that have proved to be obstacles.

Now the big question, what is the Kremlin's appetite for those kinds of compromises? We haven't had that answered yet, except in so much to say that the. That Kremlin official saying these talks were essentially positive.

TAPPER: And Nick, what are Zelenskyy and NATO leaders saying about this meeting?

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean we're literally minutes since it ended and we received that readout from Yuri Ushakov. So no response yet from Ukraine at this stage. But of course they have been saying how they are keen to digest this correctly, consult with allies.

I'm sure there will be some elements of immediate relief that we've not suddenly seen Witkoff and Kushner emerge with a deal done that may not have been to Ukraine's liking. I think the concept that was far- fetched given the Kremlin's rhetoric ahead of it. But they may take some concern in hearing Ushakov talk about a 28-point plan being discussed that's not the 20 point plan that Zelenskyy was referring to a matter of hours ago.

And there are of course these mysterious four other documents that Ushakov said were presented during the meeting, unclear what's within those, or whether they potentially impose conditions or incentives for increased U.S.-Russia relationships that might potentially alarm Kyiv in the hours ahead.

[17:20:10]

Look, ultimately, we've only heard brief statements from relatively terse mouthed Kremlin official here about what went down in five hours of meetings. Granted, half of that will be translation. Some of it may be Putin's well known historical lectures. But we have to of course hear from Witkoff himself, from Jared Kushner. They may possibly brief Zelenskyy. Certainly they'll brief their boss, President Trump in the hours or minutes ahead. They may have a different take. They may too potentially have specific asks that the Kremlin have presented to the administration.

A lot of this very volatile and of course we have to wait and see if in the hours or minutes ahead. We hear from President Trump himself about how he has perceived this meeting and what he thinks the next steps are, but no obvious breakthrough right now.

TAPPER: All right, Nick Paton Walsh in Kyiv, Matthew Chance in Moscow. Thanks to both of you. President Trump wants to create investment accounts for American children under the age of 10. Is that a good plan? We're going to talk it over with my next guest who also once wanted to give money to Americans.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:25:32]

TAPPER: In our Money Lead, happy giving Tuesday. Michael Dell of Dell Technologies and his wife Susan announced today that they're donating more than $6 billion to Trump accounts. That's billion with a B to Trump accounts, new investment accounts for all American children born between January 2025 and 2029.

The treasury plans to put $1,000 in each account available next year. And the Dell's donation will fund $250 deposits for at least 25 million children ages 10 and under.

Let's talk about this with someone who also wanted to give money to Americans, albeit in a different way, former presidential candidate Andrew Yang. Andrew, good to see you. What do you think of this plan from the Trump administration and the donation from the Dells?

ANDREW YANG, CEO, NOBLE MOBILE: Anything that puts money into the hands of babies, children, families is a huge win. Jake, $1,000 might not seem like a lot to some viewers, but it's a lot more than a lot of kids start out with, unfortunately.

And Cory Booker, other Dems have proposed baby bonds and similar ideas. The most exciting aspect of this is where it could go because if you look at other anti-poverty measures like the child tax credit, they started out as one thing and then changed a lot over the years.

TAPPER: When you ran for president, one of your staple policies on your platform was universal income, $1,000 a month for every American. Is there a similarity between these proposed Trump accounts and your proposal of a universal income?

YANG: It's $1,000 directly into the hands of an American, in this case, child. And I'm a huge proponent that in the age of AI, a lot of Americans are going to need income from different sources, including in this sort of fashion.

So to people who say, look, this seems a little like what I was talking about on the presidential trail, I agree. I love it. I was super excited when I heard about this initiative. I actually saw Michael Dell in Austin last month before this announcement and they were excited as well. It's hard to argue with $6 billion for kids.

TAPPER: Can you explain why you think in the age of AI this will be needed more than ever?

YANG: You know, I saw a post about how the unemployment rate for recent college grad is just going up and up. Jake, 25 percent of the unemployed are now college grads, which is an all-time high. And AI is decimating entry level white collar jobs in particular. And these changes are going to get worse and more widespread throughout the economy.

So that's what I mean about the connection between putting money into people's hands innovative ways and the advent of AI which is going to, in my view, eliminate millions of American jobs.

TAPPER: So the money for this proposal, we're told will come from the government, but it will be in the form of a tax credit for the new parents. Is that the best way to do this?

YANG: You know, people -- I can sense some people would look at it and say, look, I would have done this differently. A win's a win. Again, it could evolve from here. The money goes into a retirement account which then can be taken out when the child turns 18. And the hope is that the growth will compound over those 18 years and then possibly all the way through to that child's retirement decades from now.

Now you can say, look, I would have different measures for different expenses because there's a 529 account that might have certain advantages relative to these accounts, but that could change by the time these kids become 18. 18 years is a long time for legislators to return to the well and see if they should tweak it.

TAPPER: So the kids will be able to withdraw the money, as you know, when they turn 18 to use for education, for other uses. And then the account is going to function like a traditional IRA. What do you think having these funds will mean for the economic situation of that generation?

YANG: Again, it's a little bit, if it compounds the numbers could be considerable. The major unknown is whether other people decide to fund those accounts on behalf of the child over the 18 years. The Dell's 6.25 billion is a phenomenal start.

[17:30:00]

You can see something happening from governments from nonprofits from loved ones and individuals. So it's something of a blank slate that starts with a thousand bucks, which is a lot more than these families might have had without these new measures.

TAPPER: Andrew Young, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Good to see you again.

YOUNG: Thanks Jake. Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.

TAPPER: Brian Walshe, the Massachusetts man on trial for murder, has confessed to disposing of his wife's body and to misleading police, but he insists he did not kill her. Next, how Google searches once again were a major focus of testimony in court today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:35:00]

TAPPER: The Afghan man accused of killing a National Guard member and critically wounding another National Guard member last week in D.C. appeared in court virtually from his hospital bed today to plead not guilty to murder and other charges. Prosecutors released new images of the moments right before the attack.

Closed-circuit security cameras showing the man standing on the sidewalk, then running toward the Guard members with his hands raised in a firing stance. The court ordered the suspect held without bond. His next court appearance is in January. We will continue to cover that story.

Also in our Law and Justice Lead today, more graphic Internet searches for the best ways to dispose of a body. Revealed in day two of the murder trial of Brian Walshe, the Massachusetts man accused of killing and dismembering his wife in 2023.

Now, Walshe denies committing the actual murder, but he has pleaded guilty to misleading police and to disposing of his wife's remains. Her body still is missing. CNN chief legal analyst Laura Coates is all over this bizarre trial. So walk us through disturb -- these Google searches.

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: As you said, he says, yes, I dismembered and put her body in trash bags across Massachusetts, but I didn't kill her. I didn't do that, of course. I thought that she had a sudden and unexpected death, and I panicked, thinking no one would believe me that she just died suddenly.

But then these Google searches come out through an officer who's doing a forensic analysis of all these different Apple devices in his home, many of which are synced to the kids' iPads and beyond, Jake. Some of them include best divorce strategies for men, best state to divorce for a man.

That was before the actual alleged missing person's case, the now we know death. Also, how long does DNA last? Can identification be made on partial human remains? Directing also to a murdermurdermurder.com website, which who knew they had one? They actually do. Asking about ways to dispose of bodies and beyond.

How to remove a hard drive from an Apple laptop? How to saw a body? And one, how can you be charged with murder without a body? These are just some of the messages, some of the queries that were searched by Brian Walshe, as they have alleged, in the court.

Now, there are some questions as to who exactly did these searches, but the dates of some of them include the date when Brian Walshe says he found his wife dead. They had a two-year-old, a four-year-old, and a six-year-old. They're not articulating these searches.

Who else had access to the devices? That they're trying to prove here. But none of these actual searches can be exclusively used by the prosecution to show premeditation of murder. That's the first degree charge he faces here.

Because a lot of these took place after the actual murder, or they allege the murder, the death.

TAPPER: Yes, yes.

COATES: And why that's important here is because the defense is going to look at this, what seems to be an embarrassment of breaches, and instead say, this was all part of his panic. He thought no one would believe him.

And so, rather than call 911, he did what I described, the dismemberment, the placing the body parts around. But he didn't actually kill her, and it's your job, prosecution, to prove that he is, in fact, the one that did it, not the one that disposed of the body.

TAPPER: So, I mean.

COATES: I know.

TAPPER: Come on. I mean, if I was a prosecutor, I'd just say, come on. Anyway, this is also day two of the trial for, when it comes to the two accused CEO killer, Luigi Mangione, and the suppression of evidence hearing. His defense team is trying to get all this evidence thrown out of court. It sounds simple to resolve, but it's taking many days. Why?

COATES: Because it's for all the marbles, essentially. You know, what they want to suppress is what was in his backpack. Any sort of notebooks that might have had incriminating statements in it. The idea of weapons or otherwise. Any sort of laptops and beyond. Any statements he may have made.

Remember the Law and Order episodes? We all do. You know, our Miranda warnings? If I didn't give those Miranda warnings to you, and you spoke to me, there is a chance that I conformed an illegal search or a conversation with you, and therefore, you can suppress the evidence that I have taken from your possession.

And if the court were to find that's the case, and you don't have what's in the backpack, you don't have certain statements, then you have less leverage in a case to meet your burden as the prosecution.

And for the defense, they may have more leverage to try to escape the highest of penalties here in a case like this. We don't have statements from him on the stand. He hasn't testified. The trial hasn't happened yet. But they're hoping that the evidence that they acquired from his possession in that McDonald's would be enough to push over that threshold. So they're going to fight like hell to keep it all out.

TAPPER: OK, Laura Coates, great to have you as always. And if you are a true crime junkie, you can follow every step of this case. You can watch the live feed from inside the courtroom, and you can even get analysis from Laura Coates and the CNN legal team. While that's happening, this is the Brian Walshe trial, live coverage on the new CNN app under the Watch tab.

[17:40:05] Next here on The Lead, apparently the President has a high comfort level with the press. Was he so comfortable that he actually dozed off during today's cabinet meeting? What may have had him so tired, that's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Today at the White House, President Trump's Cabinet meeting and what appeared to be Trump having a little difficulty staying awake, seemingly dozing off during some presentations.

The White House says what you're seeing here is actually the President, "listening attentively and running the entire three hour marathon Cabinet meeting."

Now we should say if he was falling asleep, maybe he was a bit tired from all that time online last night where he was retrouthing quite a bit between 7:20 p.m. and midnight, 158 posts and reposts to be exact, ranging from criticisms of Democrats to criticisms of immigrants to conspiracy theories from Alex Jones and more and more.

[17:45:13]

All right. My panel joins me now. Mike Dubke --

MIKE DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yes.

TAPPER: -- he -- he did look a little sleepy in that cabinet meeting. I don't know if he was dozing off or -- or what.

DUBKE: Or listening intently.

TAPPER: Does that what I look like? Does it look like I'm listening intently?

DUBKE: Yes, it does. And I can keep talking if you want me to.

TAPPER: So --

DUBKE: I'll talk right on through this.

TAPPER: Look, he's 79 years old.

DUBKE: Yes.

TAPPER: I mean like this is not abnormal for a 79-year-old to be sleepy.

DUBKE: I -- I will say this. And this is from my personal experience with the president. He is abnormal in the -- in the lack of sleep that he needs. I mean, the fact that you -- when was the last tweet of his 158? Probably something like 2:00 a.m. in the morning.

This guy is awake all the time. And I'm not trying to -- I'm not trying to pull this Joe Biden, oh my goodness.

XOCHITL HINOJOSA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I was just going to say, you sound a lot like Joe Biden's White House staff.

DUBKE: I know. I know. And I'm really not trying to say that. It is -- I think the reason that Elon Musk and Donald Trump were such close friends at the beginning is because both of them have supernatural lack of sleep ability. It is -- it is crazy. So I'm not really worried. It was a three-hour marathon press conference, basically. And he's out there all the time.

TAPPER: Yes.

DUBKE: He conducts -- somebody was saying earlier he conducts all of his -- all of his activities out in the open. And that's something we haven't seen.

HINOJOSA: Yes, I mean, I think that, and that was a lot of what the Biden folks would say, especially when Jake moderate -- moderated that debate with Joe Biden. A lot of what they were talking about, that famous debate where he could not really say anything that was coherent was because he had international travel. His family said, you should not be doing this.

You should not be doing a debate when you have international travel right before, et cetera. But at the end of the day, whether it be Joe Biden or Donald Trump, if you're almost 80 years old or 80 years old, it is time to retire. And it is just time.

I mean, aging is part of the natural process. It isn't offensive. We all go through it.

This is what happens when you're 80 years old. And so he will be the oldest president when he leaves office. And I think you're now seeing signs of that, right?

TAPPER: Yes. The Pentagon held a briefing today, they say, for news outlets. But there was something missing. News outlets. Because a majority of the mainstream news outlets, including CNN, not to mention "Fox" and others, did not agree to the new Pentagon rules laid out by Secretary Hegseth. So this is what we have. Conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer posting she was at the desk of Washington Post reporter, Dan Lamothe.

So did several other media people, whatever they are. That prompted Lamothe to post this, saying, y'all are going to have to work this one out for yourselves. Mike Dubke, there's expanding the reach of the internet -- media press pool from outlets like "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post" to other ones that, you know, might be conservative, like the "Free Beacon" or whatever. And then there's expanding it to people that really aren't journalists at all.

DUBKE: Well, you -- I think you had so many new voices in the room because so many of the legacy media did not want to play by the rules, including CNN and "Fox News" --

TAPPER: Right.

DUBKE: -- that the Pentagon had laid down. And so, you know, my warning to the Pentagon is, really, be careful what you wish for. Because if you look at the questions that these new voices asked, they were kind of out there.

TAPPER: Right.

DUBKE: They were not usual questions. No offense to legacy media, but if I'm a spokesperson for the -- for the White House, I basically can figure out what the question is that I am going to get.

TAPPER: Because they're based in fact?

DUBKE: Well, because they're based in conventional thinking or whatever.

TAPPER: Well, look at this. Loomer took to -- to X or Twitter and she posted, the secretary of the Army's office is plotting a coup at the Pentagon to remove Pete Hegseth. That's presumably the kind of thing you're talking about. Xochitl?

HINOJOSA: Yes, I mean, I think, if you were advising the president of the United States, you are not part of the media. And that was what Laura Loomer has been doing on national security. She's been advising him. That's why you've seen certain firings happening at the White House. Matt Gaetz was in there.

He was the President's pick for attorney general, we may remember, about a year ago. And so that's not what the media is. The reason at the Pentagon and at the Justice Department and at the State Department, you have a press corps that understands those agencies is because those agencies are complicated.

You want people asking the tough questions to the American people. You want not -- you don't want some health reporter, which no due respect to a health reporter, but going into the Pentagon asking those types of questions to people of the Pentagon. They understand the precedent at the Pentagon.

TAPPER: Yes.

HINOJOSA: They understand what the law is. They understand the way the Pentagon works. And so you want people with that knowledge asking the tough questions on behalf of the American people, not people that actually are -- are talking to the President daily and his surrogate.

[17:50:07]

TAPPER: Let's talk about the -- the Pentagon right now on the -- on the subject of the second strike. Because what we -- what we got today from Secretary Hegseth was the clear message that he did not see the second strike, he did not see any survivors of the first strike, and that it was the admiral who conducted the mission. He did support -- he did express support for the admiral.

DUBKE: Right.

TAPPER: But there's been a very clear message since yesterday from Hegseth that whatever happened, I did not actually order that specific action.

DUBKE: So what I've been tracking, rather than these specifics around this, is where and who at the White House and other places have come out in support of Secretary Hegseth. Because I do think on Capitol Hill, this is a very serious matter, so I want to be serious when I address this.

TAPPER: Yes.

DUBKE: On Capitol Hill, I think there's a number of Republicans that are questioning not just this strike, but a lot of actions by this -- by this Pentagon where they are not getting timely responses, whether they be Democrats or Republicans --

TAPPER: Right.

DUBKE: -- from several elements within the -- within the Pentagon. So there have been a lot of questions about Hegseth's leadership, and this is just one of another kind of point for the media and others to -- to point to, but it -- it really is drawing into question at what point are Republicans going to hold this Pentagon accountable and Hegseth accountable.

So I -- this story has changed a little bit, and -- but I think it's a -- there's a bigger story here --

TAPPER: I agree.

DUBKE: -- in watching where the administration goes when it's difficult.

TAPPER: Totally. Xochitl?

HINOJOSA: Well, and there's not only -- not only does Congress have a responsibility to do oversight, but if you had a Justice Department that was truly independent, there are statutes in order to prosecute Hegseth if they wanted to. Now the Inspector General of the Pentagon --

TAPPER: We should -- we should note there's no conclusive evidence that he did anything wrong.

HINOJOSA: There's no conclusive evidence, but the reason I think that you are also seeing him clean things up is because an Inspector General could potentially investigate him and refer him to the Justice Department for charges.

TAPPER: All right, thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

Coming up, the new documentary from Rapper 50 Cent. This one is digging into the past of Sean "Diddy" Combs, even speaking to some of the jurors who helped send Diddy to prison.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) [17:56:45]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We have to find somebody that'll work with us that has dealt in the dirtiest of dirty business. We're losing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In our Pop Culture Lead today, the new Netflix documentary "Sean Combs: The Reckoning" is produced by Combs' longtime rival, Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson.

The documentary is said to provide never-before-seen footage of Combs. In fact, some clips are so deep behind the scenes, lawyers for Combs have issued a cease and desist, alleging that those clips were stolen. Let's bring in CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister. Elizabeth, do we know where the footage came from?

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake. So according to Sean Combs' team, I have connected with his spokesperson. They allege that that footage that you just saw in that trailer actually was Sean Combs' personal footage.

They explained to me that since he has been 19 years old, he has been documenting his life with his own personal videographer because he wanted to create his own documentary. Now, it's quite surprising that he was documenting his life in the days leading up to his arrest in September of 2024. But it appears that 50 Cent and the producers behind this Netflix documentary got their hands on that so-called personal footage.

Now, I have obtained the cease and desist letter that you have referenced, Jake. They are demanding that Netflix doesn't air this. Clearly, that didn't happen. This has been out and was released last night with all of these new allegations. But I do have a statement from Sean Combs' spokesperson that I want to read to you. His spokesperson tells me, "Netflix is plainly desperate to sensationalize every minute of Mr. Combs' life without regard for truth in order to capitalize on a never-ending media frenzy. If Netflix cared about truth or about Mr. Combs' legal rights, it would not be ripping private footage out of context." They go on to say "it is equally staggering that Netflix handed creative control to Curtis "50 Cent" Jackson, a longtime adversary with a personal vendetta who has spent too much time slandering Mr. Combs."

Now, I reached out to Netflix. They tell me that they did have the rights to this. I want to read you part of a statement from the documentary's director, Alex Stapleton. And this is what she says, "It came to us, we obtained the footage legally and have the necessary rights. We moved heaven and earth to keep the filmmaker's identity confidential." And they go on to say that they also reached out to Combs legal team, offered them an interview, that they declined to do an interview.

TAPPER: All right, Elizabeth Wagmeister, thank you so much. Appreciate it. Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, so many new questions tonight about that follow on strike on that alleged drug boat in the Caribbean. President Trump says that neither he nor the Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, even knew that there was a second strike which killed survivors hanging on to the wreckage, according to the Washington Post.

I'm going to ask a current senator who served in Iraq as a CIA analyst if she thinks the White House is trying to make an admiral the fall guy for this controversy.

[17:59:59]

Plus, as many Americans are struggling with the cost of living, President Trump says that any questions about affordability are actually a Democratic scam and a fake narrative. We'll talk about that with our panel.