Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

2021 D.C. Pipe Bomb Suspect Arrested, Facing Explosives Charges; Right-Wing Outlet Under Scrutiny After Linking Ex-Capitol Police Officer To Jan. 6 Pipe Bombs; Rep. Carlos Gimenez, (R-FL), Is Interviewed About Top Intel Dem Calls Follow-up Boat Strike Video "Troubling", Watchdog Finds Hegseth Group Chat Risked Endangering Troops; Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ), Is Interviewed About NJ Lawmaker Cuts Off Him At Hearing On Watchdog Bill; Trump Hires New Architect For White House Ballroom; Fear, Anxiety In Minnesota As Ice Operation Targets Somalis. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired December 04, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right. Thanks for being with us today. Jake Tapper is standing by for "The Lead." Hi, Jake.

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

HUNT: Have a great show.

[17:00:38]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: An arrest nearly five years after someone planted explosives the night before the January 6 Capitol attack. We just got photos in of the suspect. The Lead starts right now.

It was the grainy video that spurred conspiracy theories for years. And now the FBI says they finally know who put those pipes light bombs outside Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters. But will this arrest silence all those right wing conspiracy theorists? Plus, out with the old. What sources are telling CNN about President Trump replacing the architect in charge of designing his brand new White House ballroom?

And after claims of racist comments and a rigged contest, I'm going to talk with Miss Universe right here on The Lead about all the drama that led to her pageant win and much more.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. After nearly five years of investigation, the FBI finally announced that they had arrested a suspect, as suspect accused of planting pipe bombs near the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters the night before the January 6, 2021 Capitol attack. Brian Cole Jr., a 30-year-old white man from the D.C. suburbs is charged with transporting an explosive device in interstate commerce and with malicious destruction by means of explosions. CNN observed local and federal law enforcement outside his home in Woodbridge, Virginia this morning. Attorney General Pam Bondi gave very few details about the suspect this morning, but said this cold case has been solved.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PAM BONDI, ATTORNEY GENERAL: Today's arrest happened because the Trump administration has made this case a priority. Let me be clear, there was no new tip, there was no new witness, just good diligent police work and prosecutorial work.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Now, for years, investigators have reviewed tens of thousands of video files and tips and cell phone data and of course, that grainy surveillance video of someone disguised placing those pipe bombs, which the FBI said were viable. That next morning on January 6, 2021, then Vice President-elect Kamala Harris came within 20 feet of the bomb at the DNC. Its discovery diverted police away from the violence that was unfolding at the Capitol at the time.

CNN's Brian Todd is outside the suspect's house in Woodbridge, Virginia. And Brian, officials today were rather short on details. They wouldn't really discuss the charges or the evidence or motives. What do we know about the suspect?

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well Jake, we do have some new information tonight from neighbors in this area of Woodbridge, Virginia about their previous interactions with the suspect identified as Brian Cole. He lived just behind me down in this cul-de-sac here where police have kind of cordoned off the neighborhood. We've got new information from neighbors about their interactions with him, but also one dramatic account from one neighbor who witnessed the convergence of law enforcement on his house firsthand this morning from fairly close. The neighbor did not want to give his name but has a pretty compelling account of it. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A bunch of soldier looking guys, maybe SWAT team, people in camouflage with automatic rifles aimed at the house. And on the loudspeaker they said, this is the FBI. We have a federal search warrant. Please, everyone in such and such address come out of the house with your hands up. I saw what I believe was a woman come out of the house, but they didn't seem to take her into custody.

And then a little while later another I think woman came out of the house but they didn't seem to take her into custody either. Then after that they prepared to go into the house and they all had their rifles at the ready and they moved into the house.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: And that -- and that neighbor just said he did not actually witness the suspect being brought out of the house, but he gave that account pretty dramatic there of when they converged on the house at about 8:30 this morning Eastern time. Also talking to neighbors about their previous interactions with -- of the suspect identified as Brian Cole Jr. They said they often saw him out in the neighborhood walking his Chihuahua. But he was a very reclusive figure, never really interacted with people, almost was antisocial in the words of one neighbor. They described him walking his Chihuahua for long walks frequently several times a day, sometimes even at maybe two in the morning.

[17:05:06]

One neighbor said he would never make eye contact with you. He would always wear headphones. Never speak to you except to say hello. One neighbor had kind of a quirky account of him saying that what struck him, what stood out to him about the suspect was that even in the deadest of winter, in the coldest days, he'd be out in his shorts with red Crocs walking his dog. But a very reclusive figure is the picture we're getting of the suspect, even though he came from a family that a neighbor said was fairly friendly.

Jake.

TAPPER: All right, Brian Todd in Woodridge, Virginia, thanks.

And we do have new photographs, as you saw during that presentation from Brian, new photographs of the suspect, and we're showing those to you right now. Let's discuss with former CIA and FBI counterterrorism official Phil Mudd and former assistant secretary for the Department of Homeland Security, Juliette Kayyem.

And Phil, the attorney general said no new tips or info led to this arrest. It was just going over the information they already had. Does that surprise you?

PHIL MUDD, FORMER CIA COUNTERTERRORISM OFFICIAL: It does. Because if you look at the amount of people who must have been looking at this over the past five years, you're talking about tens of thousands of hours of manpower. If you're looking about the information that they had to weed through, as Pam Bondi suggested, I assume she's being truthful, that information hasn't changed over time. I guarantee you with the priority of this case, the number of people looking at that would have been maintained over the course of years. You mentioned cold case.

I would not call this cold case, Jake. The problem in this case is if you don't need DNA evidence, if you don't leave a photograph, if you're not, if you don't have a coconspirator, if you don't say something, if you're not on social media, even in the 21st century, Jake, people who don't leave much of a digital trail or a trail with something like DNA can be hard to find. I'm glad they found them. And I'm not -- I'm surprised, I'm not shocked it took this long.

TAPPER: And Juliette, officials at the press conference this afternoon gave very few details about the suspect, about the motive, about the evidence. There was a lot of praising of each other for his capture. Is that normal?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: That part of it is not normal. It's normal for this administration. And you sort of have to sort of dismiss it from what was substantively said. And I have totally agree with Phil in this instance, this is -- if it is true that no new evidence came, it seems like what they did is they rightfully and successfully put together phone logs or phone pings and surveillance, the grainy photograph, car and where his car was, purchases at Home Depot and a variety of other pieces that aren't like, you know, that's -- it's complex, but it's what investigators do. So it is -- it is -- it does still seem inexplicable that nothing new came.

And this may just be that they just got fresh eyes on it as the attorney general said, taking the politics outside of it. What we don't know is motive. As you noted, huge conspiracy theories about this, about whether it was a distraction from what was about to happen on January 6, 2021, whether it was a false flag by the FBI, as the deputy FBI Director -- now Deputy FBI Director Bongino often says. We have no idea. This guy has no criminal past.

He doesn't seem to have a social media presence. He's a loner, as his neighbor said. So I'm very curious about it because it does not -- you know, it could just be a coincidence, right, January 5th and then January 6th. But I'd like to know, and I think the American public would like to know.

TAPPER: And Phil, as Juliette just noted, before Dan Bongino became the Deputy Director of the FBI, when he was a podcaster, he said that he believed that the FBI knew the identity of the pipe bomber and didn't reveal it because it was a, quote, "inside job," unquote. Bongino was really singled out for praise for his work at the FBI for the reason that there was an arrest made after all these years.

MUDD: Well, the Deputy Director of the FBI does not get involved investigations. There are some things he might have been involved with, for example, directing personnel or money at the investigation. But to me, this is nuts and bolts of what the FBI has done for a century plus, that is sort through mounds of data that a local police department can't sort through and figure out after five years who did it.

I tell you what the interesting part to me is, Jake, and that is there is one thing that's changed in the past five years, and that is software. This amount of data and disparate data, you're talking about cell phones pinging, you're talking about credit cards buying things like blast caps, aggregating that amount of data over the course of months or years and putting it together to figure out who might be on the phone, who might be buying something from Home Depot 15 years ago, 10 years ago, that's hard with AI. My question is, did new access to software or new types of software help them aggregate that data? Because that stuff is tough, Jake. Humans can't do that.

[17:10:05]

TAPPER: Juliet, what sort of evidence do you think the FBI will need to get a conviction in this case?

KAYYEM: Well, we don't know if he's talking, so a confession would be the best at this stage. But it seems like they have, as Phil was describing, enough physical signal, connections to put him at the right place at the -- at the right time, so to speak. And so then they begin what will look like a relatively normal investigation. Go to the Home Depot. Who did he purchases from?

Did he say anything to whether he had friends or anything online? What did his family know? That's always the number one question that you want to ask. And then whether there's anything in the house, which they're clearly trying to get evidence from, that would give them more information.

The case right now is a -- is a federal case. Use of explosives. It doesn't have a motive yet. And so they might be able to also determine the motive and determine whether this -- how did this fit into that era, to this sort of, you know, January 2021 era. And what was he trying to do?

What was his motive?

TAPPER: All right, Juliette Kayyem and Phil Mudd, thanks to both of you.

The suspect in this pipe bomb case is a male, not a female, as Glenn Beck's far right outlet, the Blaze, published in a report last month. The Blaze claimed that, quote, "A forensic analysis of a female former U.S. Capitol Police officer's gait is a 94 percent to 98 percent match to the unique stride of the long sought January 6th pipe bomb suspect confirmed by several intelligence sources," unquote. The Blaze appears, at least based on today's actions, to have gotten that really wrong. An attorney for that woman vehemently denied the report. The Justice Department attorney denied a claim that he had determined she was the bomber.

And now, weeks later, the FBI says the suspect is Brian Cole Jr. not the woman that the Blaze mentioned.

I want to bring in Will Sommer of the Bulwark, who just wrote a piece titled "The Blaze's Pipe Bombshell Appears to Bomb." Well, he wrote that a few weeks ago.

And, Will, I guess the first question I have is how shaky was this report to begin with? And I want to note, the only reason I'm bringing this up is because lots of Republican lawmakers and members of the Trump administration pushed this Blaze report out. So it took on a patina of respectability and authenticity because all these officials who you'd think would know better had pushed it out. So he how shaky was the report to begin with?

WILL SOMMER, SENIOR REPORTER, THE BULWARK: I mean, I think to me it looked pretty suspicious. And a lot of people outside of this kind of right wing media bubble, it was based, as you noted, nearly entirely on gait analysis. So how the suspect walked or the person in the surveillance footage. As you said, people like Anna Paulina Luna in Congress, other members of Congress embraced it. Tulsi Gabbard, the head of intelligence, her office circulated a report saying, you know, essentially flagging this person, this member of -- this woman who works for the CIA now saying, well, maybe she's the suspect in the bombing.

And so this really was embraced by right wing media despite, I mean, frankly being based on very little evidence.

TAPPER: The report's assertion that the bomber was actually this Capitol Police officer. And again, that was shaky to begin with and seemingly disproven by what happened today. It played into these right wing conspiracy theories that January 6th was all a false flag operation and it was pushed by the FBI. And, you know, nobody in MAGA did anything wrong. The Blaze actually named this woman, published photos of her.

We're obviously not going to do that because there's no evidence she did anything wrong. Is there a lawsuit against the Blaze on the horizon?

SOMMER: I mean, I think it's very possible the Blaze is going to have a massive defamation suit here. I mean, as you said, they published this woman's name. They said where she works now, you know, her family, I believe was targeted certainly by people who viewed this article. And she has a lawyer. And so I think there could be a very significant settlement coming up.

It's important to note this is a massive story for right wing media. Who the pipe bomber was because, as you said, they blamed the pipe bomb, I think unfairly, for sort of ratcheting up the tension. We saw Dan Bongino said it was an inside job. So they basically said if it weren't for these pipe bombs, we wouldn't have had January 6th and Trump wouldn't have had to deal with this. And so this is a person they were really mad at after the story came out.

TAPPER: One of the reasons that it seemed a report that should not be taken at face value is that one of the authors was a guy who had been arrested and pardoned for January 6, right?

SOMMER: Yes, that's correct. I mean, Steve Baker was one of the participants in January 6 and was. He was about to be sentenced and that he was ultimately pardoned. So he avoided that. But I mean, these are people who I think frankly had access to grind the officer they keyed in on here.

She was sort of -- they were mad at her. They felt she was unfairly aggressive on January 6 itself towards the rioters. And so they said, oh, well, what a coincidence. Maybe she did the pipe bomb. So this is kind of the quality of the reporting we're dealing with here.

[17:15:00]

TAPPER: Will Sommer from The Bulwark, great reporting as always. Thank you so much.

Coming up, a new bragging right for President Trump. It's not exactly ending Russia's war in Ukraine, but his administration did broker a new peace deal after years of war, an important one. But first, today's classified briefing, the left lawmakers divided on the details, walking away with drastically different opinions about the need for the second strike on the suspected drug boat on September 2nd. Democratic Congressman Jim Himes is the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence community, he -- Committee. He saw the video and we're going to talk to him next about what he saw behind closed doors.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our politics lead, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee reacting to the video of that follow up strike on the suspected drug vessel in the Caribbean on September 2nd. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JIM HIMES (D-CT), RANKING MEMBER, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: What I saw in that room was one of the most troubling things I've seen in my time in public service. You have two individuals in clear distress without any means of locomotion with a destroyed vessel who are killed by the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[17:20:03]

TAPPER: The video was shown top lawmakers in both the House and Senate in classified briefings today. Admiral Mitch Bradley was Special Operations Commander at the time of that September attack. He's defending the military's decision to carry out that follow up strike.

Let's bring in Republican Congressman Carlos Gimenez from Florida.

And Congressman, earlier this week you told my colleague Wolf Blitzer that you would not second guess Admiral Bradley until after a briefing. I know you have not yet seen this video. Based on what you've heard come out of this leadership briefing, are you still giving him and Secretary Hegseth the benefit of the doubt, as you said?

REP. CARLOS GIMENEZ (R-FL), HOMELAND SECURITY COMMITTEE: Yes, I am. And there's two sides to that. I don't think that the Republicans who saw it, I think they had probably different opinions. And so I'm actually, actually a little concerned that if it was a classified briefing that now he's describing what's in that classified briefing. And so I'm not sure that that's something that I would have done.

He may be disturbed by it. But actually telling you what's in there, that leaves me a little bit concerned. And the other folks that seen it, from what I understand on the Republican side, they're backing the Secretary of War and the admiral. I'm not going to second guess the admiral. And until I see something else that leads me in another direction.

TAPPER: Do you think that the audio and video of the second strike should be made available to the public so that the American people can see this evidence?

GIMENEZ: I think if it's something that is, can be unclassified, absolutely. If there's some classified footage in there for one reason or another, then no. But if it's something that can be seen, then it should be seen. And so, again, I'm not going to second guess, you know, the admiral. The admiral has been at this a lot longer than you or I have been.

He knew what his mission was. And I think unless I get some other information that he was carrying out his orders to carry out this mission and he felt that the best way to carry out the mission was to issue a second strike order, and so I'm not going to second guess that at this time.

TAPPER: Let's move on to another issue related to the Pentagon. The Pentagon Inspector General released today the unclassified version of the Signal Gate scandal involving Defense Secretary Hegseth. The report says in part, quote, "The Secretary's transmission of non- public operational information over signal using his personal cell phone exposed sensitive DoD information which could cause harm to DoD personnel and mission objectives," unquote. That is quite different from how Secretary Hegseth characterized the IG report on social media, which he claimed, quote, "total exoneration, case closed," unquote.

Congressman, I don't think the inspector general concluding that Hegseth's action risked harming service members and national security is an exoneration. Does his reaction concern you at all?

GIMENEZ: Look, I said this yesterday I think on your network that we need to grow a little bit thicker skin and that when you make a mistake, just own up to it, hey, we made a mistake. We're not going to do it again. We're all human. Signal is a public app, and in this particular case, somebody put in the wrong person to actually be part of the chat group. And so, you know, regardless, there's two mistakes.

Number one, you used -- you used a public app to do this and have this information, you know, being disseminated, and then somebody that wasn't supposed to be on the chat was on it. And so that is a mistake. And so just say, look, we made a mistake. We're not going to do that again, and then move on. And I think that if you do that, then the American public has a really large capacity to forgive as long as you don't keep doing the same mistake over and over again.

Hopefully, the Secretary of War, you know, learns from this and it won't happen again. And we haven't heard this happening, you know, since then. So, you know, I think it's time to move on.

TAPPER: He doesn't think he did anything wrong, Congressman. I mean, he's saying total exoneration. He didn't do anything wrong, case closed. What makes you think that he's learned from this if he won't even acknowledge that he made a mistake?

GIMENEZ: I think part of the problem that we have in American politics is that sometimes politicians are afraid to say, we made a mistake. And I found during my time as mayor of Miami Dade County, I made some mistakes. And I just said, hey, I made a mistake, and it won't happen again. And you know what? I found that the people of Miami Dade County said, OK, we understand, and then we move on. You know, hopefully that lesson will be learned. I'm sure that he learned the lesson that he's not going to use that, the administration is not going to use that method of communications for sensitive equipment, because we haven't heard of it since. And so I hope that they did, and then we can just move on.

TAPPER: Congressman Carlos Gimenez, Republican of Florida, thank you so much, sir.

Later on The Lead, I'm going to talk with Democratic Congressman Jim Himes who also saw that boat -- who saw that boat strike video.

[17:24:58]

The major deal today signed by Republic -- by President Trump involving decades of war and one of the world's most valuable minerals and the father-in-law of one of his daughters. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And now we're going to sign a very important agreement. Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Today at the White House, President Trump signing a peace deal between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Trump hosted the leaders first in the Oval Office, then nearby at the U.S. Institute of Peace. The name of the building was conveniently renamed just 24 hours earlier as the Donald J. Trump U.S. Institute of Peace. The building was, or maybe kind of still is, an independent nonprofit, it stuck in litigation after the Trump administration tried to take over the institute during the days of DOGE.

But back to today's signing ceremony. This agreement is supposed to end more than 30 years of conflict dating all the way back to the 1994 Rwandan genocide. This year alone, the Democratic Republic of the Congo reports the conflict has killed more than 7,000 people and displaced 1 million others.

[17:30:17]

The violence also involves militias, specifically the group M23, one of the most prominent of them. Just this week, M23 and the Democratic Republic of the Congo blamed each other for attacks, although Trump seemed to today brush that aside.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think you're going to see very quick and very quickly, I think you're going to see things happen. This is something that was not doable, according to a lot of people, and not -- not only is it doable, I think it's going to be a great miracle. (END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: At times, M23 would claim control of large swaths of land and control of mining in the region for one of the most critical minerals in the world, and that mineral is cobalt. It's a major component in lithium ion batteries and almost every rechargeable electronic device that you own.

The Democratic Republic of the Congo is said to produce two-thirds of the world's cobalt. Last month, leaders of M23 signed a framework for a peace deal with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, among the prominent people at that ceremony, Massad Boulos. He is the father-in- law of Tiffany Trump, President Trump's younger daughter.

Boulos is a billionaire. He serves as Trump's senior advisor on Arab and African affairs. President Trump gave him a special shout out earlier today at the signing ceremony.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: And senior advisor for Africa, Massad Boulos, who's been fantastic. Thank you, Massad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Let us hope that peace deal holds.

Coming up on The Lead, the issue that led to this contentious moment with a sitting U.S. senator.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please conclude.

SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): Sir, I have been here for five and a half hours. I am missing votes at the Capitol.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. So what? So as everyone else.

KIM: Give me 30 seconds.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why do you think you're special?

KIM: No --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not.

KIM: What -- what happened was you gave Mr. Keller special privileges here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What was that about? Well, the senator, Democrat Andy Kim of New Jersey, is going to join us here in studio next to talk about it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [17:36:26]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, a less than warm reception at the New Jersey State Capitol of Trenton for a sitting U.S. Senator. Democratic Senator Andy Kim was there Monday to testify against a controversial bill that critics say would gut the powers of the New Jersey Comptroller's Office.

The Comptroller investigates misconduct by state leaders and government officials. According to "The New York Times," Senator Kim was among the first three people who requested to speak at the hearing that day, but was instead called to testify dead last.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KIM: The people of New Jersey are sick and tired of this. They feel this way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have three minutes. So please conclude.

KIM: Sir, I have been here for five and a half hours. I am missing votes at the Capitol.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. So what? So as everyone else.

KIM: Give me 30 seconds.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why do you think you're special?

KIM: No --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're not.

KIM: What -- what happened was you gave Mr. Keller special privileges here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He came at my request.

KIM: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You didn't.

KIM: Oh, OK. I see. OK. So there is someone that is special.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Joining us now to discuss Democratic Senator Andy Kim. OK, first of all, let me acknowledge my bias right now as a Philadelphian. I automatically think that New Jersey has dirty politics, right? You guys are across the river and Trenton sometimes is a sewer.

KIM: Yes.

TAPPER: You went there to testify against the changes that they were going to try to make, which would make it easier for politicians to be corrupt. And that was a fellow Democrat --

KIM: That was a Democrat.

TAPPER: -- that was being -- that was being rude to you. So tell me, first of all, why did you feel it was important to go there and -- and testify?

KIM: Well, look, right now, 84 percent of people in New Jersey surveyed have a similar opinion to they believe that their elected officials are corrupt. You know, we have a reputation of being the soprano state for a reason. And look, I'm in the U.S. Senate by virtue of the fact that a predecessor of mine was indicted and convicted of corruption and bribery.

So you look, I'll be honest with you. What I said there, I'm sick and tired of it, you know, and I just -- I can't stand it. And what I also say is, how can I be down here at the United States Capitol railing against the lawlessness of the Trump administration with any credibility if my own party in my own home state is taking steps that I consider to be corrupt, steps that I think are moving our democracy in the wrong direction, this importance in showing that you stand up against corruption in all forms.

So the bill would strip key investigative powers from this watchdog agency. It passed out of committee unanimously in the Democrats control the legislature, right?

KIM: Correct.

TAPPER: It comes as the current comptroller's aggressive approach to corruption has angered officials, many of whom in New Jersey are your fellow Democrats. So what does this legislation say about the state of politics in New Jersey?

KIM: Well, it's not just about the state of politics in New Jersey, but in the country. I mean, I think that we see a collision. What happened in that hearing is a collision between the old politics, the machine politics that these people who think that they are not beholden to the voters instead, you know, they just think about it as an exclusive club for the well off and the well connected. And then this new energy that I'm excited about this anti-corruption movement that we're trying to build in New Jersey and across this country that is standing up and saying, no, enough of this.

We're tired of the status quo. We're tired of the same old, same old broken politics. We demand a politics based off of transparency and accountability. And look, we're making progress in New Jersey. You know, we were able to defeat a ballot issue called the county line that entrenched this machine power. And I think the anger that you saw from that gentleman, I mean, he is someone who is the head of the Democratic Party in the county that tried to stop me from making those changes.

[17:40:10]

You could tell his anger towards me is one that shows that he thinks that their power is slipping away. And it's true. And I think that this is exactly what the American people will need to see is a change in this politics, because it's not just about corruption. It's that this affects what you pay at the grocery store. It affects how much you pay in your health care and your housing costs. I call it this corruption tax.

TAPPER: Yes.

KIM: You know, as these politicians are, you know, taking in money for themselves and their special interests and their buddies and corporations, we have to pay the cost.

TAPPER: So I don't know what -- what's the next step for the legislation? You have a Democratic governor right now, Phil Murphy -- Phil Murphy. Mikie Sherrill, your former colleague in Congress, she was just elected governor. Have Murphy or Sherrill said if they're going to sign this legislation that would make it easier to be a corrupt politician in New Jersey?

KIN: Well, right now we're trying to still kill this in the legislature. I still think there is a possibility. And I frankly think that hearing and just the absurdity of it all is helping because I'm getting a number of calls from state senators and legislators saying that they were appalled by what happened and that they don't support the legislation. So I'm calling on them to kill this legislation. If it does move forward, I hope that our governor does stop it. But right now I'm trying to focus in on the legislature.

TAPPER: But neither Murphy nor Sherrill has said they will stop it, right?

KIN: No. Neither of them addressed this legislation directly. I have had conversations with Governor-elect Mikie Sherrill about the importance of accountability and transparency in fighting anti- corruption. She's made some statements about it, and I hope that she'll be a good partner in this fight.

TAPPER: Democratic Senator Andy Kim of New Jersey, thank you so much. We appreciate it.

Some breaking news just coming in about the case of New York Attorney General Letitia James before a grand jury. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:46:06]

TAPPER: Breaking news. A grand jury has declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James. Let's get straight to CNN's Katelyn Polantz.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Katelyn, what are you learning? Well, Kaitlan Collins and I have just confirmed through some sources that indeed a grand jury sitting in the federal courthouse in Norfolk, Virginia today, they looked at the possibility of indicting Letitia James for mortgage fraud and they said no to this Justice Department.

Now this comes just about 10 days or a week or so after a judge previously dismissed the case. That case was dismissed against James. It was the same mortgage fraud case, we believe, that the prosecutors were trying to get off the ground again today. It had been dismissed because previously a judge looked at it and said that the prosecutor who had taken it through the grand jury the first time wasn't validly doing that job and so that they needed to try again with a grand jury to reconfirm an indictment if they wanted it.

We do, though, believe that the Justice Department could try again before a grand jury, potentially a third time to try and secure a James indictment, but we do not know exactly when that might happen. We were told that this could be not a time for premature celebration. Jake?

TAPPER: All right, Katelyn Polantz with the breaking news. Thank you so much.

In our Politics Lead, President Trump is replacing the architect that he picked to design his $300 million White House ballroom. Sources tell CNN that President Trump and the original architect clashed over expanding the project. The White House strongly denies that Trump fired the architect, saying that he will instead stay on as a consultant.

Here now is our panel. Staying on as a consultant. I always love that gambit. That's always a good one.

ALENCIA JOHNSON, AUTHOR, "FLIP THE TABLES": That's a political exit in this town.

TAPPER: Alencia, the White House originally said the ballroom would be 90,000 square feet with a seating capacity of 650 people, putting a cost of $200 million. That obviously has expanded in every way. The square footage, the people, it's now at least $300 million. I'm sure there's going to be more. Although we should note, paid for by -- by private donors. What's your reaction to this latest news?

JOHNSON: I mean, it's just -- it goes back to my reaction in general about this whole project and the hypocrisy here, knowing that as a Democrat, had Obama or Biden done this, Republicans would have been outraged. But no one's really saying anything about this.

The other piece, too, I was doing a little digging. This is not surprising that this is stalled or there's a change in, you know, the people working on this. Donald Trump has been known to start projects and not finish them, right? These big, massive projects.

And so it's really unfortunate that this structure, this huge piece of our nation's history has been demolished and now he's over here playing, you know, chess, chair, like, rearranging the chairs for folks. But the reality is, where is actually the protocol in which this was supposed to have gone through in order for this to happen? And where are the Republicans holding him accountable?

TAPPER: What do you think?

MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VP MIKE PENCE: I'm shocked to learn there's hypocrisy here in Washington. Look, I think that the vast majority of Americans are more focused on the cost of living and prices. And I think as much as the media and Democrats want to focus on this story, I don't think that's where the vast majority of voters are.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: But Marc, I would argue that's exactly the problem here.

JOHNSON: Right.

GANGEL: Because I have always wanted to use the word tchotchkes on T.V. And when I've spoken to people about the ballroom project, the first thing they say is they don't like the style, they don't like the taste. Maybe the White House needed a ballroom, but they don't like the Oval Office, full of its tchotchkes and gold, the way the demolition was done. And to your point, people are worried about affordability. This looks like let them eat cake. It looks like let them eat cake.

SHORT: The design is a contrast. I think that's fair, but I don't think that what's happened as far as a ballroom or what they do with an architect is really going to be dropped this.

JOHNSON: But I think it's a symbol of this administration, not focused on the priorities of the American people.

TAPPER: President Trump does seem very, very involved in this.

JOHNSON: He cares more about this than lowering the prices for the American people.

SHORT: I'm not going to defend it, but I also think it's a symbol. A lot of American people want him to come to bulldoze Washington, D.C. And so, yes, it's a symbol in a lot of ways.

[17:50:07]

TAPPER: And -- and replace it with a giant ballroom?

SHORT: Look, I just think their focus is going to be on what is going to be the cost of living.

TAPPER: I don't disagree, but I take Jamie's point. Like, it's like the Gats -- like the Gatsby party that they have. Let's turn to another subject. "The New York Times" says it's suing the Pentagon over these restrictive press access rules. I want to play with what the Pentagon press secretary told conservative influencer Cam Higby about why the Pentagon clamped down on journalistic access.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KINGSLEY WILSON, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: They just waltzed in my office, rang my doorbell literally nonstop. My doorbell was going off probably every single second because they were just trying to come in, trying to hang out, would push their way in if someone else came in for a meeting, would just follow them along and plop down and sit down.

So they definitely had zero boundaries. And like you said, there were instances where they were hanging outside of the secretary's office trying to see who he was meeting with, if they could eavesdrop and hear anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I mean, what the actual F? That sounds like journalists reporting.

GANGEL: Yes, number one, I covered the Pentagon a long time ago when dinosaurs roamed the earth. I do not remember doorbells, so I found that interesting. Yes, that is how we do our job. We go, we talk to people. And in the past, it's been productive. I would argue that the Pentagon and the Trump administration has made a terrible mistake by not having the reporters in there.

You can cover a building from outside the building and look at our Pentagon reporters, our national security reporters. They have just had exclusive after exclusive after exclusive.

TAPPER: Zach Cohen and I broke the inspector general report story yesterday. I want to get your feedback before we go. "Politico" is reporting, or actually it's "Der Spiegel" is reporting on a leaked transcript of a call among European leaders talking about how to protect -- protect Ukraine. The French president, Emmanuel Macron, warned, "There is a possibility that the U.S. will betray Ukraine on the issue of territory without clarity on security guarantees."

Finland's president said, "We cannot leave Ukraine and Volodymyr alone with these guys." Quick reactions from you two.

SHORT: I think it's a huge concern that I think that this administration is instead of deciding to say, let us help arm Ukraine to allow them to defend themselves, has wanted to carve it up. And I think that some of the reporting about the most recent trip to Russia where it seems like there's a profit incentive that's being offered by the leading negotiators, I think is tragic. I wish they'd be defending Ukraine like actually they did, Jake, in the first Trump administration.

TAPPER: Yes, well, Vice President Pence was there then.

SHORT: There were a lot of people. Secretary Pompeo was an enormous influence in that. There was a lot of people that were defending it. You know, Trump in 2018 would campaign about the fact that we gave Javelin missiles to Ukraine when Obama gave blankets. He did defend Ukraine in the first administration. It's very different this time.

TAPPER: Very quick.

JOHNSON: Well, I mean, I think this just shows us again that Trump is not this master negotiator and able to bring about peace in a lot of these conflicts around the world like he said he would, much like a lot of the other campaign promises that he can't deliver on.

[17:53:01]

TAPPER: Thanks to all. What CNN is hearing today from the Somali community in Minnesota after President Trump called the community garbage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead now, two days after President Trump called Somalis living in Minnesota, "garbage," the city's police chief tells CNN that people are scared as new immigration operations are targeting undocumented Somalis. That's ramping up in the Twin Cities. CNN's Whitney Wild spoke with Somalis in Minneapolis, many of whom born in the United States, carrying U.S. passports just in case they get stopped.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MOHAMED AHMED, PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA REPUBLICAN PEOPLE OF COLOR: This is the Somali mall. This is the heart of the community in terms of enterprises.

WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): At Karmel Somali Mall in Minneapolis, halls lined with cafes and shops are normally bustling. Today, they are quiet.

WILD: And with the news of ice coming into Minneapolis, has that shifted? Has the energy changed in here? Are there fewer people?

AHMED: Yes, there is a certain amount of fear.

WILD (voice-over): Mohamed Ahmed is a Somali-born U.S. citizen. Now President Trump is harshly condemning Ahmed's community, citing a three-year sprawling $300 million fraud case in which dozens of Somalis were charged.

TRUMP: I don't want them in our country. We're going to go the wrong way if we keep taking in garbage into our country.

WILD (voice-over): Those words are especially hurtful. Ahmed voted for President Trump in 2024.

AHMED: I've been a Republican for over 25 years. I'm not going to stop being a Republican. And now we're being called garbage.

WILD: How did it make you feel when you heard the President say that?

AHMED: I got five children. My children are no garbage.

WILD (voice-over): The Minneapolis mayor says there are more than 80,000 Somalis in the Twin Cities area. Throughout Minnesota, 87 percent of foreign-born Somalis are naturalized U.S. citizens, and nearly 58 percent of the community were born in the U.S., like this woman who asked us not to share her name.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I got my passport right here. I'm not going to lie to you. You have it right on me? I don't even carry an I.D. with me. So to carry a passport now for my own safety is, I think, not right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, yeah. You're not welcome. We know who you are.

WILD (voice-over): The Department of Homeland Security says they are conducting a very targeted operation. Throughout Minneapolis, social media videos captured stepped up immigration enforcement in recent days. CNN reporter Rob Kuznia captured the moment armed federal agents questioned a man outside a Somali, then quickly left.

As we walk through this mall, the people here are suspicious, asking why we're taping or hiding their faces. Then one woman speaks candidly.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Every human being, some people bad, some people good.

AHMED: We understand.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right?

AHMED: Not all the Somali people. It's big name.

WILD: What would you say to the president if he were standing here right now?

AHMED: Mr. President, we campaigned for you. We have hope in you. We see hope in you. Please differentiate between good, bad and evil.

[18:00:02]

WILD (voice-over): Whitney Wild, CNN, Minneapolis.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.