Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Indiana Senate Republicans Reject Trump's Redistricting Push; White House Defends Trump's Suggestion to Give Up Certain Products; NTSB Warns Defense Bill Undermines D.C. Airspace Safety Changes. Trump Pushes For Senate Confirmation Of Lindsey Halligan; DOJ Fails Again To Re-Indict Letitia James. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired December 11, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

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

This is our, a massive rebuke of President Trump from Republicans in Indiana. In a vote right before the show, a majority of the Indiana State Senate's Republican caucus rejected President Trump's redistricting push despite a rather aggressive pressure campaign from the president and his top allies.

[18:00:02]

So, what happens now?

Also, less than a year after that deadly crash above Washington, D.C.'s Reagan National Airport that killed 67 people, a new warning, that part of the defense bill that's going through Congress right now could roll back some of the exact safety measures put in place after the accident to avoid a future disaster. We'll explain how in the effort to try and strike that provision from the bill before it becomes law.

And you likely know him as one of the stars of the T.V. show, Mad Men. Now, John Slattery is grazing the silver screen in the dramatic new film Nuremberg, which centers around the trial of Hitler's second in command. Slattery's going to join us this hour to explain why he thinks the movie is relevant today, even though it is based in the late 1940s,

The Lead tonight, a massive rebuke of President Trump and when it comes to the president's plans to reshape the midterms for Indiana rejected tonight by his own party. The State Senate today voted down the effort to redraw the Congressional to go from seven Republican, two Democratic seats to nine Republican seats. This is part of President Trump's grand plan to try to hold onto control of the House of Representatives next year with all these unusually midterm redistricting efforts from states all over the country.

The final vote tally in Indiana was 31-19 against the new map. 21 Republicans banded together with 10 Democrats and rejected Trump's will for two more Republican leaning seats, even as lawmakers have continued to face threats like this from the conservative lobbying group, Heritage Action, a big ally of President Trump, quote, President Trump has made it clear to Indiana leaders if the Indiana Senate fails to pass the map, all federal funding will be stripped from the state. Roads will not be paved. Guard bases will close. Major projects will stop. These are the stakes and every no vote will be to blame, hash tag pass the map.

This is a more stark version of what Republican Governor Mike Braun has alluded to in past interviews referring to, quote, consequences of not working with the Trump administration as tightly as we should, unquote, and Indiana perhaps not being the first call when it comes to federal benefits.

President Trump himself has leveled threats to oust the Republican dissenters, writing last night on Truth Social, quote, anybody that votes against redistricting and the success of the Republican Party in D.C. will be, I am sure, met with a MAGA primary in the spring.

I want to bring in Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman from Indiana. Congressman, thank you so much for being here. We really appreciate it. I know you're in favor of the redistricting map that just failed. House Speaker Mike Johnson just reacted to the vote moments ago. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): It's disappointing to me. But as I've said all along, whatever the maps are that are presented by every state, I have to win those and we will. So, I guess that's disappointing now coming in Indiana. But there's about 14 states at some stage of the process now, either litigation or redistricting. So, we shall see.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I know you're disappointed, I know you supported the map.

REP. MARLIN STUTZMAN (R-IN): Yes.

TAPPER: What do you think this means in terms of President Trump and his ability to get Republican officials to do what he wants?

STUTZMAN: Well, I think first of all, that, you know, the Indiana Senate is kind of a different animal, more or less because you had the Indiana House that supported it, Governor Braun, Lieutenant Governor Micah Beckwith, both of our U.S. senators and the entire Indiana delegation supported it. You know, the Indiana Senate has had super majorities in the state Senate for years, for decades. And, to me, you know, I served in the body for some time. There's a different leader there now than when I served state. Senator Rod Bray is the pro tem. They are -- frankly, I mean, they haven't faced really tough challenges since the Mitch Daniels era when we had to do some reforms in the state to get our state back on track.

So, to me, this is a team vote. This is one of those where it's like, you know what, this is the Republican Party, we're sticking together and, you know, the Democrat party, they're doing the same thing in their states. I think it's unfortunate overall that this is even part of the conversation that we're having to have and that policy decisions are being made over the redistricting efforts. But there should be some sort of national standard, but there's not. And that's why I'm really disappointed. I think it was a terrible decision.

TAPPER: So do you think, as Heritage Action suggested should happen now, that all federal funding should be cut from Indiana? Do you think that you should not have money to pave the roads in Indiana, you shouldn't have money to fund the guard bases in Indiana? Because that is what the administration was suggesting. Presumably you now support that.

STUTZMAN: We have a lot of projects that we've been working on in Indiana. And, look, we know that, you know, just like in business, you work with people who work with you. And you know, President Trump asked for this.

[18:05:01]

Mike Johnson, Speaker Johnson, he put a ton of time making phone calls, there was pushing, pulling, you know, and some of the excuses. There was no good excuse that I heard other than this just breaks precedent or the president was being a bully about it. This is politics. I mean, this is hard ball and we're playing softball.

And so my belief is that, you know what, he's going to look at Indiana and say, look, we want to work together, but I need your help, and the State Senate failed to help today.

TAPPER: So, you think that Indiana should not get federal funding anymore?

STUTZMAN: No. I think, you know, that -- it makes our job harder as a delegation here. Now, you know, he's going to look at states like Texas or Florida or Ohio, Missouri, North Carolina, states that are moving ahead and saying, you know what, we're going to make sure that the House Republicans have the support that they need to be sure we hold the majority. I mean, you know, Al Green he already filed impeachment articles today in the House. That's what's going to happen as soon as Democrats take control of the House of Representative.

TAPPER: Al Green has been filing impeachment well since you and I were in the cradle (ph).

STUTZMAN: But once Hakeem Jeffries is speaker, there will be even more of that. And so -- but, no, I mean, I hope not. I want to work with the president. I want to make the case why it's important to invest in Indiana. Indiana has a lot of good things going. Unfortunately, we just don't have a State Senate that sees the big picture and understands the national implications of this.

TAPPER: Is it not possible that they do see the big picture and they think that your state is not entirely Republican and it should have some Democratic representatives, as is the case in other parts of the country that are blue states but there are Republican representatives?

STUTZMAN: Massachusetts is a great example and this is the one that I've compared. We're as Republican in Indiana as Massachusetts is Democrat. It's been 9-0 in Massachusetts for decades. And so we've always just kind of accepted the fact that New England is just a Democrat part of the country. Well, in Indiana, you know, we are a Republican state. You could have a kindergarten class draw the maps in Indiana and be 9-0. We have protected Congressman like Andre Carson in Marion County for years. The seat up in Northwest Indiana is probably more of a swing state, a swing district. We might be able to win that with the trends because people from Chicago are moving into Northwest Indiana.

But at the end of the day, this is a team -- you know, a team sport. We have to stick together, and the State Senate in Indiana decided not to do so today.

TAPPER: Indiana Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman, thank you so much. Thanks for coming over to our studio.

Let's get to CNN's Jeff Zeleny now to break it all down. Jeff, thanks so much. 21 Republicans voting against the wishes of the president, why did they feel emboldened to do that?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, in a word, a lot of it turned on local concerns. That was clear throughout this three-hour debate this afternoon. They clearly were not, pleased by the fact there was so much outside pressure here, but listening to this debate, just as senator after senator talked about how local concerns in Indiana actually outweighed this out-of-town push, if you will.

And the congressman was talking about the districts, how they're drawn. We heard some very specific arguments from members about how their local constituents just simply were not interested in drawing the maps. Listen to Republican Senator Greg Goode explain his loyalties.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STATE SEN. GREG GOODE (R-IN): I love and appreciate the President of the United States.

Most importantly to me, I appreciate and love and listen the most to the residents of Clay, Sullivan and Vigo Counties. Collectively, I serve them and they are my priority.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So, again, there was just not a groundswell of support from actual voters in Indiana for this push. So, that was one of the reasons.

The other reasons, the strong arm tactics backfired. There's no question about that. There were threats of violence, a lot of swatting for these members. But, Jake, the roll call vote is so interesting because a majority of Republicans voted against it. I've been speaking to Indiana Republicans in the last hour and they say that is by design. Effectively, some of these other Republicans may have voted either way, but they're giving some of the Republicans who really were out there some backup, if you will.

So, yes, the White House, the president have threatened to primary some of these members. The reality is a lot of them aren't up until 2028. Some are up next year. So, we will see if any of these primary campaigns actually develop. But there's no doubt a threat from a primary from the White House is not as effective as finding a local candidate to run against a respected state senator.

TAPPER: It's worth noting that this is not the first time a Hoosier Republican amid state Trump pressure campaign that included threats of violence has stood up to President Trump. Vice President Mike Pence comes to mind in 2021. What does this say though about President Trump's hold over the Republican Party at this point in his presidency when so many Republicans are afraid that the midterms are going to go the way of the Democrats next year?

[18:10:00]

ZELENY: Jake, there is no doubt. We have not seen this in the last decade. The President Trump's hold on the party is simply not what it was. His threats simply do not ring as a reel as they used to be.

Now, there is no doubt he's still -- this is still his Republican Party, but there is example after example of Republicans standing up to him and this is the biggest one yet. It's a rebuke of him. There's no doubt about it. He got personally invested. The vice president did too. J.D. Vance went to Indiana at least a couple times to make this argument there.

But behind the scenes, former Vice president Mike Pence very quiet on this behind the scenes. I do not know if he was working this quietly. But Mitch Daniels, the former Indiana Republican governor, was very outspoken against not redrawing maps. He thought it's not the good thing, it's not the right thing for democracy here.

So, look, the reality is Washington does not run everything. These state senators answer to their voters.

TAPPER: All right. Jeff Zeleny, thanks so much.

We're keeping an eye on the Oval Office. President Trump is signing bills and executive orders, including a measure on artificial intelligence. We're going to bring you those details coming up.

Plus, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt growing defensive today when asked by CNN's Kaitlan Collins about President Trump's comments that parents should give up certain items this Christmas, like dolls, if they're worried about money. Kaitlan joins us live to break down their back and forth. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00] TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, President Trump right there in the Oval Office signing executive orders and the like. We're waiting for him to take questions and see if he says anything about the rebuke that Indiana State Senate Republicans just gave his plan to redistrict that state mid-decade.

And in the meantime, our Politics Lead, we will bring to you right now, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt got a bit defensive today over President Trump's handling of the economy, standing by Trump's recent comments that perhaps parents should give up certain products, like pencils or dolls, this Christmas if they have affordability concerns.

Let's bring in CNN's Kaitlan Collins. So, Kaitlan, you were front and center in that exchange with Karoline Leavitt today.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Tell us exactly what happened. Well, this was actually about something the president had said in Pennsylvania earlier this week when he was giving that speech tailored to affordability ostensibly. Obviously, he talked about other things during that speech, as you laid out yesterday. But one of the comments that he had made, that he had generated some headlines was that he told parents that instead of buying 37 dolls for their children, that they could buy 2 or 3 dolls.

And so when Karoline Leavitt came out to the briefing today, one of her big openings was about how robust and rigorous the economy is in this moment. And so the question was really just about that comment the president said in light of how they've been talking about the economy.

But then it came to something that the president has been repeating for weeks and months on end, which is that inflation is virtually non- existent.

TAPPER: Not true.

COLLINS: And when you talk to Republicans about that, they'll say, that's not true. I mean, it's just based on the numbers. Is it down? Yes. Is it non-existent? No. And so we ended up getting into a back and forth on that. And here's that exchange.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Inflation is about what it was a year ago, as you know, and grocery prices have been up. So, we've covered the economy, but there's mixed signals in terms of what that looks like. But on the --

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Inflation is down from where it was. As measured by the overall CPI. It has slowed to an average 2.5 percent base. This is down from what the president inherited -- the president inherited 2.9 percent in January. Today, it's at about 2.5 percent. So, we're trending in the right direction with more to come.

And I would remind you when President Trump left office in his first term, inflation was 1.7 percent, and the previous administration jacked it up to a record-high 9 percent. So, again, in ten months, the president has clawed us out of this hole. He's kept it low at 2.5 percent. And we believe that number is going to continue to decline, especially as energy and oil prices continue to decline as well.

COLLINS: No one is arguing it wasn't high under Biden. They're just saying it's not virtually --

LEAVITT: Well, nobody reported on it at the same under Biden. My predecessor was standing at this podium, but now you want to ask me a lot of questions about it, which I'm happy to answer. But I will just add, there's a lot more scrutiny on this issue from this press corps than there was.

COLLINS: Because the president has said it's virtually non-existent.

LEAVITT: Well, and the previous administration said that too.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COLLINS: Well, obviously, I don't think that they would want to have the same line of defense on inflation that the Biden administration have given how critical they are of the inflation rate when Biden was in office.

TAPPER: It's just such nonsense that we didn't cover inflation under Biden, but we're going to listen into President Trump who's talking right now in the Oval Office.

REPORTER: What's your reaction?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, we won every other state. That's the only state. It's funny because I won Indiana all three times by a landslide and I wasn't working on it very hard. It would have been nice. I think we would have picked up two seats if we did that. You had one gentleman, the head of the Senate, I guess, Bray, whatever his name is. I heard he was against it. He probably loses next primary, whenever that is. I hope he does, but because he's done a tremendous disservice.

I mean, think of it. It's a great place. I love the people there. They love me. You know, we won in a landslide all three times. I got tremendous votes record, I got record votes. And then you -- there's no reason for doing that. And the Democrats do it to us. So, I can't imagine that they do it. But I wasn't very much involved.

But there's a man named Bray, a, I guess, head of the Senate. Was that Bray? Is that the name Bray? And, I mean, I'm sure that whatever his primary is, it's I think in two years, but I'm sure he'll go down. He'll go down. I'll certainly support anybody that wants to go against him.

REPORTER: Mr. President, can I you briefly about --

TRUMP: Sure. REPORTER: -- on A.I. and a question on Ukraine? I mean, the A.I. side, the flipside of what you've done today is what kind of agreements you can get with China, particularly on national security threats posed by A.I.?

TAPPER: All right, so that's what we were waiting to hear President Trump responding to what happened in Indiana.

I just also want to make one note in addition to Karoline Leavitt saying that we didn't cover -- the media didn't cover inflation under President Biden, which is laughably, demonstrably false. There's a difference also when she talks about the inflation rate. The inflation rate right now is the same as it was when President Trump took office.

[18:20:00]

It did peak under Biden in 2022 at 9 percent. But she tries to make it different because she's talking about the pace of inflation. It's a different calculation.

COLLINS: It's apples to oranges, basically, and so both can be true. The year to year inflation rate when Donald Trump went into office again in January, it was 3 percent. When those numbers came out in September, the same numbers by the same comparison, 3 percent.

TAPPER: Right.

COLLINS: What she is talking about, the numbers that she's referencing, and my colleague from CBS, Nancy Cordes, followed up with her accurately on this, is if you compare an average of February to now compared to what it was in January, she was saying it's 2.5 percent. I actually believe it's a little bit higher than that.

But that actually is not the same comparison to what the number was when the president took office, because, actually, inflation has been going up. She said it's trending in the right direction from April to September, which is the last time we got the numbers because of the government shutdown. We'll get new inflation numbers for November next week. We'll see what it looks like then. The inflation had been ticking up because of the president's tariffs. And so if you only average it based on that, you're including those lower numbers from January to April. So, that is why it's different.

And, really, the question was just that the president says it's non- existent. It's virtually non-existent. Yes. Obviously, it does exist. Yes, it is also lower than when President Biden was in office. But still, you can make the argument that inflation is not going down, or we will wait and see what the number is next week. But you can't make the argument that it's not, that it doesn't exist because it does exist.

TAPPER: Well, also just speaking of President Biden, if this White House wants to say to the American people, prices are not going up and you should be looking at these charts and listening to this data instead of experiencing what you're experiencing, I mean, good luck with that. That's what Biden did, and that was a disaster. Kaitlan? COLLINS: And also the idea that, to your point, that we didn't cover it, obviously, I don't think President Biden, Jen Psaki or Karine Jean-Pierre would agree with that because they all faced questions at that same lectern. And President Biden, I personally questioned him about inflation.

TAPPER: Of course, it's nonsense.

Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. And, of course, don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Tonight, she's going to be joined by Democratic Congressman Dan Goldman, who is facing a primary challenge in New York. That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN.

New safety warnings today less than one year after that deadly plane crash outside D.C.'s Reagan airport. The chair of the National Transportation Safety Board is going to join me in studio next to explain her concerns about this defense bill.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

TAPPER: Our National Lead now, nearly a year after that deadly collision in the airspace above Reagan National Airport that killed 67 people, safety experts, and the families of the victims of that crash are warning about next year's National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, saying that the language in the bill rolls back those critical safety improvements regarding military helicopters, which could risk recreating the conditions that led to last year's disaster at Reagan National.

Here now with me is Jennifer Homendy, the chair of the National Transportation Safety Board. Jennifer, thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it.

So, there are two parts to this section of the NDAA that the Senate has passed this week. It says, flights cannot be authorized in that airspace unless the aircraft is, quote, actively providing warning of the proximity of such aircraft to nearby commercial aircraft in a manner compatible with the traffic alert and collision avoidance system of such commercial aircraft. And the second part gives Secretary of Defense Hegseth with the concurrence of the secretary's of transportation permission to waive the limitation in some circumstances.

Now, you wrote a letter to House and Senate Armed Services Committee leadership on behalf of the National Transportation Safety Board saying that this section presents an unacceptable risk to the public, to aircraft crews and to those here in D.C. You call it an unthinkable dismissal of the NTSB investigation and the families of those poor 67 souls who perished earlier this year.

Can you explain why the NTSB doesn't seem this provision is going far enough to protect safety? JENNIFER HOMENDY, CHAIR, NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD: Yes, not just doesn't go far enough. It actually rolls back safety to what existed prior to the mid-air collision. We recommend -- we issued urgent safety recommendations to improve safety in the airspace around Washington National and the secretary implemented those urgent safety recommendations immediately.

TAPPER: Secretary --

HOMENDY: Secretary Duffy.

TAPPER: -- Duffy of transportation, okay.

HOMENDY: Within hours and greatly improved safety. And this is a rollback of before that to what existed at the time of the crash.

TAPPER: Do you know why this rollback happened? Is there some reason? I mean, Hegseth wanted the ability to waive at all.

HOMENDY: Well, and I will just point out it's not just the secretary for the Department of War, it's also any secretary for any military department that can operate in D.C. airspace unfettered. I don't know why but I know that we have to find a path forward because otherwise passengers and crew members are at risk.

TAPPER: Now, I would imagine the play devil's advocate here on the waiver element of the provision, the exceptions listed are if a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States, and if a risk assessment has been conducted for the operation. So, does the suggestion -- because you're objecting to it, are you -- is there a suggestion here that you don't trust the people who would be in charge of the waiver to do the assessment and to have the best idea of what's in the national security interest of the United States?

HOMENDY: Well, first of all, what it does is it puts back in place what existed on January 29th prior to the mid-air collision. And then it says that they can waive that with the secretary's concurrence. So, that's even less safety.

So, you know, again, I don't know the motivation. I know that this needs to be fixed.

[18:30:01]

This -- we have had improved safety in the airspace where the secretary has taken a strong stance on ensuring there's not mixed traffic on ensuring that all the aircraft in the DCA airspace know where each other are. That won't exist with us.

TAPPER: So, lawmakers in both sides of the aisle are -- share your alarm and they're pushing for amendments to the section. Senator Cruz and Cantwell, along with other members are pushing the ROTOR Act, they've introduced in order to close the loophole. Is that -- will that solve the problem?

HOMENDY: You know, the ROTOR -- the NTSB supports the ROTOR Act because it implements technology that we've been recommending for nearly 30 years. Whether they strike this provision or insert the ROTOR Act, we have to do something because we can't leave this provision in there and accept a lower level of safety.

TAPPER: I will say it does seem bizarre that after these safety measures were taken to roll it back just for no reason that the public's being given at all.

HOMENDY: Absolutely. And if someone had reached out to NTSB or FAA or anyone, we would have been able to work together to craft a pass forward that strengthened safety, not reduced it.

TAPPER: All right. Jennifer Homendy, thanks so much.

HOMENDY: Thank you so much.

TAPPER: Should states be able to control how you use artificial intelligence? Should the federal government make sure that no one can say anything about how you use it? That's the question in front of President Trump this week we're going to break down the actions he's taking when it comes to A.I. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

TAPPER: In our Tech Lead today, TIME Magazine today named the architects of A.I., artificial intelligence, as their persons of the year. The list includes a roundup of the usual suspects, Mark Zuckerberg of Meta, Elon Musk of X A.I., and OpenAI's Sam Altman, as well as lots of others who are not household names or skyscraper construction workers.

It's just one of a slew of headlines involving A.I. Amazon has let it be known that the most searched question posed to its A.I. chatbot, Alexa, this year was, what does A.I. mean? Disney is taking a $1 billion equity stake in OpenAI as part of a deal that will allow users of OpenAI short form video generating social media network, Sora, to make videos using more than 200 Disney animated characters.

Now, perhaps most important of all the headlines, President Trump just now in the Oval Office signed an executive order to prevent states from passing laws that would restrict artificial intelligence. The president says this will benefit America's tech companies, which asked for one set of regulations rather than 50 different ones from every state.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I spoke to, all of the big companies, great companies, and they won't be able to do this. This will not be successful unless they have one source of approval or disapproval, frankly. You could have disapproval too, but it's got to be one source. They can't go to 50 different sources.

(END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: So, let's discuss this with Alondra Nelson, a researcher and professor who was acting director of the White House Office of Science and Technology during the Biden administration. Thanks so much for joining us.

So, The Wall Street Journal has an article about a Connecticut man who spent months talking to a OpenAI's chatbot, ChatGPT, about how he believed he was under surveillance by a shadowy group and suspected that his 83-year-old mother was part of the conspiracy. He ended up killing her and himself in August.

Now, according to the Journal, this appears to be the first documented killing involving a troubled person who was engaging extensively with an A.I. chatbot. His family is now suing OpenAI. Isn't this exactly why states are passing regulations when it comes to the use of artificial intelligence?

DR. ALONDRA NELSON, FORMER ACTING DIRECTOR, WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY: Jake, yes. Thank you for having me. It's such an important issue, and, yes, this is exactly why, because we've seen over the last couple of years, and certainly even over the last six months, that there's increasingly been cases where we think that there's a harm to people, you know, death, suicide, now an alleged homicide, that might have something to do with engagement with artificial intelligence.

And right now, we have a system that just allows the release of these tools into the world without prior knowledge of the public. And we get some information about testing, but there's really no standards about what the benchmarks for these testing should be.

So, you know, imagine you're a governor of a state and you see that countries are passing laws. You see that the president has been slow to act, that Congress has not acted over many years, not only about A.I., but also with regards to social media. And you know that safeguards and guardrails around A.I. can save lives and increase people's trust in the tools and, you know, secure their wellbeing.

I think the only obvious thing there to do, if you're a state, is to act. And that's what we've been seeing. And even with, you know, states like Connecticut have been, you know, the states that have been trying to act and even still you might have had this tragedy occur.

TAPPER: So, in a social media post earlier this week, President Trump wrote, quote, we are beating all countries at this point in the race, but that won't last long if we are going to have 50 states, many of them bad actors involved in rules and the approval process, unquote. A draft of the executive order leaked last month, it sets up a task force that would sue states that enacted restrictive laws. It forces states to get prior federal approval for new A.I. laws. It threatens to withhold federal grant money for, among other things, broadband extension if states don't toe the line.

But here's the point. Is there any appetite in Congress and the White House for any restrictions on A.I. right now? I mean, we talk about there needs to be one set of rules. I certainly understand that. [18:40:00]

That makes sense. But if the federal government isn't willing to do that, to make one set of rules, then it's just chaos.

NELSON: This is exactly the point. And, you know, I would point to you that what you just described was somebody standing up yet another task force. We have had over the last few years in Congress and in Washington several task forces that were supposed to get to the heart of this issue. Meanwhile, we've got a cascading set of issues that keep reoccurring, harms to children and all of our mental health, amplification and the acceleration of kind of discriminatory decision- making. People are concerned about their jobs. You know, artists' work is getting appropriated. We're all concerned about our intellectual property.

So, in response, you know, the states, which we typically turn to as these laboratories for democracy have done some really smart lawmaking. Utah has -- you know, two years ago, Utah included consumer protection, you know, A.I. under consumer protection. So, in the same way that if you use deception or fraud or scam by telephone or some other practice, A.I. falls under that as well.

The state of California has taken -- allowed people -- passed a law this year that allows people to take a private right of action if they're a victim of DeepFake pornography, so you can go after the perpetrator of that.

You know, today, Governor Hochul in New York State assigned a legislation that would require that it be disclosed if synthetic performers are being used in commercials and in movies, and, you know, helping to protect some of our, you know, artists and performers. And last week, even Governor DeSantis in Florida proposed something that he calls the Florida A.I. Bill of Rights. That actually takes a page out of some of the work that we did in the Biden administration and would include things like, you know, allow requiring disclosure when insurance claims are being determined only by artificial intelligence.

So, states are doing very agile, very innovative policymaking, and they could allow us to see what works, what doesn't work and to make better decisions at the federal level while we wait, precisely, as you say, for the government and Congress to act.

TAPPER: An article in The New York Times points out that David Sachs, who is one of the Trump administration's top technology officials, he's, quote, influencing policy for Silicon Valley in Washington while simultaneously working in Silicon Valley as an investor, end quote. This raises ethics and conflict of interest questions.

And let me just also say there is a feeling, I think proven by fact, that tech companies, whether social media companies or A.I. companies, really just do whatever they want in Washington, D.C., because they have so much money. This town operates according to money. And the idea that -- I mean, David Sachs is an example. But it's way beyond David Sachs. I mean, tech companies do whatever they want. NELSON: It is absolutely a systematic problem. You know, part of it is we've got a financing regime with venture capital that really requires companies to make the most possible profit, like we're well out of the area of kind of a 3 percent or a 5 percent, or even a 10 percent return. And so part of the pressure on companies to do whatever they want is because they're, you know, on the hook for these big returns.

Listen, we know from -- you know, this is one of probably the last remaining bipartisan issues. All of the polling data on A.I., if you're looking at Pew or Gallup, the Edelman trust barometer, says that the American public at 50 to 70 percent is concerned, worried, distrustful, they're worried that they can't get a fair shake from, you know, a resume screening company. They're worried that they won't get fair health insurance. And so it is a big concern.

And I think that, you know, on the one hand, you know, certainly, in government, you want people who have expertise around the technology, especially when you have new and powerful technologies, like A.I. But they should not get to make all the rules of the road.

TAPPER: Yes. Alondra Nelson, thank you so much. I appreciate your time.

The Justice Department tried and failed for a second time to bring a new indictment against New York Attorney General Letitia James. So, what happens next? Three times the charm. My panel's here to break it down in moments.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:48:08]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: In our politics lead, President Trump is pushing hard on the U.S. Senate to confirm Lindsey Halligan as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia. The new pressure campaign comes after a federal judge ruled last month that Halligan's initial appointment as the district's top prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid. That ruling had serious implications, of course, including the dismissal of her criminal cases against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James.

My panel joins me now.

And, Marc Short, her nomination appears dead on arrival due to opposition from Virginia's two senators, Democrat Mark Warner and Tim Kaine. They're withholding their blue slips. This gets into a wonky D.C. thing. It allows home state senators to signal their approval or disapproval of a judicial nominee.

MARC SHORT, FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VP MIKE PENCE: Well, sure. I mean, I think in light of the fact that the Senate has confirmed people like RFK, you can imagine that the Trump White House thinks they can get anybody confirmed. But I think when Republicans have tried to nominate personal attorneys to the bench, it hasn't worked out too well for us in the past. And so, I would imagine that this one doesn't get across the finish line either, really.

TAPPER: Adrienne Elrod, Trump's been a consistent critic of the blue slip process. So, do you think that this is going to blow up the blue slip process or --

ADRIENNE ELROD, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It doesn't appear that way? And I think that's indicative of where Republicans are. You're starting to see more Republicans in the Senate, in particular, pushing back against Trump. I mean, the blue slip policy you're talking about tends to be, you know, standard operating procedure. He wants to get rid of it.

But Republicans especially, I think there was a spokesperson on the Judiciary Committee. Today, he was on the record saying, we're not getting rid of the blue slip policy. So you're starting to see a lot of senators who are -- who stood by with Trump for a long time, starting to push back on him and starting to make sure that -- to the extent they can, that the norms are held.

SHORT: It's also not any Republican. It is Chuck Grassley who's been around for quite a while.

ELROD: Right.

TAPPER: Right, chairman of the judiciary.

[18:50:01]

ELROD: Yeah, exactly.

TAPPER: Today, the Justice Department for a second time was unable to bring an indictment against New York Attorney General Letitia James for alleged mortgage fraud. Her previous case was dismissed after the Judge Halligan was found serving that authority. You -- I mean, it is said that you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

TERRY MORAN, JOURNALIST: It's the old saying.

TAPPER: But they've now not been able to do that.

MORAN: They've not been able to do that, which shows both the weakness of their case. And it's a signal that these guardrails are holding. Right. The grand jury is in the fifth amendment, in part for political reasons, right? There were cases just before they wrote the Constitution where the king was trying to prosecute the Earl of Shaftesbury in a way that was considered unfair. And they put that right in the Constitution. And this grand jury today, this year, is performing that same essentially quasi-political function against what they must have thought was not just a weak case, but a pretty transparent abuse of power.

TAPPER: So, speaking of guardrails, and pushing back against President Trump and perceived excesses, the Indiana state senate did something extraordinary today. Republicans are in the supermajority there, and 21 of them voted against President Trump's efforts to redistrict the two Democrats out of existence in their nine seat seats in Indiana. And as I said earlier, your former boss, Vice President Pence, set the bar perhaps for Hoosier Republicans pushing back against the pressure campaign from president Trump, including amidst threats of violence.

What do you make of it?

SHORT: Well, I do think there's a difference. I think --

TAPPER: Oh, of course.

SHORT: January 6th was a pretty dramatic day of trying to overturn election results versus a normal process.

TAPPER: Yes, yes, yes. Of course.

SHORT: But having said that, it wasn't a close vote. I mean, this was -- this was a landslide against the president's political team that was pushing for this. And I think in many cases, a lot of these efforts are redistricting are really -- I'm not sure that's really going to produce the political dividend. They think it is.

And I think that you're drawn in many cases off of 24 map that just because you're running against Kamala Harris doesn't mean that the Democrats will have a similar candidate in '26 midterms. And so, I think a lot of this -- a lot of wasted energy. But I also think something else is there's a level of Midwest nice, Jake. And there's a part of Midwest nice that doesn't like feeling like they're getting bullied. And I think that was missed in this argument as well.

TAPPER: Speaking Midwest of nice. Wisconsinite -- Wisconsinite over here.

MORAN: I'm born in Chicago, but I went to college in Wisconsin.

And what I would say is think of this. The grand jurors in Virginia, Indiana state senators, why couldn't people in Washington, why couldn't people at the universities, why couldn't people at the big law firms find the spine right to stand up with them? It's people who aren't tied up in politics, who are all of a sudden doing what people in Washington apparently think is impossible, which is to stand up to the president of the United States.

TAPPER: Meanwhile, these Obamacare subsidies are about to expire at the end of the year. And if you look on Capitol Hill, there doesn't seem to be any effort on the Senate side to come together in any way.

Now, in the House side, we see there are efforts we had Congressman Gottheimer and Congresswoman Kiggans on earlier this week. They are working together. Some reforms to Obamacare to help Republicans, extending the subsidies to help Democrats coming together.

But Congressman Don Bacon issued a warning to his party. He's a Republican from Nebraska. If they don't put together a plan to address the expiring Affordable Care Act subsidies. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. DON BACON (R-NE): I think it will be used like a sledgehammer on us a year from now. The reality will be bad.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ELROD: Well, he's exactly right. I mean, the ads are being written right now, and I mean, Jake, affordability, of course, was a defining issue in the Virginia and New Jersey governor's races and some of the other elections that took place about a month and a half ago. It is going to be even more of an issue when people's health care costs go up dramatically.

What I can't quite square -- I mean, I know that Republicans have been running on taking getting rid of Obamacare since Obamacare was passed. It, of course, has become more popular through the years as more and more people rely on Obamacare. They rely on those subsidies.

What I can't quite reconcile, however, Jake, is that a lot of Trump supporters, a lot of the base Republican voters are on Obamacare. They receive these subsidies. They are the very recipients of these subsidies are about that are about to expire.

I think that's why you're seeing -- Don Bacon saying, maybe we ran on this, but we need to take a real hard look at what our policy is now going forward.

TAPPER: KFF, the Kaiser Family Foundation says three out of four people on the Obamacare exchanges are in states that Trump won.

SHORT: Right.

TAPPER: Three out of four.

SHORT: Right. Yeah, that's definitely true. If you look at -- that's why I think you see Tim Scott as head of the senatorial committee now engaging, want to be part of the effort to extend subsidies. I -- look, I think that it is a political albatross for Republicans come next November if they don't have a solution.

What I don't like -- I don't think Republicans are actually offering any real free market reforms. Instead, what they're doing is saying, instead of giving the subsidies to the insurance companies, give it to the individuals, which maybe polls better. But, Jake, the reality is Obamacare and government-run health care has been a disaster. People are paying two times premiums they did when Obamacare started.

Government-run health care is expensive. It's not inexpensive. And instead of an argument about how we lower costs, we're simply saying how we can redirect the subsidies.

TAPPER: And I mean, this is this is a potentially big problem for Republicans when it comes to the midterms.

MORAN: Huge. And Don Bacon is already -- he's not -- he's not running for reelection. So he's free to speak out. How many people does he stand for in the Republican caucus who are saying, no, please don't make us do this?

Well, stand up and don't do it. You're the Congress of the United States. You're Article One. I don't get it.

TAPPER: Thanks, everyone. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Star breaking news, we had to postpone our interview with Emy Award nominated actor John Slattery about the movie "Nuremberg". So, join us tomorrow for our conversation about that new film "Nuremberg", which explores the relationship between Hitler's second in command and the psychiatrist who's trying to understand him. It's a fantastic film. We'll talk about it tomorrow.

If you ever miss an episode of "THE LEAD", you can watch the show on the CNN app.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.