Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
GOP Leaders Make Final Offer on Shutdown; Savannah Guthrie on Ransom Notes in Mom's Disappearance; Parents Sound Alarm About Epstein-Related Game. Trump Claims He'll Sign Order To Pay TSA Agents Immediately. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired March 26, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Phil Mattingly in for Jake Tapper.
This hour, a furious scramble on Capitol Hill where there's still no deal to end the partial government shutdown. Top Republican senators, they say tonight they're going to make their, quote, last and final offer to Democrats. And as that fighting plays out, TSA agents are among those still not getting paid, leading hundreds to quit, thousands more to call out of work, and countless passengers stranded in hours-long security lines.
Plus, NBC Anchor Savannah Guthrie reveals she thinks her own fan may be the reason her mother was kidnapped from her Arizona home. Nancy Guthrie is still missing nearly two months after her disappearance. Hear Savannah's latest comments about the ransom notes and the search for her mother.
Also, parents and teachers sounding the alarm over the spread of a new online game being played by kids across the country. It involves players pretending to be victims trapped on Jeffrey Epstein's Island, trying to evade the dead pedophile. Not only is the concept incredibly disturbing, it's also raising concerns that it downplayed just how serious Epstein's heinous crimes actually were. The journalist who has been reporting on the game's alarming popularity joins us live ahead.
And, first, it was the FIFA peace prize. Now, House Republicans have made up another award to give to the president, and a cabinet secretary suggests a statue, a statue in Venezuela may be coming next. Really subtle, guys. Our panel is here to weigh in.
The Lead tonight, pressure intensifying for Congress to reopen the Department of Homeland Security, yet negotiations appear to be going nowhere with lawmakers still set to leave for a two-week break starting tomorrow. Now, just to be clear, if that's the case, TSA workers will miss a second full paycheck this weekend.
The Trump administration says more than 500 TSA officers have quit during the partial government shutdown, more than 3,000 officers did not show up to work yesterday. Major airports in Atlanta, Houston, New Orleans had the highest call out rates Wednesday with at least a third of their TSA workers absent. And today, ICE agents were seen checking passenger I.D.s at Atlanta's airport security checkpoint.
Now, airports across the country are bracing for another massive rush of weekend travelers, which means more unpredictable TSA wait times, which means we want to talk to CNN's Lauren Fox, who's tracking the negotiations on Capitol Hill. But we want to begin with Ed Lavandera.
Ed, you have been at Houston's George Bush International Airport throughout the course of this week. What is the move right now there? You've covered the number of lines, the number of people, the frustrations, the hours. What are people saying?
ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I mean, I think it's safe to say the frustration just keeps growing. And we're seeing something here this afternoon that we haven't really seen much of the week. Usually, it kind of settles down to a certain degree by the end of the day, but now look at the scene around here today. Earlier this week by this time in the afternoon, a lot of these lines, at least in the lower level, would have dissipated by now. But we're talking to people near the front of the line who will, by the time, they get through security, will have spent nearly four hours in this line here this morning.
We met a woman just a short while ago named Jennifer Clark. She was here in Houston because her son just graduated and has become a United Airlines flight attendant. She came here to fly on his first United flight from Houston to Washington, D.C. We talked to her at 3:30, about an hour away from the end of the line, and she -- her flight was at 4:00. She was supposed to ride with her son on his first flight with United.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNIFER CLARK, AIR TRAVELER: This will be his first flight with United. So, I was hoping to be on the flight with him. So, since he gets priority, he's already through security. But we're waiting the two and a half, three hours to try to get through security.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LAVANDERA: She was rather heartbroken that she wasn't going to make this flight. But by some miracle, her flight ended up getting delayed almost an hour. She got through a security about an hour after we talked to her. She ran to another terminal, and this is a picture of her on the flight with her son as he's taking -- working as a flight attendant for the first time for United Airlines.
So, that is the kind of drama and kind of suspense and, you know, just things that so many different people are dealing with on these flights. Airport officials here at George Bush Intercontinental Airport say that TSA is deploying another 32 additional TSA agents to be able to help with the flow of people here. But so far, we're not seeing the effects of that minimizing the wait times here so far.
[18:05:01]
Phil? MATTINGLY: Lauren, I want to turn it over to you. You've just learned the White House is considering going around Congress to pay TSA agency. Explain to me how that might work and I guess more broadly where things are act actually stand in the building you're standing in.
LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Phil. I mean, obviously this is just one idea and it really speaks to the desperation of Republicans right now as they are trying to find some way forward to ensure that TSA workers are paid across the country.
Of course, we are told that this is just one option and one idea that is being considered. It is not necessarily going to happen. It is not necessarily in the works, but it is something that Majority Leader John Thune told his conference today during the Republican Party lunches was a possibility and something on the table if they can't find some agreement with Democrats.
Now, there are a couple of promising signs this evening. One of them is the fact that they have had this procedural vote open for several hours now. Sometimes, as you know, Phil, from covering this place, that is a sign that negotiations are happening behind closed doors, that they are trying to find a path forward, they're trying to find some kind of agreement, and they're trying to leave themselves as much wiggle room as they can to come back to the floor and vote quickly if a deal comes together.
Again, it is not clear what the elements of that deal would be right now. We saw that Republicans gave Democrats another idea just a couple of hours before the Senate lunch. The Democrats have not countered, but I am told that those negotiations are ongoing. They are positive. It is just not clear they're going to be able to get there anytime soon.
There's also the huge question mark of the House of Representatives. Any deal that the Senate cuts between Republicans and Democrats in that chamber does not necessarily make it through the House of Representatives, where Speaker Johnson obviously has his own dynamics, his own conference to contend with. So, Phil, even if this gets through the Senate tonight or into tomorrow, there's still a huge question mark about what happens in the House.
MATTINGLY: 6:00 P.M. on a Thursday ahead of a two-week holiday break. It's about that time for promising signs. We'll see how they actually develop.
Lauren Fox, Ed Lavandera, you guys have been awesome all week. Thanks so much.
Let's bring in now Democratic Senator Gary Peters of Michigan. He's the ranking member on the Senate Homeland Security Committee.
And, Senator, I just want to start, what do we know -- what do you know about the possibility of actually bringing this to an outcome?
SEN. GARY PETERS (D-MI): Well, there are a variety of possibilities, but right now, as they reported, we are still in a vote that's being held open for a long time. There are discussions that are occurring right now. I've been in some of those earlier as well. So, a contour of a deal hopefully can kind of come together, but as you know, it doesn't come together until it actually comes together. And so that's kind of where we're at right now. But at least the fact that the floor is open is an encouraging sign.
But we got to make sure as the contours of that deal come together, that we're able to get a caucus that's willing to support it. And, obviously, the Republicans have to do the same thing as well. So, there are still a number of steps that we got to go through.
MATTINGLY: Can you explain? I think one of the things I've had difficulty with over the course of the last couple of days is my sense of things was that what Senate Republicans had put on the table most recently, and kind of dragged President Trump to sort of kind of support, was very close to what Democrats had discussed at one point or potentially been willing to do. What's wrong with that version? And how much do you think you can get changed in the current talks?
PETERS: So, I don't want to get into details because I can't negotiate any of that obviously on air, as much as I know, that would be great.
MATTINGLY: That'd be great though.
PETERS: Everyone would be really happy about that. But there are just -- on the margins, there are some issues. So, we're in a pretty close place, but in this business, being at the margin still means you could be a long ways away. So, that is going on.
But I also want to be clear what we've been doing as Democrats, and I would've done it, I would've offered this bill once again today, except we're still -- with the vote still open, there isn't any floor action, but we have put several times, actually ten times we've put a bill on the floor that says, let's pay TSA, let's fully fund them. You don't have to pass the full DHS bill. You can do that. But each time Republicans have blocked that, which is really frustrating for me. And the fact that we all agree, all my colleagues, we say, well, we got to have TSA, they got to get paid, they're not part of the debate right now. That's ICE, as you know.
So, let's pay TSA, let's make sure people can get on their planes, make sure those folks can pay their bills, and we can do that. We've offered the bill, I would've done it again today, and I will, if the floor opens up. But one Republican can object and every time we've done it over ten times, a Republican has objected. If they don't object, we could get it done today.
MATTINGLY: What do you think about the White House or the executive branch circumventing legislative outcome through the mechanism that they are potentially talking about using?
PETERS: So, I don't know what that is. We'll see what the mechanism is. But the laws are pretty clear, that if it's not funded, you can't use that money. Although this administration sometimes doesn't let the law get in the way of what they do, and we've seen that from time to time, and that's -- we'll see what he's proposing.
[18:10:00]
I can't comment on what may be percolating in their head. But what we should do is just get Congress to act and get Republicans to act. If we can't get this bigger bill passed, then let's pass a bill just to pay for TSA, which we have done. As I keep mentioning, we've done it ten times. They keep objecting. Stop objecting. We can take care of the issue.
MATTINGLY: Just to take a step back in your role as the top Democrat on Senate Homeland Security, we're in the middle of a conflict with a nation that has proxies, has direct ties to terrorism, the concern about sleeper cells, things like that. In this moment, how concerned are you that TSA agents are calling out or quitting, or DHS is not fully funded right now?
PETERS: Well, certainly, that's why we got to get them funded and I want to make that happen. There's no question now that we're in war. I'm concerned about threats to the homeland. One of the third threats that I'm most concerned about are cyber attacks to infrastructure. We had an attack in Michigan that was backed by an Iranian group just a few days ago. But I want to say that CISA, which is our cybersecurity agency within Homeland Security, is there.
But before we've even had this debate about funding, the Trump administration basically laid off or fired one third of all the cybersecurity professionals that work in CISA, our principal cybersecurity agency. They need to rehire those folks. So, we're going to talk about the funding right now, but the Trump administration made this country less safe by firing one third of all of the cyber professionals that keep us safe every day.
MATTINGLY: Both caucuses tend to have a group of members that at some point just kind of throw up their hands and say, we'll take it here, we'll get something passed, right? Much to the chagrin of their bases, much to the chagrin sometimes of various political elements here, Democrats have remained completely united throughout the course of this.
PETERS: Right.
MATTINGLY: How long do you think that is sustainable in your caucus?
PETERS: Well, we've been united because it's clear that we need to put common sense guardrails around federal agents. And what we're asking for is something that the American people all agree in. We're saying that basically when federal agents are on our streets, in our cities, they should abide by the same rules that our local police abide by, do it with professionalism and with honor and distinction. We should have federal agents also abide those rules. The Republicans have said, no, we don't want them under the same rules that our local police.
So, we feel very strongly about that. We think that's essential. We don't think we need to have all the other elements, not being paid or not being funded, CISA, the cybersecurity, I've offered a bill on the floor to do that. Republicans objected when I offered the bill to make sure we open CISA. TSA is the same. So, we can open a lot of Homeland Security, provide the essential protections that we need while also continuing to negotiate ICE and making sure that they're keeping our streets safe in America and not engaged in activities that actually make people less safe.
MATTINGLY: Well, here's hoping the promising signs that Lauren Fox alluded to, the conversations you say are ongoing right now. The open vote, which normal people will have no concept actually is a good sign of things end up in an outcome at some point.
Senator Gary Peters, I really appreciate your time. Thanks for coming in.
PETERS: Great to be with you.
MATTINGLY: Well, in a new interview, Savannah Guthrie talks about the many alleged ransom notes her family received after her mother's disappearance, and whether or not they believe the letters were legitimate. We'll explain next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:00]
MATTINGLY: In our Law and Justice Lead, we're hearing from Today Anchor Savannah Guthrie in her first interview since her mother, Nancy Guthrie, disappeared. Savannah speaks about the moment she learned her mother was missing and the reason she believes her mother was targeted.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS ANCHOR: I just got home at the same time that Mike came home and we were just saying, hi, putting down our stuff, and the kids were running around, and my sister called me and I said, is everything okay? And she said, no. She said, mom's missing. And I said, what?
My brother, you know, he spent his career in the military.
He saw very clearly right away what this was. And he said, I think she's been kidnapped for ransom. I just said, do you think because of me?
Somebody thought, oh that girl, that lady has money. We can get -- make a quick buck.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: It's been 54 days since someone took 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie from her Arizona home in the middle of the night.
Let's bring in former FBI Agent Bryanna Fox. And, Bryanna, it is absolutely heartbreaking to watch that interview, to think about what the family must be going through. Investigators have not yet publicly identified a suspect or motive in the disappearance, but what are the signs that may point the family into believing that this is in fact a ransom case?
BRYANNA FOX, FORMER FBI AGENT: Right. I mean, Savannah's interview this morning was just gut-wrenching. I can only imagine what she and her family are going through. I think she was right though. She said that she felt like there not only this was a kidnapping for ransom but also that she may have been the actual target.
So, kidnappings for ransom have actually been on an increase since 2025 and now into 2026. They obviously are, you know, driven because there's some attachment from the person that they, you know, are stealing for ransom and, you know, their perceived goals and gains. So, in this case, obviously, Savannah's perception was she as a celebrity status, she has a lot of money, that made her a target.
Obviously, I think that that is a wise conclusion. But, in fact, the research shows that people that are seen as being wealthy, have, you know, the financial means that people are seeking through kidnapping for ransom are, in fact, at higher risk for kidnappings for ransom.
[18:20:00]
The other groups would be child custody disputes or domestic disputes. Those would be the other types of ransoms that we typically see.
MATTINGLY: So, multiple ransom notes were sent to various news organizations. You could almost lose track of them. It felt like so many were coming in the first week after Nancy Guthrie was reported missing. In the interview, Savannah said that she believes that two ransom notes that her family received and responded to are legitimate. How do investigators actually determine what's real and what's not in something like this?
B. FOX: Yes. Well, that's very obviously difficult to do when it's happening after the fact. Obviously, a ransom note left at the scene, we have a pretty good belief that that would be a real legitimate ransom note. But afterwards, that makes it very difficult to decide is this real or fake.
One thing they would look at is, are there details in that note that only the kidnapper would know. That's why when we're wondering, you know, why is law enforcement keeping their details of this investigation so close to their vest. The answer is they want to make sure the general public doesn't know something that could ultimately be able to show whether this, you know, let's say a ransom note is true or fake, or some detail that could go eventually to court in a prosecution.
But the motive for these kidnappings and why they would, you know, be sending fake kidnapping or ransom notes is the exact motivation for why these are actually increasing. And that's because of social and economic instability. Anytime that you see, you know, volatility both in a society and, obviously, you know, higher unemployment rates, higher cost of living, it actually drives a kidnapping for ransom rates up.
MATTINGLY: Savannah also continued to ask people to come forward if they know anything. Explain to people how important it is to keep the public engaged in a case like this, particularly as it reaches kind of this point in the calendar.
B. FOX: Right, that's a great question. And actually what you're doing right now is probably the best thing for a case that sort of is I don't want to say losing steam, but it seems like most of the, you know, front -- the investigative techniques that they would do right at the front of the investigation, I think, have been completed. So, media attention is one of the best predictors of a cold case getting solved.
Obviously we would love to have forensic evidence. We would love to have, you know, great eyewitness or certainly somebody confessing to the crime. But short of that, keeping the media engagement on a case is one of the best things we can do to help to solve it. It keeps people involved. It shows that there's still, you know, an effort to solve it. And, importantly, it keeps getting access to maybe that one person who knows something and encourage them to say something.
MATTINGLY: Yes. Well, hopes, prayers certainly for the family that that one person shows up soon.
Bryanna Fox, I always appreciate your expertise. Thanks so much.
B. FOX: Thank you.
MATTINGLY: And, of course, if you have information you think could help this case, call the Pima County Sheriff's Department at 520-351- 4900, or the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI. You can also reach the bureau online at tips.fbi.gov.
Well, there's been a massive rise in popularity of prediction markets. You can go on your phone and bet on everything from sports to politics. But there's a new move to ban certain people from participating. We'll explain next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
MATTINGLY: In our Money Lead, insider trading has for decades been a serious criminal issue, but now concerns are creeping into prediction market trading, where users can bet on, well, just about anything from sports to elections to well, even war an analysis shared with exclusively with CNN shows one Polymarket trader made nearly $1 million on the prediction marketplace since 2024 through dozens of well-timed bets that correctly predicted U.S. and Israeli military action against Iran.
I want to bring in Republican Congressman Adrian Smith from Nebraska Democratic Congresswoman Nikki Budzinski from Illinois.
Congressman Smith, let's start with you. You and the congresswoman are among those introducing legislation to ban insider trading among members of Congress on platforms like Polymarket. How urgent do you see the issue right now?
REP. ADAM SMITH (R-NE): Well, I really see this as a preventive measure that I don't think there's a persisting problem right now. But as you know, this is a newer market. And so to really think about the future and let's prevent bad things from happening as we do move forward.
MATTINGLY: Congresswoman, there have been efforts to restrict what lawmakers can trade on in, I think, traditional markets or their portfolios that haven't quite gotten across the finish line. Do you think this is the type of bill that can actually get support in both the House and Senate.
REP. NIKKI BUDZINSKI (D-IL): I definitely think that. And I think that because I'm standing here with my Republican colleague, Congressman Smith, I think, together on a bipartisan basis, we're the only bipartisan House bill to address prediction markets and to look at how those trades are happening and eliminate the ability for elected officials and our senior staff to potentially take advantage of them.
MATTINGLY: And, Congresswoman, I want to play something that Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan told Axios back in November when asked about guarding against exactly this, insider trading. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHAYNE COPLAN, CEO, POLYMARKET: I think what's cool about Polymarket is that it creates this financial incentive for people to go and divulge the information to the market and the market to change, and all of a sudden it's trading at 95 cents and people are like, oh --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, you think you when you say divulge, you mean the people who actually know?
COPLAN: Yes, or someone tells someone and then the market responds.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTINGLY: This bipartisan legislation makes all the sense in the world. Do you think there are further steps beyond this that will need to be taken regarding regulatory structure for this type of trading on issues where a single person or a couple people actually know and can create the outcome?
SMITH: Well, that's what we're trying to prevent. And I think, you know, with markets evolving the way they are, who would've thought we'd be in this situation right now?
[18:30:03]
But yet markets are evolving, technology develops. And so, this is I think a very reasonable approach to make sure that members of Congress and senior officials do not engage in using some privileged information for their own benefit and so that we can develop more trust in government.
MATTINGLY: Congresswoman, I've been around this town long enough to know that when there's a new industry or kind of a new hot business coming in, they tend to bring with them lots of people who want to advocate on their behalf on Capitol Hill, and I believe these prediction markets are no different right now. What are you hearing from their representatives from the folks who are lobbying on their behalf about this right now?
BUDZINSKI: Well, we've had really positive conversations with industry. I'll say Kalshi in particular is supportive of the legislation that Congressman Smith and I have introduced. And we're continuing to have ongoing effort conversations with the industry as we put forward this legislation just today.
MATTINGLY: For people who don't know that there is actual bipartisanship on Capitol Hill, you may just not read about it a lot. I give you Nebraska Republican Congressman Adrian Smith, Illinois Democratic Congresswoman, Nikki Budzinski. Thank you both. I really appreciate your time.
SMITH: Thank you.
BUDZINSKI: Thank you.
MATTINGLY: A growing number of kids are playing an online game that you might not even have heard of, but it's centered around Epstein Island and the dead pedophile. What you need to know and how social media companies are working to stop its spread, that's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
MATTINGLY: In our Law and Justice Lead, a new report is shedding light on an online game that's sweeping through classrooms nationwide and troubling parents and educators alike. It's called Five Nights at Epstein's. Players pretend to be sexual assault victims trapped on the late sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein's private island. It is horrifying on its face.
Bloomberg tech reporter Alexandra Levine wrote about this game, which has now gone viral and joins me now. It's incredible work, the story, but just start by walking us through the origin of this game and how it became so popular.
ALEXANDRA S. LEVINE, BLOOMBERG NEWS TECH REPORTER: Well, Phil, it's hard to pinpoint exactly where this originated, but it emerged in the last few months as the Justice Department was releasing more files related to past government Epstein investigations. I think though what has really supercharged the spread of this, particularly in schools, is social media, where now you've got videos of boys playing the game, girls playing the game as well in classrooms, at their desks, sometimes even on school issue devices. And these videos are sometimes racking up millions of views on platforms like Instagram and TikTok and YouTube. MATTINGLY: Yes. I'm not like a prude by any means, but this was like a general what the bleep moment when I read your story. It's remarkable to me. Are there any moods to try and ban the game or try short circuit the ability to get the game?
LEVINE: You know, I think, to be clear, this game was not intentionally designed for minors. It was designed by a gamer for a much broader audience, and now there's many versions of the game. And yet kids -- like with so much other technology, kids are finding their way to it anyways. And that really led us in our reporting to ask the question, is this just kids being kids and teens being teens, or does this go a step beyond that? And in speaking to parents and educators, the answer was resoundingly, this is different and it's extremely problematic and dangerous on many levels.
But at the end of the day, the platforms do have some rules, you know, some rules related to child exploitation. But at the end of the day, the majority of the videos that we found that are showing this game and students playing it don't actually violate platform rules.
MATTINGLY: Can I ask you real quick, just to expand a little bit on this is different in terms of your reporting, what you found, why?
LEVINE: I think in the past, it's very easy to dismiss things as kids being kids, teens being teens. There is a game called Five Nights at Freddy's, which is quite popular. That is also sort of like a scary, suspenseful game. That is sort of the first iteration of this. Then moving past that, around the time of the Sean Combs trial a couple of years ago, you saw Five nights at Diddy's emerge. And then now after all of this, you've seen five nights at Epstein's emerge.
And I think that, you know, of course it's easy to dismiss as kids being kids but it really also seems like the risk here is that children are becoming desensitized to some really horrible, illegal, violent things, and it's also dehumanizing to the victims.
MATTINGLY: Yes. That's what -- I mean, I think immediately about the victims. Is there concern that this is some like wide -- this is just a reality for kids these days, given kind of what they're growing up with the technology, the social media, everything like that, is that your sense of things when you talk to people?
LEVINE: I think a big piece of this is just the popularity of the social media internet meme culture, which really is bent on taking current events, taking hot button, political, social, cultural issues, things that are controversial and just making light of them. And I think when the platforms have also loosened some of their content policies to allow even more content to stay online, especially content that is focused -- that is satirical content focused on public figures. I think it makes it even easier for a lot of this stuff to spread.
MATTINGLY: Yes. Again, I'll sound like an old person, like it's not edgy, like it's just -- it's not. It's not funny or cool.
All right, Alexandra Levine, it's a great story. You can read it on Bloomberg. Thanks so much for coming in.
Well, breaking news from President Trump on the shutdown impacting TSA agents. We will go live to the White House next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:40:00]
MATTINGLY: Well, breaking news in our Politics Lead, President Trump has just posted that he's ordered the Department of Homeland Security to, quote, immediately pay our TSA agents, although it's not entirely clear how that will work or what authority he's utilizing for that order.
I want to get straight to CNN's Kristen Holmes from the North Lawn of the White House. Kristen, I know this is like just happening. We're trying to figure lots of things out here. What do we actually know right now?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're asking all the same questions that you are. So, I do want to get straight to the Truth Social posts because that's where, of course, you put this news as he has wanted to do.
This is what he wrote. He said, I'm using my authorities under the law to protect our great country, as I always will do. Therefore, I'm going to sign an order instructing the secretary of Homeland Security, Markwayne Mullin, to immediately pay our TSA agents in order to address this emergency situation and to quickly stop the Democrat chaos at the airports. It's not an easy thing to do. But I'm going to do it. Well, I mean, that last line is kind of an understatement here. It's not an easy thing to do. We are not really sure what legal mechanism he has to do this or where this money would come from.
Remember, the reason why we're in this situation is because they're fighting over funding for DHS that would then fund these agents who are on the ground. So, where's the money going to come from to fund these agents? And if President Trump has this legal authority to kind of just bypass Congress completely on an issue like this, then why have we had these standoffs for the last decade over these various issues when usually there is a president sitting in the White House who is on one side or the other when it comes to these various issues?
So, it is unclear what legal authority he is using or where that money is going to come from.
[18:45:01]
We have, of course, reached out to the White House to try and figure all of this out and what this plan actually means for those men and women who are currently not being paid.
MATTINGLY: Will definitely keep us posted. I'm literally right now thinking like, I wasted 15 years of my life covering late night stakeouts over government shutdowns. If we could have just done this the whole time. All right. Kristen Holmes from the North Lawn again, we're all trying
to figure everything out. Great reporting as always.
I want to discuss now with the panel.
And again, I think it's important to just be candid with folks we don't know the emergency authorization that he is alluding to here. There are things the Office of Management and Budget can do on its own to move money around, as this administration has done. This does not appear to be that.
What's your kind of initial snap response to the president unilaterally needing to do this?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, one, I'd be curious to know what the legal theory that the president is proposing. I think this is a fascinating territory. Just as someone who loves electoral politics, broadly speaking.
But two, I also think the president is attempting to shift some of the blame here on Democrats by saying, look, we don't have enough votes on the Republican side to do this. We need a handful of Dems to come over. We only got one, and that's the senator out of Pennsylvania.
So, I'm going to attempt, through executive authority to make sure the hardworking people who care -- and mentioned in our previous segment are getting paid on time so that they can put food on their tables, cover their rent and their mortgage.
I can imagine if your Dems right now, this is not a good look to continue to say, we're not going to try to compromise with Republicans on this front. When the president is trying to find a solution. I think this was kind of strategic and smart in a lot of ways.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think it's a win for Democrats because it proved that they clearly were standing firm. And I suspect that the president is also hearing not only not only seeing the polls we were just talking about, but hearing from his members, particularly frontline members. We can't handle this. We can't take it.
Our own -- they're hearing from their own constituents. People are struggling. It's not just, you know, it's the backlog at the airports. It's the pain. And, you know, another of our Republican colleagues said, well, this is how he deals. He does this move and that move.
All right. But you're -- you're negotiating with people's very real pain and Republicans -- another quick thing on this -- are starting to lose the confidence of the American. Lose trust and confidence of the American people, that they're the ones who can deliver a prosperous economy. It's another poll that was out recently.
That's been an advantage that Republicans have enjoyed for quite some time. If that shifts, that's a huge move for Democrats to make the argument going into the midterms. We're the ones who can get this economy straight. We're the ones who actually care about people and your everyday lives.
SINGLETON: And I wish Democrats would do the right thing then and work with Republicans to fund this. And they're literally not doing it because we simply cannot mathematically vote.
MATTINGLY: Just totally --
SINGLETON: We just don't have the votes.
MATTINGLY: Lay bare that I'm a nerd at heart. Like this is the worst possible thing to happen for any type of outcome in the near term, which apparently was starting to get, according to Lauren Fox, was getting some signs of life like, you know, jet fumes. There's a two- week recess. It's Thursday night.
It's always dark before it goes pitch black, according to John McCain. Like it's that moment right now. And right now, this takes all the steam out of that.
FINNEY: Well, but look, it also, I'm sure there are also nervous that there will be cameras at the airports watching them go to the front of the line while people are as they leave town.
MATTINGLY: Delta took that away, by the way.
FINNEY: I saw that.
MATTINGLY: Which I thought was like probably the best incentive for people to actually reach a deal 100 percent.
FINNEY: But look, I think the point of this still matters. This was never about money. This is about accountability. This was about Democrats saying, we are not going to allow you to treat people on our American streets like we saw in Minneapolis. And by the way, it's still happening.
Those border agents and ICE are still breaking the law in the way they are treating people on American soil. And so that principle of accountability actually matters. And then Trump was trying to throw in the SAVE Act, which isn't just about voter ID. It is also about him trying to control the election.
SINGLETON: I take Karen's point as it pertains to ICE and accountability. And the president clearly recognizes that. He recognized it in Minnesota when he sent in Tom Homan. He recognized it when he replaced Kristi Noem with Markwayne Mullin.
So, clearly, the president understands what the American people visually see on their television screens every single night. I think he has a good barometer on where the winds are going one way or the other. And so, clearly, we are making the necessary changes to one, handle immigration in a proper way, while making sure that the optics don't look negative for the president and the Republican Party.
But again, Phil, you know this. We do not have the votes on my side to sync to single handedly pass this. If we did, we would need Democrats. It would have been done two weeks ago. So, we're simply saying Democrats compromise with us on the issue of ICE, and they're refusing to. And it's harming the good people who are protecting us at the airports every single day.
MATTINGLY: Can I ask you, though, like Democrats decision to hold out when Thune came back, even though stripping enforcement funding for this, which again, has been explained to me 15 different ways from Democrats, and I have enough knowledge of appropriations, I have a pretty decent idea of what they're going for here.
But the point remains, two weeks ago, Democrats probably would have taken that deal.
[18:50:02]
It looked fairly similar to the things that they were on board with, and it allowed for a vehicle to continue what, by my understanding, have been very substantive, not always super fruitful, but they've been substantive negotiations over enforcement restrictions going forward. You got a vehicle that you have to pass, someone's going to move.
This seems to short circuit all of that. Like this takes the pressure valve and just releases it.
FINNEY: It may, but it certainly means that Democrats were able to stand firm. I mean, look, the administration could have done this weeks ago. Let's be honest. I mean, Trump is not someone who's actually followed the law in terms of how, you know, where the money is going. He could have said, you know, we're going to take care of you all and don't worry about it. He could have done it weeks ago
So, I think for Democrats, particularly at a time when they're hearing from voters, we want you to fight. They held the line and that's important.
MATTINGLY: I appreciate you guys both, as always. I'm excited to like, learn about what this actually is.
FINNEY: Yeah.
MATTINGLY: Again, nerd, total nerd. You guys are, too.
Karen and Shermichael, thanks so much.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:55:12]
MATTINGLY: In our pop lead, you know Andrew McCarthy as an '80s heartthrob as part of the so-called brat pack and as the star of iconic films like pretty in pink and Saint Elmo's fire. And more recently, he's also famous for directing and writing award winning travel memoirs. Jake Tapper spoke with Andrew about his latest book, just released
this week, "Who Needs Friends: An Unscientific Examination of Male Friendship Across America".
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: The last time you were here, we discussed the fact that you were not in real life, hanging out with your fellow brat packers Rob Lowe and Emilio Estevez and the like for your documentary about the Brat Pack. You wrote this book after your son Sam asked you a question. He said, you don't really have any friends, do you, dad?
So, tell us about how this road trip started. Even though you write in the book that you don't particularly like driving.
ANDREW MCCARTHY, AUTHOR, "WHO NEEDS FRIENDS": No, I hate driving, Jake. It is. My son said, dad, you don't really have any friends, do you? And so, I sat with that for a minute and I thought, you know, I do have friends, Sam. I just don't see them. But I know they're there, and that's enough.
And then I sat with that and I realized it wasn't enough. And so I got in the car and I drove 10,000 miles across the country to go reunite with some of my oldest, dearest friends I hadn't seen in sometimes 20 years.
And along the way, I started talking to men of all walks about the place friendship had in their lives. I would just approach random men on the street. Hey, you know, I'm going to see my old friend across the country here. Can -- what about you? Friends, and I started talking to these guys, and so it evolved into this book where I just talked to men across America about the place friendship had in their lives, and it turned into an amazing kind of 10,000-mile journey.
TAPPER: It -- it's -- I've been talking a lot about this as well recently with my friends. Women seem to have very different friendships than men do. And by that, I mean they seem to have much better friendships than men do. What did you discover while exploring this?
MCCARTHY: Well, you're absolutely right. Women seem to be much better at it than men are.
And I think -- I think men in many ways sort of get involved in careers and business and family and all that stuff. But women do too. So, we have no excuse, really. I think it's just, there's a certain fear of intimacy that us men naturally have, and there's certain manhood. The idea of manhood has become this kind of stoic, go it alone, carry your own water, pull your hat down kind of thing, and sort of keep it -- keep it under wraps.
And I think to our detriment, that's been become the case.
And so, in just talking to all these men and I realized how many have just sort of isolated themselves, I realized id isolated myself a great deal. And one of the things I discovered is I kept driving across the country talking to all these men and seeing my friends again was this sort of feeling of a safety net sort of spread out underneath me as I drove across America? Like there's something I'd really been lacking and doing without, with not having this kind of constant and intimate contact with my friends and letting them know how valuable they were to me, you know?
TAPPER: So have you changed your behavior at all? Now, having had this revelation and going on this journey, are you now visiting your friends more? Are you checking in with them more? Are you talking on the phone now?
I find that texting, while a great tool, has in a lot of ways replaced calling people. And I think that's a -- that's a bad thing, ultimately. What -- and I resolved like about a year ago to, to call my friends more instead of just text them.
What about you? What are you doing to -- to fix it?
MCCARTHY: Well, I've got you know, I think you're right. Consistency in showing up. I think I've learned the older I've gotten, the most important thing in life you can do is just show up. The idea that I sort of drove all this distance and my friends would go, dude, you drove all this. I go, dude, you're meaningful to me, and you've been important in my life.
So yeah, a number of them I have, seen multiple times. I do pick up the phone. I think you're right. Texting is great and fine, but I pick up the phone constantly. Dude, you won't believe what I just saw, even if it's two minutes, you know, so that they're an active part of my life again.
And, you know, it's just a self -- a selfish thing to do because I find in my own life, it's just I feel I feel sort of safer out in the world, you know what I mean? Were in a particular in a precarious moment in the world. And to have friends who know you without even having to say too much and just sort of checking in and touching base, I feel the sense of safety and expansiveness.
And I also think as a parent, it's been really good because, you know, kids don't listen, right? But they know the behavior we model for them. And for me to start changing my behavior and modeling sort of friendship for my kids, I think has been really valuable thing.
TAPPER: Yeah. And also, your son can see that you realize there's a problem and you fix it. And yeah, it's great.
Andy McCarthy. The book is "Who Needs Friends", it's out now. Congratulations. Come next time you're in D.C., give me a ring. We can -- we can become friends, Andrew.
MCCARTHY: I'd love to. Thanks, Jake.
TAPPER: Okay. Talk to you later.
MCCARTHY: Aren't we all ready?
TAPPER: Yes, but better. Deeper.
MCCARTHY: All right. It's a date.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MATTINGLY: Now, you can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.
