Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Scott Pelley Fired By CBS After Clash With Management; Utah Residents Decry Plans For Colossal A.I. Data Center; House Passes Iran War Powers Resolution In Rebuke To Trump; Hilton, Becerra, Steyer Battle For Two Spots In CA Gov. Race; George Santos Under Investigation For Alleged Bets On Kalshi. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired June 03, 2026 - 17:00   ET

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

DAVID AXELROD, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: He's traveling all over that state. The second question is, are there other shoes to drop? But I want to make one point about this. There are questions about personal character here and they're real and I take them seriously. People should take them seriously.

There's also a question in this election in Maine about public character and about whether you are accommodating a system --

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right.

AXELROD: -- that conspires against everyday people as they believe Susan Collins has as a long term incumbent, or whether you'll challenge it. And that's another element of this.

HUNT: Fair enough. Don't mean to cut you off, but Jake Tapper will have all of our heads if I don't. So thank you very much. Really appreciate it. "The Lead with Jake Tapper" starts right now.

[17:00:43]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Those stories and more tonight on "60 Minutes." The Lead starts right now.

So much news even after CBS fire journalist Scott Pelley from "60 Minutes" last night continued disagreement about what went down. We're going to dive into it all and why this story is about much more than personnel issues at one show or one network. And the blunt question from Secretary of State Marco Rubio that seemed to sum up hearings on Capitol Hill today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF AFFAIRS: We're talking about shoes. Are you guys kidding me? I mean, is this the Foreign Affairs Committee or is this like a circus? What is this?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: From a quote about kicking ass to accusations of racism? We're going to bring you some of the lowlights on the Hill today coming up. Plus, how are we powering the AI boom? Is it coming at the expense of local communities? I'm going to talk to the celebrity investor putting his name behind what could end up being the biggest data center in the world.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. We start in our politics lead where a growing debate over how T.V. network's cover news has upended CBS's "60 Minutes" after 58 seasons on the air. Last night CBS News fired veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley one day after a show staff meeting where Pelley sharply criticized the news magazine's new boss, Nick Bilton, to his face. According to leaked audio from the meeting, Pelley told Bilton he would, quote, "never be welcome here," unquote, saying that Bilton and CBS News editor in chief Bari Weiss are unqualified for their jobs.

Pelley then said Weiss, quote, "Does not love this place. She was brought in to kill it and she's been doing exactly that," unquote. Weiss, other CBS leaders and HR held a follow up meeting with Scott Pelley yesterday, but the end result was this, a letter from Bilton notifying Pelley of his termination, Bilton writing that Pelley hijacked his very first staff meeting and, quote, "demonstrated that you have no interest in contributing to the future success of the show or approaching my new tenure with a mind open to collaboration and progress," unquote.

In a statement last night after his firing, Pelley said that Paramount, the new owner of CBS, is trying to curry favor with the Trump administration and claims that new management recently, quote, "instructed me to inject falsehoods and bias into a politically sensitive story," unquote. Pelly says that he ignored and refused those instructions. We're trying to find out exactly what he's referencing there.

In a statement, a CBS News spokesperson said, quote, "There is no political interference at CBS News, not from ownership, not from Bari Weiss. The only interference is the normal back and forth between editor and correspondent that happens in every newsroom."

But the story did not end there because in this morning's CBS editorial meeting, Bari Weiss addressed the firing saying, quote, "I'm only interested in working in a newsroom that is built on trust and mutual respect. That foundation was broken on Monday, and despite our attempts to engage with Scott Pelley and to find a way back, unfortunately, we weren't able to do so, and so we had to part ways," unquote. After those comments leaked, Pelley then issued another statement to the New York Times saying, quote, "There was no effort of any kind to, quote, "find a way back," as Weiss said in the editorial meeting, at no point did anyone in the Tuesday meeting suggest that there could be steps taken by either side that would lead to a resolution," unquote.

A Paramount spokesperson pointed to a Wall Street Journal piece outlining that CBS President Tom Cibrowski opened that meeting and said the purpose was to figure out how to go forward. The article reads, quote, "At the beginning of the meeting on Tuesday, Cibrowski told Pelley that he had a long legacy with 60 Minutes and that they would like to talk to him about, quote, "how to reach a point of civility and go forward, according to a person familiar with the matter."

Now, let's zoom out for a second to look at the core issues here and why this larger "60 Minutes" overhaul may be happening, because this story is relevant when it comes to two significant, significant developments in American media right now. One is one that you are all out there very familiar with. It's the atomization of where people get their information with cord cutting and social media and streaming T.V. and podcasts and so many channels and influencers and much more, resulting in legacy media losing audiences and seeking ways to reach you where you are, which is often on your phone wanting information when you want it. Second, this is also a story of media consolidation and those who are trying to big -- trying to build big mega companies in the environment where we have a president who is more than willing to impose his likes and dislikes on the regulatory world.

[17:05:22]

Now, people close to Bari Weiss insist that the CBS overhaul is about culture, not politics. They think that "60 Minutes" is an archaic institution that is in urgent need of reinvention. Bari Weiss argues that the news media needs to be fairer and needs to regain the public's trust. And her boss, David Ellison, says that CBS News needs to appeal to the 70 percent of the country that is in the political middle. On the other hand, what "60 Minutes" defenders see as its strengths, the Bari Weiss individuals and executives see as potential shortcomings. And they're determined to rebuild this news magazine for a digital world in a vertical video age.

But Scott Pelley and others at CBS and others who used to be at CBS do think there's something more, something political behind this rebuild. They say that Paramount's new owners, with David Ellison at the top, are seeking a closer relationship with Donald Trump and his administration and that Ellison appointed Weiss to appease Trump and overhaul "60 Minutes," which Trump doesn't like, and all of CBS News, which Trump doesn't like. And this argument goes that all of this is happening in order to get approval of the purchase of Paramount last year by David Ellison's company and the pending purchase of Warner Brothers Discovery any day now. And of course, we should note Warner Brothers Discovery owns CNN.

If you want to know one of the reasons why people keep suggesting that new ownership of these news organizations is behind wanting to curry favor with Trump, and that's -- and that's one of the things driving all this, it's because of things that President Trump keeps saying or Secretary Hegseth. Just a few moments ago, President Trump said this to CNN's Kaitlan Collins.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: CNN -- in particular, CNN does such false reporting, but now they have new ownership, so maybe it'll straighten it out. I doubt it, but it's hard to straighten garbage out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: A reminder that President Trump calls any reporting he doesn't like false and any reporting he doesn't like garbage. Again, CBS News and Paramount reject the assertion of any political influence or interference.

Here to discuss our first panel is former CBS News Justice correspondent Scott McFarlane and Terry Moran, former ABC News Chief White House correspondent.

Scott, let me start with you. You work with Scott Pelley, you work at CBS News, are you surprised by how some of this went down? What do you think is going on here?

SCOTT MCFARLANE, FORMER CBS NEWS JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Nobody wins if "60 Minutes" is damaged through this. Nobody wins. It's still one of those rare media entities, Jake, that can cut through the noise and cut through the clutter. Scott Pelley was, I think, the living Mount Rushmore at CBS News when we worked together.

I mean, I wasn't called Scott in the office. I was called Scotty Mac, McFarlane, or hey, you come over here because Scott Pelley was Scott. That's the reverence with which he was held at CBS News.

I'm surprised that anybody would get rid of a transcendent personality who can attract an audience or who is associated with the strength of a brand. You watch Scott Peltier on "60 Minutes," you knew you were going to get a comprehensive report. You never want to damage a brand by getting rid of the pillar of the entity.

But there's some good news for the show and for CBS. The new product, whatever it looks like, whatever it sounds like in September, will be sampled. It still comes on after NFL football. It still has tens of millions of people who will, if nothing else, trip into watching the show because it comes on after Patrick Mahomes, they have a big responsibility to make sure it does not become the new Coke or the crystal Pepsi of "60 Minutes."

TAPPER: So, Terry, just to remind our viewers, after an illustrious career at ABC News, where you and I worked together some time ago, ABC News fired you because you went on Twitter and you wrote that Trump advisor Stephen Miller eats his hate as spiritual nourishment." You said that both he and Trump are world class haters. The White House demanded your head and ABC News provided it. What do you think is going on at CBS News? Do you think it's related at all to what you went through at ABC News?

TERRY MORAN, JOURNALIST: Different stories, right? I've always felt like that company has its policies. They said I violated them. I thought I had said something was accurate, fair and true.

This is different. And there's two basic principles. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. OK? Yes, "60 Minutes" ratings are down in the last 10 years because of the splintering of the audiences as you say --

TAPPER: Everyone's ratings are test.

MORAN: Yes. There is no journalism enterprise in the Western hemisphere that has the cultural impact, the political impact, the stature that 60 Minutes does. So the notion that they're trying to fix it, either they're messing it up or something else is going on. The straightest line -- the straight -- shortest distance between two points is a straight line. I mean, last year, Bill Owens, a longtime executive producer of "60 Minutes" resigned, saying that management was trying to interfere with political content.

[17:10:08]

Anderson Cooper left quietly to be with his family, which is what you say when you don't want to say what you want to say. They fired Cecilia Vega and Sharyn Alfonsi, two fearless, bold journalists, troublemakers. I mean, in a good way. Good trouble, right, as John Lewis used to say. And now here's Scott Pelley saying political influence has done this.

There's one reason this is happening, which is that the management at CBS wants to curry favor with Trump because the new owner of CBS wants his business interests to come out correctly, by his lights, under the Trump administration.

TAPPER: So Scott, obviously Bari Weiss and David Ellison would reject that premise. And they would argue that CBS News and also "60 Minutes" have an anti-Trump spin, liberal spin, not fair. And that the media has been so unfair that we have -- we are so untrusted by the American people. And polls do suggest that the media trust is at an all-time low. What would you say to that?

Do you see that argument?

MCFARLANE: I would venture the bold prediction that if Americans were surveyed about the trustworthiness of "60 Minutes," it may have more support and more trust, more credibility with Americans than the general milquetoast term media. What is the media at this point that they're being polled on? Are they talking about specific programs, specific sources of information? Are they talking about the garbage on the internet, the garbage on talk radio? Are they talking about the actual verified, bonafide sourced sources of journalism, the ones who actually have credibility and empirical evidence to back up their reporting?

This all feels to me like apples and oranges.

TAPPER: So I don't cover news media a lot on the show. I don't -- I think it's -- I generally think it's navel gazing. I generally think that we have so much to cover. But this story felt different. It felt a little different with Sharyn and Cecilia and the executive producer last week and then this very public kerfuffle with Scott Pelley.

This is bigger than just this show and just this channel, don't you think?

MORAN: Yes, it's a fire bell in the night, right? We were at ABC News together and --

TAPPER: It was very different back then.

MORAN: It was very different back then, but it was in a corporate entity, it was in a big corporation. And there was supposed to be a wall between the owners on one side who did owning and the journalists on the other side who did journalism. And that wall got chipped from time to time. At CBS, that wall is gone. And the question in this era is can any of those walls at any legacy corporate owned news media organizations stand under the kind of pressure that's being put.

I would also just add one more thing. I think chasing a MAGA audience is a fool's errand because they don't want the kind of journalism that "60 Minutes" does which is in depth and straight and fearless. They want the journalism that flatters their own prejudices.

TAPPER: All right, Terry Moran and Scott McFarlane, thanks to both of you.

Let's go now to CNN Chief Media Analyst Brian Stelter.

So, Brian, CBS News declined to offer us a guest. So I'm actually going to rely on you to try to help us understand how they view events. How do they view what has happened in the last day or two?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Right. Certainly these have been some self-inflicted wounds at CBS News and this is not the first one. The overhaul of the evening news was also highly controversial and picked apart months ago. And the ratings have not really improved due to all those changes.

You know, my sources close to CBS management say that they believe "60 Minutes" is really valuable, but so that it's archaic, it's out of date, it's an institution that needs change. They believe, and this is the management point of view, that some of those staffers are stubborn and sanctimonious. They definitely believe that about Pelley. So these managers, especially Bari Weiss, they want to inject outside energy and outside ideas and that's what they've done.

But Jake, I would say not just many, but most T.V. news veterans believe that even if Weiss has the right instincts and is trying to do the right things, she has gone about it the right -- the wrong way, maybe the right moves, but the wrong way.

TAPPER: So "60 minutes," it's a huge success story just in general, whether or not --

STELTER: Yes, it is.

TAPPER: -- people like the editorial content. It averaged 9.1 million viewers in its 58th season, up 9 percent from the prior season average. Why would this be a focus right now when there's obviously so much -- look, everybody in legacy media, CNN, MS, and everybody, we're all trying to figure out how to revamp and get where people are, to get on their phones, to get on their streamers, we're all trying to do that. Why start with "60 Minutes? STELTER: Right. The "60 Minutes" ratings were up 9 percent this season. But the lead in for "60 Minutes" for most of the season was the NFL, and those NFL ratings were up 11 percent. So from the Weiss camp, they say, hey, "60 Minutes" needs to evolve now or it will perish. She said to staffers last week, and so did Bilton, if you don't disrupt yourself, you will be disrupted.

[17:15:02]

But again, most of those T.V. news veterans look around and they say that's just a smokescreen for a political agenda here. And I think people are right to be skeptical. I'm joining you from the mountains of Wyoming. People here all day long are asking me about Scott Pelley. So you're right, this story's breaking through unlike most media stories because people see a treasured American institution potentially at risk.

And that has been the story of Trump 2.0. Not just in media but in many other fields. People are right to be skeptical, not cynical, but skeptical. News outlets have to earn and re earn your trust every day. Controversies like this one at CBS, they make it harder to earn trust.

And the bosses at CBS right now, they know this is a crisis. They know this is a big problem. They now have to rebuild "60 Minutes" with only three of the seven correspondents that were on the show this season, Jake.

TAPPER: Brian Stelter, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

In California tonight, the nation watching and waiting for the final results, especially in two big primaries. The man leading the primary race for governor will be here on The Lead. But first, the pushback against what could be the biggest data center in the world. The celebrity investor behind the plans will join us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:20:09]

TAPPER: Time for the latest installment of our series, AI Friend or Foe? In Utah, state leaders are responding to a swarm of public outrage over plans for hyperscale data center north of the Great Salt Lake. It's backed by the government and private investors, including "Shark Tank's" Kevin O'Leary. Protesters say they're furious over potential impacts to air quality and fearful of harm that the lake -- to harm to the lake from what was originally proposed to be a 40,000 acre campus. On Monday, Utah's top state senator, J. Stuart Adams sent a letter to Kevin O'Leary calling for a 75 percent reduction in that area.

Adams notably chairs the state funded land development organization that approved this project already. Kevin O'Leary is here with me now to talk about all this and more.

Thanks so much for being here. We really appreciate it. You told the Salt Lake Tribune you're not walking away from the data center. You are looking for a way to scale it down, but not 75 percent, is that right?

KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: Yes. This is the Adams letter. I brought it with me. 90:1 Monday morning, it went around the world, including all of the people financing this, a $15 billion project, in addition to the engineering, architectural firms. But he did it for political reasons. I understand why he did it.

In real estate, you would never give your partner 75 percent haircut. That's impossible. You can't take a building. It's like selling me a house and telling me I can live in the second floor toilet. It doesn't work.

We -- but I understand why he did it and he has a list of grievances and concerns. I have to address these personally now. And I've told the Tribune in Salt Lake City and the local affiliate there, the ABC affiliate, I will respond to this letter by Friday morning. I've had my engineers, the architects, we will address these concerns because it's my best interest to do that.

The people there have been fed so much propaganda and misinformation, including this narrative about the levels in the Great Salt Lake. The water on this property has nothing to do with Great Salt Lake. And we're not even planning to use that much of it at the end of the day. But we've decided to address this issue and maybe give some of that water to the Great Salt Lake. It's Josh Romney, Mitt Romney's son, who's taken on that mandate to raise the level.

We'll work with him, we'll work with whoever we have to. But this is just one microcosm of what's going on all around the country on data centers as you're well aware.

TAPPER: Yes. So one of the things that's going on, I know you -- I just read the story in NOTICE. The chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee in the House is looking into right now, investigating whether or not there is foreign money, specifically Chinese money --

O'LEARY: Yes.

TAPPER: -- funding some of these NGOs that are opposed to this data center and other data centers. And I guess the theory is the Chinese are trying to stop our progress so that they can shoot past us in the AI arms race. What do you think?

O'LEARY: Well, I heard -- I heard that story from -- there's only 15 teams developing these data centers in North America. It's very complex, very expensive. I'm one of them. Some of my cohorts in this area called me about this, saying when you announce this Utah thing, you're going to see some crazy stuff happen. I said, conspiracy theory, I don't buy it.

About 8:00 on May 4, after it was announced, all of a sudden on my Instagram and X formerly Twitter feeds, unbelievable explosion of DMs with false information. And I thought to myself, this is really expensive. Who is doing this? And 48 hours later, names like the Party for Socialism and Liberation, the People's Dispatch. And the IP addresses, so I hired some forensic auditors and some IP scientists, it led back in U -- because some of this was going into Utah, Alliance for a Better Utah.

And I said, OK, pull their tax free, pull their 990s, go do a forensic audit on their IRS filings. Let's find out who's funding this incredibly expensive campaign against our project.

TAPPER: Yes.

O'LEARY: And lo and behold, I couldn't believe it. They all go back to an entity called Arabella, which is funded by a guy named Neville Singham who shares offices with the Chinese party.

TAPPER: Yes.

O'LEARY: And apparently he's under investigation by multiple agencies in the government. So I took all the data and I gave it to the government, including Smith's initiative. They have all the data and I'm just -- I'm just taking public filings. It's irrefutable. I know the company's been under scrutiny.

TAPPER: Yes.

O'LEARY: But I don't know how they're going to explain this.

TAPPER: But you know that wherever this is taking place and whether -- whatever company is doing it, these data centers are, generally speaking, not popular with a segment of the population. They worry about power, they worry about noise, they worry about water. Are those concerns not legitimate?

O'LEARY: But you might -- Jake, you might ask why is that? Remember, the data centers that really made this industry unpopular were first built in Virginia. They were noisy, they hummed, they spewed a lot of heat --

TAPPER: Yes.

O'LEARY: -- they ate a lot of water. That is 20-year-old technology. Today, what we're going to build in Utah is completely different. It's not a box with no windows. We're building a place where people want to work.

[17:25:05]

We're building our own power. We'll give it back to the state. We're going to give water back to the Great Salt Lake. If we have to build a daycare center for our employees, we will. I want people, remember, I'm bringing $15 billion to Utah.

Two thousand long term high paying jobs and 4,000 construction jobs, but obviously I've got to address the latter.

TAPPER: Yes.

O'LEARY: And I have to talk -- I've said no more lobbyists. I'll address the people myself. They know who I am. I'll go on television every day if I have to and say here's every phase. All these things you've been fed are not true.

The size one story was, it was 23 atom atomic bombs of heat. What a load of BS. That's so not true that we're going to use all the water in the salt lake. Not true. That we're going to use all the power and the rates are going to go up.

Not true. None of it's true. So I have to turn them around first. Address Adams letter. Reengineer, I've been working on this day and night with my teams.

I think we'll have an answer by Friday morning.

TAPPER: All right, come back and tell us what happened. We appreciate it.

O'LEARY: Thank you very much.

TAPPER: Good to see you, Kevin.

We're going to go to California next and talk to the man who is backed by Trump and appears to be on his way towards advancing towards November's general election for governor of California. Steve Hilton will be here on The Lead. But first just coming in from Capitol Hill, a rare rebuke of President Trump and his war with Iran. We're going to go to the vote moments ago next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:48]

TAPPER: Some breaking news on our Politics Lead. The House of Representatives here in Washington, D.C. just passed a resolution to limit President Donald Trump's war powers in Iran. It's a rare, significant rebuke to President Trump. Let's get right to CNN's Manu Raju on Capitol Hill.

Manu, Democrats have repeatedly forced these votes in recent weeks to no avail until now. What changed and what could this resolution actually achieve?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, this vote coming at a time when the Republicans were doing everything they could to try to prevent it from succeeding. Ultimately, this did just pass the United States House on a 215 to 208 vote. There were four Republican defectors, Congressman Tom Barrett from a swing district in Michigan, Warren Davidson, a conservative and more libertarian-minded conservative, along with Thomas Massie, another libertarian-minded conservative who voted against it. And Brian Fitzpatrick, who represents a Pennsylvania swing district, among the members who voted with Democrats to rebuke the president, to rein in his powers on Iran.

Now, Republican leaders have tried to avoid this vote for weeks. In fact, there was a vote that was expected to happen before members left town for a week-long Memorial Day recess. They abruptly recessed the House early to avoid this vote and avoid this rebuke against the President. But they could not avoid a vote from ultimately happening here on the House floor, because when they came back into session under the rules of the House, Democrats could force their vote, and they succeeded in doing so, a real sign of some of the consternation within the GOP ranks on this bill.

But Jake, this is more of a symbolic rebuke, because the Senate does not have the votes to pass this bill. Certainly President Trump is not going to sign this into law, but it's a sign here of some of the tension within the ranks and the fear and concern about this war that continues to drag on and impact constituents, these members back home.

TAPPER: All right, Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, thanks so much.

Now to our Politics Lead, the vote still not finalized in two big primary races in California where the top two finishers, regardless of party, move on to face each other in November's general election. In the race for Los Angeles Mayor, incumbent Mayor Karen Bass, a Democrat, secured her spot for the next round. TBD, who she'll compete against, the current vote count shows that former T.V. reality star Spencer Pratt is in second place, followed quite a bit back by L.A. City Council member Nithya Raman.

In the statewide race for governor, Republican Steve Hilton leads the field. He's followed by two Democrats, former HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and then Tom Steyer. Many, many mail-in ballots that could lean Democratic are still left to be counted.

And so joining us now is the current frontrunner, Republican businessman Steve Hilton. Mr. Hilton, thanks for being on the show. You said earlier that the campaign starts today. You appear confident you're going to hold on to this first place positioning as the remaining ballots are counted. Do you expect any surprises in the process? And do you have different plans if it's Becerra or if it's Steyer?

STEVE HILTON (R-CA), GOV. CANDIDATE: Great to be with you, Jake. I think that we can still see some changes. It's possible that the lead will switch, as it were, that you might find Xavier Becerra taking the top spot as these votes come in. We don't know that yet.

I think what we're confident about is that given where we are today, we're not going to see both of those Democrats moving ahead of me. And the real point there is that the only thing that matters in this election in the primary is to make sure that we can offer Californians a choice, a real choice in the general election in November, because right now in California, there's a majority who think the state's going in the wrong direction.

A recent poll showed that number of 56 percent of Californians who think we're going in the wrong direction. And therefore, it's vital that we offer a new direction. And that has to mean a choice between the kind of policies and the agenda that we've been living under in California for 16 years now of Democrat one party rule and offer something new.

I don't think it changes whether it's Xavier Becerra or Tom Steyer, because in different ways, both of them are offering more of the same. Tom Steyer, in particular, I would argue, is offering more of the same policies we've seen for the last 16 years, but even more extreme, even faster in the direction. And the reason we need a change is because on any measure, the results have been disappointing. We've got the highest poverty rate in the country, the highest unemployment rate of all 50 states, the highest cost of living by far. People are really struggling in California. And that's why I'm confident that in November we will vote for change here.

[17:35:26]

TAPPER: Of course, Republicans are in the minority significantly in terms of voters. And during today's news conference, you noted the Democrats are outspending your campaign roughly four to one. How do you compete? How does a Republican who was backed by Trump, who used to be on "Fox," how do you reach Democrats who you will need in order to become the next governor?

HILTON: With a very positive, pragmatic, non-partisan almost campaign. That's how I've been running the primary. I think that's why our campaign resonated. It was focused on practical things to make people's lives better. There was one word that captured my head. We put it on our banners as we did town halls up and down the state, Cal Affordable. And the components of that, the very simple, practical things, your first hundred grand, tax free, no state income tax, $3 gas, your electric bills cut in half, a home you can afford to buy. Obviously, behind each one of those is a policy reform plan that I've been developing over the past year or so.

But the actual goals there are things that a majority of Californians can get behind. They're not divisive. There are things that actually everyone wants to see. And I think that another argument, I think, that is really compelling. And I've seen it from many Democrat audiences I've spoken to is that 16 years of one party running absolutely everything. All the statewide elected offices, both chambers in the legislature with a super majority, every big city, every big county, the state Supreme Court with a six-one Democrat appointed majority. It's just not healthy to have that kind of one party control. A bit of balance is welcome. And I think people really can see that now in California.

TAPPER: All right, Steve Hilton. Thank you. As I noted earlier, congratulations. I think we'll see when all the ballots come in. I appreciate your presence on the show. Hope to have you back sometime.

HILTON: Thanks, Jake. I'll come and see you in a month when we'll know the real results.

TAPPER: Right where you're still counting ballots. That might be something the next governor wants to take care of. He's already been to prison for a federal conviction for fraud. And now Republican former Congressman George Santos in New York is under investigation yet again. The prediction market activity raising suspicions, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:42:01]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, disgraced former Congressman George Santos, Republican of New York, who was sentenced to seven years in federal prison after pleading guilty to fraud and identity theft charges, and then had his sentence commuted by President Trump. Well, recently he boasted on social media that he would attend President Trump's State of the Union speech earlier this year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE SANTOS (R), FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE: I'm going to be there for the State of the Union in the gallery, guys. Just chill, trolls, chill, OK?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: OK. So at the time, bets were being made in online prediction markets about who was going to attend and other notable figures were being bet on. But then, of course, despite saying he was going to go, Santos did not go to the State of the Union. And now betting market, Kalshi, has referred Santos to the Department of Justice for allegedly placing bets that he would not attend, even though he was telling the public that he would attend, according to two sources. Now, Santos told NPR that he wasn't aware of any insider trading investigation.

Joining us now is the panel. So today, Santos posted that he is fielding hundreds of reporters questions and, "I will comment further when appropriate and clarify everything accordingly while being mindful and respectful of any process that might be underway. The basis of the accusation is preposterous. And I look forward to supplying any information asked of me to any agency that inquires. Until then, media, please do not inquire."

OK. Shermichael?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: This is this is really -- this is really an unregulated territory for the most part. And I honestly don't expect the DOJ to indict him on some charges. I mean, Congress has to do its job and pass legislation to regulate whether it's Kalshi or Polymarket or any other betting services out there. I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon, Jake. So maybe this is in the news right now, but I don't think this is going to impact too much.

CHUCK ROCHA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Let me jump in and give Kalshi some credit, because at least they were like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. We're going to turn him in because what you're doing is wrong. Like I think they --

TAPPER: Allegedly.

ROCHA: Allegedly wrong. Sorry. Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: Yes.

ROCHA: For sure they get some credit there. TAPPER: OK. So here's another post from Santos before the State of the Union where he asked, "Should I wear a muted serious suit to the SOTU or a bedazzled one? And then on the night of the big event, which Santos is alleged to have been betting against his own attendance, he posted, "Watching State of the Union from an airport T.V. was not part of the plan. Chuck?

ROCHA: Look, I think that this guy's been in the headlines for already too much for my satisfaction. And I go back to like he should not be out there in the public doing this. And I think it goes back to and I've grabbed this because I get frustrated that Donald Trump's the one who gave this guy a pass. And I think the American electorate is like over him. Thank you, Kalshi, for turning him in.

TAPPER: Senate Republicans dealing President Trump's White House ballroom is set back today. They stripped language from a revised budget reconciliation bill that would have provided a billion dollars in security funding for Secret Service upgrades, including for the ballroom. Some Republican senators expressed concern about funding a ballroom when Americans are struggling with rising cost of energy and food ahead of the midterms. Shermichael, what's your take on this? I mean, that's kind of a rebuke of President Trump from Republicans.

[17:45:09]

SINGLETON: I think the senators are looking at the political reality of most Americans are looking at cost in Washington, foreign costs in the Middle East and other parts of the world that are saying, what about us? What about our struggles? What about gas prices? What about cost of living? I can't afford to buy a house if I'm a recent college graduate. If I'm about to graduate from high school, I can't afford to go to college. Republicans are looking at all of those things.

And they would rather be messaging and drawing a contrast to the Democratic opponents about what the Republican message is to solve some of those problems. And so I think that's what this was really about.

TAPPER: No doubt, Republicans don't want to be talking about the ballroom. Something else they maybe don't want to be talking about is the fact that there's construction underway right now on the South Lawn of the White House for the UFC fight at the White House on Flag Day, which also happens to be President Trump's 80th birthday. So here's what President Trump posted on TikTok about the claw. That's this double arch-shaped structure that will hold the lights for the event. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Don't know that in Paris, France, the Eiffel Tower, 1889, it was built, was supposed to be taken down immediately after the World's Fair. And then they said, you know, we sort of like it. Let's leave it up a little bit longer. And then they said, let's leave it up longer and longer and longer. Well, they never took it down. And, you know, we're building something in front of the White House that's quite attractive to a lot of people. It's going to have the big UFC fight on June 14th. And I'm looking at it and maybe we'll never, ever take it down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Is he just trying to troll you, Chuck?

ROCHA: I think he is. And I think that, look, if you've got a Donald Trump tattoo on your shoulder, you love all of this and you think it's funny, but regular folks, regular, independent, moderate voters in the middle, they're sick of this. Like I'm running on congressional races from Maine to California. When I asked folks, this ain't in the top hundred of the issues that they care about, but an ad maker like me, and this is why that vote earlier that you asked Shermichael went down is because they know I'm going to make an ad saying meat was here, ground beef was here. Now it's here, but we still got enough money to build a UFC, W whatever, and all the other things like that's what is going to kill --

SINGLETON: And we don't want to see that point to you guys, Chuck, at all. I can assure you of that. It's exactly why Republicans have wanted to focus on the cost of living in the kitchen table issues because they're looking at the same polling data that we're talking about here on air, Jake, which is that the American people aren't very happy with what they have seen thus far from my party.

TAPPER: Yes. Well, I mean, I didn't put out that TikTok.

SINGLETON: Well, look, I'm a big fan of the UFC. I'm going to be honest. I'm not a little biased here. I plan to attend. I think it's going to be a great night. And I think the President's trolling it's going to come down. But that said, it's not lost upon me. The optics of this, I'm a political strategist. I get how this looks to most people out there.

ROCHA: And it was -- you didn't have to do this. There's a perfectly good basketball arena, literally five blocks away where you could have done this and he could have been there and had the cabinet there and not, and said, look, we did this here to save money.

SINGLETON: Are you going?

ROCHA: No.

TAPPER: So quickly incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan, he's in Alaska, is up for reelection. He's facing more than a dozen challengers, including another individual who's named Dan Sullivan. Senator Sullivan says Democrats, especially his main rival, Democratic Congresswoman Mary Peltola, are behind the addition of the other Dan Sullivan on the primary ballot. The NRSC, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, sent a letter to the Alaska legislature demanding that challenger Dan Sullivan then be removed from the ballot, suggesting, "Sham candidate Sullivan is taking these actions to proactively confuse Alaskan voters and rig the voting system to the obvious benefit of Democrat candidate Peltola's campaign." What's your reaction, Chuck?

ROCHA: This ain't the first time I've seen the same name showed up on a ballot. This is old school stuff that I've seen many, many times.

TAPPER: They do it in Philly all the time.

ROCHA: All the time. And we do it in Florida and a guy went to jail over it. Let me just say that only in Alaska, the top four people, we should remind everybody, get on the ballot. And that's what somebody is trying to do.

TAPPER: Yes. Thanks to both of you. And this note, CNN has a partnership with Kalshi. And we use its data to cover major events. But CNN editorial employees aren't allowed to trade on prediction sites. I predict I'm going to touch my nose.

[17:49:08]

Live images outside Madison Square Garden right now. Today's -- tonight's game, one of the NBA finals is in Texas, but New York is still hyped up. We're going to go there live, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our Sports Lead, the NBA Finals begin tonight. The New York Knickerbockers taking on the San Antonio Spurs. These two teams last met in the 1999 NBA Finals. Game one is in Texas, but that isn't stopping the Big Apple from getting in on the action. CNN's Omar Jimenez is outside Madison Square Garden in New York. Omar, the Knicks are fighting to end a 53-year championship drought.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, and you can feel the excitement among, see. You can't really walk anywhere in the city without seeing that blue and orange. People are excited about this moment that they feel like they haven't had in this city in a long time. You talk about that championship, obviously been more than 50 years, but their last appearance back in '99 against the San Antonio Spurs. As you mentioned, they are not playing here in New York, but you wouldn't be able to tell based on the fans here.

There will be watch parties inside the stadium as well, which we expect to be fully packed. And then outside the stadium, there was a question on whether outside watch parties were going to be able to happen because they were pulled back after some New York Knicks success earlier in the playoffs. The show goes on outside tonight, and we've got people lining up, getting ready to walk in to this actual watch party area.

And I was talking to this man earlier, Dominic, about how excited he was about the Knicks. Just tell me real quick, how's it feel in New York right now with the Knicks ahead of this game one?

[17:55:05]

DOMINIC VALERIO, KNICKS FAN: We active, we live, we outside. You're going to be seeing newborn babies with jerseys on. F. Trae Young, you feel me? I bleed blue and orange tonight. I ain't going to lie, excuse the colors, I ain't come correct, but I'm still repping my city. Knicks in five. JIMENEZ: Knicks in five. That is a big prediction. But you know what? Dominic is as confident as all the Knicks fans around me that no matter the hype with Victor Wembanyama, you can't tell that to New York City. They feel like they're taking this and maybe Knicks in five.

TAPPER: Omar, please tell Dominic that next time I want him to come correct. Omar Jimenez at Madison Square Garden, thanks so much.

JIMENEZ: Yes, yes.

TAPPER: So will there be a $1.776 billion anti-weaponization, so- called fund or not? Well, yesterday the Justice Department said no. Up next here, how President Trump seems to be leaving some wiggle room.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:06]

TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, President Trump is defending the --