Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Trump Touts Iran Deal, New DNI Pick Amid Political Backlash; Epstein Survivors Release Letter Opposing Blanche Nomination; Digging into Trump's Unfounded Claims About California Election Fraud. "86 47" Etched Into Grass On The National Mall. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired June 11, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]

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

This hour, after threatening a third straight night of massive strikes against Iran, President Trump now says the U.S. has reached a, quote, great settlement to end the war with Iran. The president claims there will be a signing ceremony soon, potentially in Europe, and Vice President J.D. Vance will attend. We're going to get the latest developments from the White House in moments.

Plus, CNN learning tonight that a group of Epstein survivors met with Congressman James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, which is investigating the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files. What did the survivors tell Chairman Comer, and did he make any assurances to them as to what's going to happen next? I'm going to ask somebody who was inside that meeting ahead.

Also, just days before massive crowds are expected for the White House UFC match, a huge 8647 has been fashioned onto the grass on the National Mall. The numbers, of course, have been used in the past to signal opposition to President Trump, 86 meaning get rid of, 47 for the 47th president. Now, the Trump administration has launched an investigation into what it calls deranged vandalism, going on to say it will, quote, hold those responsible accountable.

The Lead tonight, two major moves from the White House today as President Trump walks back threats that could have ignited a further escalation in the Iran war. Hours ago, after threats to seize vital oil infrastructure, including Kharg Island, from Iran, Trump called off a third night of strikes. He claims progress has been made on a potential peace deal. Of course, he's been saying that for quite some time.

Here at home, the president nominated the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jay Clayton, to be his next full-time director of National Intelligence, seemingly walking away from more of a political fight over his controversial pick of Bill Pulte to serve as acting director of National Intelligence. This is just hours after a short-term extension of the nation's warrantless spy powers on foreigners who contact Americans after that failed in a bipartisan House vote.

CNN's Kaitlan Collins is live for us at the White House. Kaitlan, first, just yesterday, Trump was defending Pulte. Now, Pulte is still going to be the acting director of National Intelligence. What are your sources saying about this decision to announce the nomination of Jay Clayton to be the full-time DNI? Was that a way of trying to soften opposition to Pulte?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, the White House couldn't resist. I mean, they couldn't do anything but face this basic revolt that was coming to them from lawmakers who said that Bill Pulte should not be the next director of National Intelligence, even if it was only going to be on an acting basis, because, obviously, that is something that could stretch on for hundreds of days, potentially.

And they made clear to the White House they wanted at least a name to be out there, a potential permanent director if Bill Pulte is going to take over, which he is still expected to do, I should note, at the end of next week, Jake. And so it's not clear how long he'll be in that position.

Obviously, he's a former housing official, still current housing official in this administration. He's still maintaining those other two jobs while serving as the acting director of National Intelligence. But whether and how long he stays on that job really remains to be seen in terms of how quickly the Senate moves here, Jake. And if there's been any indication from both, not just Democrats, but Republicans on Capitol Hill who do not feel that Bill Pulte should be in that job, they seem to be moving pretty quickly.

And the president was asked about this change earlier today, Jake, and why he is picking Jay Clayton to pick -- to take this job on a permanent basis, and this is what he told reporters.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: He's only there for a little while. He's running it for a short while. We'll get a very talented person, Jay Clayton.

Bill will run it for a short while.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Now it may assuage some concerns of Republicans, Jake, to pick Clayton for this role on a permanent basis. We'll see if he gets confirmed, obviously. But how long Bill Pulte is in that role could also still be crucial, because one thing that we know the president has directed him to do is to downsize the intelligence community.

They believe that the agencies all put together have too many employees in them. That has long been obviously a point of suspicion for the president when it comes to the intelligence community, dating back to his first term in office. And so we'll see how this moves forward from here. I should note, Jake, that John Ratcliffe, the director -- the CIA director, is the person who actually suggested Jay Clayton for this role to the president and was a leading advocate for him inside the administration.

TAPPER: And, Kaitlan, also today Trump called off this third night of strikes on Iran because of this potential deal. But just moments ago, a spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry pushed back saying Tehran has not made any final decision.

[18:05:04]

So, is an agreement close? I mean, it sounds as though President Trump might be a little premature talking about some sort of signing ceremony.

COLLINS: No one really knows, Jake, because obviously we've heard the president say dozens of times now that they are close to getting a deal. He has directed strikes and then called them off. Today it was within the span of five hours where he announced that strikes would happen against Iran. They would have started in the last hour had they gone forward, as they've been starting basically around the 5:00 P.M. Eastern hour every single night, and then five hours later called them off, citing getting close to a deal.

And so I think it still remains to be seen if they are actually close to doing so. He said that he would send the vice president potentially to Europe for a signing ceremony if they get close to that memorandum of an understanding.

And so it's not totally clear yet, Jake. There are signals of optimism from the White House, but obviously skepticism from the mediators here as there's those denials from Tehran saying that they are not close to an agreement, and the supreme leader has not signed off on anything. So, all of that really remains to be seen, and it seems to change on a daily basis, if not by the hour here. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much.

And don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Her guests tonight include Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California. That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern on CNN.

Let's turn to Frank Kendall for analysis. He was the former Secretary of the Air Force during the Biden administration. Thanks for joining us, sir.

So, in the Oval Office, President Trump said it was his understanding that Iran's supreme leader agrees with this deal, but now we have Iran's foreign ministry spokesman telling state media that no agreement has been finalized. What do you make of this all?

FRANK KENDALL, FORMER SECRETARY OF THE U.S. AIR FORCE: Well, Jake, first of all, the president at one time or another over the last 100 plus days of this war has indicated that we were close to a deal of some kind, a total of, I think, 39 times now. So, I think we have to take this with a grain of salt. He did threaten attacks, and he's now called them off. If we are in fact close to a deal, that's a good thing.

But I think it's really important to realize that this isn't a final deal to end this war. This is an extension of the ceasefire, presumably for 60 days or so, while the negotiations continue on the nuclear program in Iran, which is the reason we went into this ostensibly anyway. So, it's certainly a good thing if we do have an agreement. It's certainly a good thing if the strait is opened again. But this isn't over, even if there is an agreement memorandum of understanding, as we've talked about.

TAPPER: Yes. I mean, the Iranians agreeing to not pursue nuclear power or anything that could be weaponized into a nuclear weapon, that's easier --

KENDALL: They've made that claim for years, so that's nothing new.

TAPPER: Yes, easier said than done in terms of putting that in the TBD of this memorandum of understanding.

After the downing of the U.S. Apache helicopter earlier this week, President Trump and Secretary Hegseth both publicly telegraphed the U.S. strikes would happen before they happen. Could that have jeopardized the mission of the U.S.?

KENDALL: Absolutely. And the more specificity there is, the more so. Talking about seizing Kharg Island in particular would put that mission at risk. It would certainly increase the possibility of casualties and give the Iranians a chance to prepare for that. So, it's unheard of to talk about an operation ahead of time for that very specific reason.

Before President Trump called off tonight's strikes, this is what Republican Congressman and retired military officer Air Force General Don Bacon had to say today. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. DON BACON (R-NE): Iran needs to come to us wanting a deal. Right now, we're going to them, and they are abusing the president in these negotiations, if you ask me.

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Do you think they're winning?

BACON: Because they think he wants it more than they do. Right now, they think they can -- they think they have the advantage over President Trump.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Do you agree that Iran has the advantage?

KENDALL: I've been concerned for some time that Iran is overplaying its hand here. They feel that they've got us. They feel that they have an advantage over us because they can keep the straits closed. And we do not have great military options about reopening them. So, they can hold out. I think at some time they're going to provoke a much stronger reaction, in fact, from the president if they don't come to the table and make a deal.

TAPPER: I want to ask you about a story that CNN wrote about not long ago about paranoia and distrust running rampant inside the Pentagon under Pete Hegseth's leadership, or lack thereof. CNN spoke with 15 current and former Pentagon officials and these officials and sources tell CNN the defense secretary is so suspicious that, quote, some troops had to sign nondisclosure agreements to learn about operations, and polygraph tests have become commonplace, unquote. Another official said, quote, everything we did on a daily basis, we were calculating, is this going to keep the boss employed or is this going to get him fired, unquote.

What effect might that have, that tone inside the Pentagon have on decision-making, especially during a time of war?

KENDALL: I have no firsthand evidence about those specific things that you talked about. But I do know from talking to a lot of people that there is a climate of fear that exists now in the Pentagon that is very dysfunctional.

[18:10:01]

People are afraid to tell the secretary the truth. They're afraid of getting fired, and as that note indicated, people are afraid that if they do something, they may get their bosses fired. It's not a healthy environment.

What you want is a place where people are free to come say what they really think. You need to hear that before you make a decision, and then you can expect people to carry out whatever the decision was. But you're not going to get good decisions in an environment like the one that exists in the Pentagon today.

TAPPER: Former Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, thank you so much for your time today. I appreciate it.

Breaking news tonight, a group of Epstein survivors have just come out in an official letter opposing Todd Blanche's nomination to be attorney general. One of those survivors, Liz Stein, joins me live to explain why next.

Plus, she just beat out Spencer Pratt to advance in the race to become Los Angeles' next mayor. Nithya Raman joins me live to share how she would run one of America's largest cities, and her plans to defeat the current mayor, Karen Bass.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Breaking news in our Law and Justice Lead, roughly 20 survivors of dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his sex trafficking and child rape ring are releasing a public letter opposing the nomination of Todd Blanche to be U.S. attorney general. [18:15:02]

The letter strongly condemns Blanche's presence at meetings in which top Trump administration officials reportedly gathered in the White House Situation Room last year in an effort to contain the political fallout of the Epstein files scandal.

On Wednesday, The New York Times' Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan detailed those meetings, which included heated discussions over what, if any, of the files to release, a suggestion from Vice President J.D. Vance to have Tucker Carlson interview Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell in an effort to get her to clear Trump's name. There was even talk of a pardon or clemency for Maxwell.

The survivors write in their letter, in part, quote, these revelations confirm our worst fears about the administration prioritizing political expedience over justice for survivors and truth for the American people. They go on to say, we deserve an attorney general who will use the full power of that office to pursue justice, protect others, and ensure that what happened to us never happens again, unquote.

Joining us now is Liz Stein, one of the Epstein survivors who signed today's letter. Liz, thanks for joining us. And I know this is never easy to talk about any of this. I hope you're doing okay. In this letter, you and your fellow survivors single out Todd Blanche, deputy attorney general at the time the meetings took place. And you write that Blanche, who Trump has nominated to be permanent A.G., quote, Blanche has consistently minimized legitimate concerns about how the files have been handled, including problematic redactions and the exposure of survivors' personal information. Blanche failed to deliver transparency, and he has gravely failed survivors. This is failing upward, plain and simple, unquote.

What is it like to see Todd Blanche move further up in the administration in light of how you feel about how he is, has handled the Epstein files?

LIZ STEIN, EPSTEIN SURVIVOR: Thanks, Jake. To say that this is concerning would be a really gross understatement. You know, if his nomination is confirmed, Todd Blanche would be the head law enforcement agent of our country, and we have seen consistently over the past year his behavior in regards to the Epstein case is just really concerning.

We've heard him say that there's nothing to see here. We've heard him say that there are no investigative leads. When we saw Pam Bondi testify last week in her transcribed interview, she seemed to lay a lot of the responsibility for the release of the Epstein files and the blame on Todd Blanche.

And so it's really concerning to us because at the end of the day, we're victims of a crime, right? And what is the message that we are sending to Americans in this country about how victims of crime should be treated? This is an issue that has been laden with a ton of political emotion, but if we can't count on our government to prosecute crimes, then we're in big trouble.

TAPPER: We're also breaking tonight, CNN, we're revealing and reporting for the first time that there was a meeting between Epstein survivors, including you, and the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, James Comer. It took place earlier this week, Tuesday. You were there. What was the purpose of it? Tell us about it.

STEIN: Well, we have consistently looked to meet with lawmakers just to kind of explain our story and explain what our concerns are, and we were really glad that Mr. Comer was receptive to meeting with us, and it was an extraordinarily positive interaction that we had with him.

I think that to hear from us directly, you know, what the particular concerns were, I think that it opened his eyes in a way that they haven't been opened before. And I think that just, you know, him coming out and saying that there are investigative leads really shows us that this is the beginning of something.

TAPPER: Yes, I know, I've reported in my story with Annie Grayer a few minutes ago that one of the things that was expressed was you, your group wants these interviews to happen under oath and on camera for everyone because some of the things some of these individuals have said has not been true. I also wonder on -- is that true? Tell me about that. And also did you discuss any names of any possible perpetrators in this meeting?

STEIN: So, I will address that part of the question first. Sky Roberts, in that meeting, read aloud some of Virginia Giuffre's deposition from a civil case, in which she names some of the men who perpetrated these crimes against her. This is a document that was released in the Epstein files document release, and it's also a document that can be found online.

And so oftentimes we're asked, well, why aren't you releasing the names? Why aren't you talking about the men? We have. We've done that in the proper legal arenas in cases such like this.

[18:20:00]

And I think that even if you just look at the information that's available publicly, I think that if you even start with those leads, I think that it will be incredibly fruitful in uncovering who was involved in this crime and what their involvement with Epstein looked like.

TAPPER: All right. Liz Stein, thank you so much, as always. Thank you for your courage. I know it's not easy to talk about this stuff. We really appreciate your bravery and your willingness to talk to us.

STEIN: Thanks, Jake.

TAPPER: It's used by couples all over the world to have families, but now surrogacy is facing increasing attack from critics, some compare it to human trafficking. What's behind that effort? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [18:25:00]

TAPPER: In our Health Lead, for many couples, surrogacy offers the only path to having a biological child. But that practice, which has existed for decades, is now facing increasing attacks. A recent United Nations report called for a global ban on surrogacy. And in the U.S., Florida's attorney general has likened the practice to human trafficking and modern-day slavery.

CNN's Eli Honig spoke with the first person ever born from gestational surrogacy about what's at stake for families like hers.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: You are the first ever human being born of this method. What does that mean to you?

JILL BRAND, FIRST PERSON BORN VIA GESTATIONAL SURROGACY: It means some, a lot more now than it did growing up. It crushes at a dinner party.

HONIG (voice over): In 1986, Jill Brand's parents, Sandye and Elliot Rudnitzky, changed reproductive medicine forever. On April 13th of that year, Jill became the first human being ever born through gestational surrogacy.

BRAND: I sometimes think about what my parents went through, and it frankly just feels impossible.

HONIG: In the early 1980s, Sandye and Elliot longed for another child to join their two adopted daughters. They initially turned to in vitro fertilization, still a relatively new technique.

SANDYE RUDNITZKY, JILL BRAND'S MOTHER: Everything was fine, and then at 26.5 weeks, I developed this sharp dagger-like pain in my stomach.

HONIG: Their daughter, Heather, was born prematurely and died just 13 days later.

RUDNITZKY: It was devastating. Not only did we lose her, but also I had a hysterectomy, which meant that I couldn't have any more children.

HONIG: Sandye and her husband, Dr. Elliot Rudnitzky, a practicing cardiologist, refused to give up on their dream of having a biological child.

RUDNITZKY: I'm lying in bed. Elliot is in the bathroom shaving, and he says to me, what if we have your egg, my sperm, and we have an embryo, and we had a surrogate carry the baby? It had never been done before. I never heard of such a thing before.

HONIG: Finding a doctor willing to attempt this novel procedure would prove to be its own challenge.

RUDNITZKY: We got a list of IVF programs in the country, and Elliot started calling down the list. But almost universally, we heard from them, well, you know, we don't think this would work, until we got to the end of the list, Dr. Wulf Utian.

DR. WULF UTIAN, OVERSAW FIRST GESTATIONAL SURROGACY: Out of the blue, I got a telephone call from a cardiologist in New Jersey who said he'd had an idea.

HONIG: Ohio gynecologist Dr. Wulf Utian was intrigued, but first said he had to overcome legal, ethical, and religious obstacles.

UTIAN: When I first went to them with the idea, there was like a shocked silence. I had to take it to the hospital board. They said they had to get legal opinion.

HONIG: Did you consult with other religious leaders?

UTIAN: I consulted with an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, and he said, our religion says be fruitful and multiply, and what you're doing is you're helping an infertile couple have a baby, it's kosher.

HONIG: Even with hospital approval, there were still unanswered legal questions.

You were operating in somewhat of an unknown with respect to the law.

UTIAN: It was totally unknown. It had never been done. So, we had to try and think of every aspect before we went ahead. Ultimately, I got legal sign-off.

HONIG: The pregnancy faced one final medical hurdle.

RUDNITZKY: Dr. Utian, on this trial, was only able to retrieve one egg. What chances do we have at this point? And his answer was simple, it's a beautiful egg. And this is my beautiful egg.

HONIG: Today, hundreds of thousands of families have been built with the help of gestational surrogacy, a legacy that began 40 years ago with Jill.

UTIAN: She was the world's first surrogate baby. She made the cover of Life Magazine.

HONIG: When Jill was born, her birth certificate originally listed the surrogate, not Sandye, as the legal mother. But the Rudnitzkys filed a legal challenge.

RUDNITZKY: The court found in our favor, and I'm listed as mother on the birth certificate.

HONIG: In recent years, surrogacy has faced criticism from some politicians and advocates.

BRAND: That's a couple that really wants a baby. That's a child that is going to be really loved. Why take that away?

HONIG: For Sandye and Jill, their family is evidence of what surrogacy can make possible.

BRAND: My husband and I have three beautiful children.

HONIG: And I understand you paid tribute to a certain medical professional.

BRAND: Yes. My youngest Nuri, Nuri Wulf, named for Wulf Utian. I mean, he's a hero.

UTIAN: Oh, I was absolutely blown away. When she called and told me, I had tears running down my eyes. I mean, I really was touched.

HONIG: Dr. Elliot Rudnitzky, Sandye's husband and Jill's father, passed away in 2024.

BRAND: This is his legacy. I think he's up in heaven just really happy that this story is getting out there.

[18:30:00]

I think he's thrilled.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: And Elie Honig joins me now. And, Elie, you mentioned some of the resistance surrogacy is currently facing. What arguments are critics making?

HONIG (on camera): So, I disagree with these arguments, but the Florida A.G. and people at the U.N. are saying this is an ownership contract. You're paying money for a child. But, of course, the problem with that is they're not buying a child. It's the mother's genetic material, the father's genetic material. They're paying a surrogate to safely carry that baby. That's their baby.

So, I think it's a ridiculous argument, but there is increasing resistance.

TAPPER: Sandye and Elliot overcame a lot of obstacles in their quest to have Jill, who I can't believe is 40 years old. She looks like she's 20. What do you think are the biggest lessons here?

HONIG: The persistence. They were desperate to have a biological child. They overcame medical obstacles, ethical obstacles, religious obstacles, legal obstacles. You know, I said to Jill at one point, I said, no offense, but you didn't really do anything. And she said, No, right, all I did was get born. But the heroes are Jill's mother, who you saw in the piece, her father, who passed away a year ago, and Dr. Utian, who were so brave to pursue this vision they had and to overcome all those obstacles. And now hundreds of thousands of families use this method to have babies. They changed the world.

TAPPER: Yes. I have friends who have kids through surrogacy.

HONIG: For sure.

TAPPER: Those kids are alive and loved. Elie Honig, thanks so much.

HONIG: Thank you.

TAPPER: President Trump once again this afternoon pushing unfounded conspiracies about election fraud in California that there's no evidence exists. CNN's resident fact checker Daniel Dale is here to set the record straight.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:35:00]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, for days, President Trump has claimed, with no evidence, that California's elections were rigged against Republicans during the primaries this year. Yes, it is true, California and other states are notorious for taking a very long time to count their mail-in ballots, but when asked for evidence to support his claim of election fraud, the president didn't provide any, and maybe just doesn't have any because it doesn't exist.

Moreover, here's a question. How does this conspiracy square with the fact that former Fox host and Trump endorsee Steve Hilton was one of the top two vote recipients in the statewide governor's primary?

CNN's fact checker Daniel Dale joins us now. Daniel, how exactly is Trump trying to adjust his own conspiracy theory on election integrity to explain how Steve Hilton is on the ballot for the general election?

DANIEL DALE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: So, Jake, President Trump is a seasoned veteran conspiracy theorist, and like many longtime conspiracy theorists, he doesn't abandon the conspiracy theory when facts emerge to contradict it. What he does is what he's doing here, and that is expand, modify, tweak the conspiracy theory so that it accommodates the new facts that were -- that contradicted the original one.

So, the original one, as he said is that this election in California was rigged against Republicans, it was being rigged against people like Steve Hilton. And then media outlets like CNN projected that Hilton had in fact advanced to the November runoffs. So, the new version of the conspiracy theory is that Trump's public pressure, these claims that it was going to be rigged, was being rigged against Hilton, put so much, quote, heat on the would-be election riggers that these would-be riggers had to abandon their devious plan.

So, listen to what the president said today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: It was a week, and it was heading south, and I started saying it's a rigged election. And then they said it was going to take two weeks, one week, two weeks, and all of a sudden he was approved. You know why? Because the heat was on. They couldn't get away with it. If I didn't do it, I guarantee he wouldn't be the nominee. It's a rigged election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DALE: All of this is total nonsense. Nobody behind the scene has approved Steve Hilton. All that happened is that the vote count continued. The vote count showed that Mr. Hilton had earned enough votes that media outlets could unofficially project that he had advanced to the runoff. That should be the end, but it isn't.

And I just want to note, Jake, this is exactly the same playbook that President Trump used 15 years ago, 2011, with his birther conspiracy lies that President Obama was not actually born in the U.S. President Obama eventually released his long form original Hawaii birth certificate showing he was born in a U.S. state.

So, did President Trump abandon the lie then? No, of course not. Instead, he pivoted to a suggestion that birth certificate was a forgery.

TAPPER: Daniel Dale, thanks so much. Good to see you again.

Joining us now, L.A. Mayoral Candidate and L.A. City Council member Nithya Raman. Earlier this week, she beat out Spencer Pratt and is advancing to the November election against incumbent Democratic Mayor Karen Bass. Council Member, thanks so much for joining us.

We're going to talk more about your candidacy for mayor in a sec but I do want to ask you about President Trump's unfounded claims about election fraud in California. It is true that other states with vote by mail managed to count much more quickly, and it did take a week of vote counting before you were declared the second place winner.

As vice chair of the Rules and Elections Committee, do you agree that more needs to be done to speed up the process?

NITHYA RAMAN (D), LOS ANGELES MAYORAL CANDIDATE: Well, L.A. County handles the votes not L.A. City, but I do agree that the process here does take a long time. However, I have full faith that we run free and fair elections here in California, and I'm grateful to the election workers who are making sure that every vote is counted.

TAPPER: Let's turn to your campaign. On public safety, you told my colleague, Jessica Dean, last month that you no longer believe in defunding the police. That's a reversal from how you campaigned in 2020. Now, you say that you don't want the LAPD to lose more officers.

Your fellow council member, Monica Rodriguez, told the L.A. Times that your comments don't match your voting history, saying, quote, this is a political moment for her to pretend that she's showing up as an advocate when her actions are quite the opposite, unquote.

So, it is true, you voted against increasing pay for police, citing the city's budget deficit. So, theoretically, how can you encourage more officers to join the force if they're starting off with fairly low salaries in a city where housing is prohibitively expensive?

RAMAN: Well, I believe that city workers should be paid well, and I've supported multiple budgets that have provided for maintaining and even expanding our police force.

[18:40:05]

But I have voted against raises for police officers that bankrupted the city then, and that actually left the city worse off in terms of public safety outcomes. We now have 1,500 fewer officers in LAPD, and we're paying half a billion dollars more per year for them. And our fiscal situation, which our mayor led us into, our precarious fiscal situation, has meant that we're investing less in other parts of our public safety response that are leaving our city feeling less safe.

As mayor, I would want to make sure that we were actually hiring 911 call takers so that 911 call times could be shorter. I would want to make sure that we were building out a system of mental health crisis responders that could take call load off of LAPD and ensure that when people called for help, the right person would come when they called, whether it's an armed officer when they needed that response, or whether it's an unarmed crisis responder who could make sure and deescalate situations and provide the support that residents need.

Right now, that is not the system that Angelenos have, and people are feeling poorer public safety outcomes as a result of it.

TAPPER: So, obviously, I don't need to tell you or many residents of Los Angeles, but homelessness is a huge issue in Los Angeles, in California, in general. You also serve as chair of the Housing and Homelessness Committee in the City Council. Your opponent, Mayor Bass, says you haven't done enough to reduce homeless encampments near schools. You have been criticized for not clearing out encampments along the L.A. River, despite getting millions in funding to do so.

People who live near encampments, as you know, do not feel safe. Do you take any responsibility for the lack of progress in these areas? How can you fix it as mayor in a way you haven't been able to do in the city council?

RAMAN: Well, in my district, we've actually had real results on addressing tents and encampments. I've reduced tents and encampments in my district by 54 percent in just three years. I have a proactive system of response in my district that goes out and offers shelter and ensures that people are moving off the street sustainably, making sure that encampments are not just moved across to another sidewalk, but actually moved indoors.

And that has been the key to the success that I've had in my district in reducing tents and encampments, including some that were around schools when I first got elected but that are no longer there because of my office's work.

Unfortunately, across the entire city, Angelenos are simply not seeing the results that this mayor is leading. We may be seeing incremental progress in some places, but homelessness feels out of control in most of Los Angeles. What I want to do as mayor is bring proven results across the entire city, taking the lessons that I've learned that have demonstrated real outcomes in Council District 4 across the entire city, and that is what I promise to do as mayor. Angelenos deserve progress on this issue. They're demanding it, and I will deliver it as mayor.

TAPPER: L.A. City Council Member and Candidate for Mayor Nithya Raman thank you and congratulations on making the runoff.

RAMAN: Thank you so much for having me.

TAPPER: A message mysteriously appeared in the grass of the National Mall today. Last time we saw this same message displayed prominently, the Trump administration pursued an indictment against the guy who took the photograph of the shells that said, 8647. But what's going to happen this time? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:47:12]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: In our politics lead, check out this photo taken today at the National Mall. Numbers appearing as dead grass, it's a "86 47". To translate, 86 means to get rid of. Forty-seven presumably means President Donald Trump, the 47th president.

Some say this is used to signal just political opposition to Trump. The administration paints it as a genuine physical threat.

Remember, these are the same numbers in the photograph of shells that former FBI Director James Comey posted online, which got him indicted twice.

Spokesperson for the Department of the Interior says, quote, "Any threat against the president is taken very seriously by the department and our U.S. Park Police will investigate this incident and hold those responsible accountable."

Let's discuss all of this with Max Rose, former Democratic congressman from New York City, and Mike DuHaime, Republican strategist and CEO of Mad Global Strategic Group, used to be a big Republican operative in New Jersey.

Do you still do that? Are you still --

MIKE DUHAIME, CEO, MAD GLOBAL STRATEGY GROUP: I'd like to be a pundit now.

TAPPER: Pundit?

DUHAIME: Fun to sit back and talk, you know?

TAPPER: So, Max, this has appeared just days before these massive crowds are expected on the South Lawn of the White House for the UFC match on Trump's 80th birthday. I mean, obviously we don't know the motivation of these folks, but, like, I mean, do you consider it a threat?

MAX ROSE (D), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: I can tell you the characteristic of the folks, they're stupid.

TAPPER: Yeah.

ROSE: I mean, this is just not what we need at this moment. At a time where Donald Trump's corruption has never been more evident, his ineffectiveness has never been more evident, his inability to lead overseas as clear as day. And this stupidity is coming out, but what that doesn't do, although it is serious --

TAPPER: Uh-huh.

ROSE: -- is it doesn't ever justify the indictments of James Comey either. That remained equally stupid as well. So I think we all agree collectively, we should move beyond this ridiculousness.

TAPPER: What do you think, Mike?

DUHAIME: I would agree. It's a distraction. It's probably good for President Trump that it distracts from some of the other issues. But obviously, any kind of threat against the president of the United States, whoever it is, should be taken seriously.

And I think with everything that's happened with former FBI Director Comey, folks know how seriously this is going to be taken. It shouldn't be seen as a joke. And I think anybody who does that is stupid and obviously is risking their own personal security as police look into it.

TAPPER: Yeah. Presume -- I mean, presumably, they know that Comey got indicted over. It's not like people are running around saying 86 47 -- .

DUHAIME: Yeah, if you're in Washington, DC.

TAPPER: Yeah, it's not something that's sweeping the nation. It's a very particular phrase.

Max, speaking at the National Mall, at least five states are now bowing out of Trump's Great American State Fair. The states are Washington, Massachusetts, Illinois, North Carolina. They say this largely due to costs. Oregon raised concerns about the partisan nature of the event because a Trump-aligned nonprofit is behind it. There's a difference between America 250 and Freedom 250.

America 250 is the official sanctioned congressional bipartisan group and Freedom 250 is the public-private partnership that seems to some people a little Trumpy, a little MAGA-y.

[18:50:07]

What do you think are those states missing out?

ROSE: I don't think they're missing out but I think the country is missing out right now. You know, and this is something you've touched on throughout your career, how our cultural unity has been a great strength of ours -- TAPPER: Yeah.

ROSE: -- as a nation and we're losing it.

Look, I don't want to blame everything on Donald Trump, but he's certainly playing a part here. How it does not matter what the issue is, it's not a moment for unity for the guy. It could be America 250. It could be a national holiday. He uses it as an opportunity to divide us.

And what we've seen now is it seeps into the pores of everything, even when Donald Trump's not front and center on the issue. This is an example of that. This is MAGA writ large, not Donald Trump. But I certainly think this is the America that Donald Trump is helping to create.

TAPPER: So I think I'm the oldest one here. So I was seven during the bicentennial, our 200th birthday. And again, I was only seven, but I was a pretty precocious kid. I was paying attention to stuff. I knew who the president was and I knew that Jimmy Carter was challenging him and all that and I'll tell you something it was very different.

Even though, you know, this has always been a divided nation in different ways there just wasn't the politicization of everything of every single thing in the world. I can't even wear a Springsteen shirt without people assuming that it's like some sort of political statement.

I just like Springsteen, you know?

DUHAIME: It's a great decision like Springsteen. So I commend you on that.

TAPPER: You're in New Jersey.

DUHAIME: But I would just say like, people should just, like, have fun. Like, we shouldn't let politics deepen everything. And I agree with the congressman that the president uses opportunities to be divisive and seek political gain kind of any chance that he can. But, like, people should just have fun. It's a fair. Go have a Zeppole and relax. Don't be so upset about everything.

Don't let politics interfere with you enjoying life. And that is what people, I think, in states are doing. It's an opportunity for people who are from your state in Washington, D.C. to go to their booth, and nobody's going to be there. I think it's silly.

ROSE: Go have a Zeppole.

TAPPER: We should allow -- we should allow politics to intrude in politics, though, and I do want to raise this up because while the U.S. is at war, Laura Loomer, who is an Islamophobe and a bigot and kind of unhinged, frankly, she posted, after traveling with the secretary of defense to Gitmo and to CENTCOM yesterday, "Thank you, Department of War, for inviting me on this trip. I truly appreciate it." Hegseth traveling with Laura Loomer. What do you think of that?

DUHAIME: I think. I am no fan of Laura Loomer. I know what they're doing. They are trying to create a kind of a new media ecosystem, and they're going out to people who have followings instead of going to traditional media. So I understand that that is -- that is the goal, but Laura Loomer should not be elevated by anybody, I think, in a high level in government like that.

TAPPER: What do you think?

ROSE: Donald Trump did this during his campaign.

TAPPER: He did.

ROSE: He took Laura Loomer, I believe it was actually...

TAPPER: Oh, by the way, we should say she's also a 9-11 truther.

ROSE: Right.

TAPPER: To hit something close to you guys here in New Jersey and New York.

ROSE: Absolutely. And nonetheless, he took her multiple trips. And then, by the way, took her into the Oval Office and received recommendations from her as to who on his national security staff he should fire and then followed through on those recommendations.

So, you know, there's been this thing that's happened with Trump and MAGA for the last decade. When he does something, we're like, oh, well, that's just crazy Donald, right? This is the administration Donald Trump has created. And unlike Trump version one, he has many Trumps now throughout his cabinet.

Hegseth first amongst them. Hegseth went down to Gitmo and said that people should be executed. This guy is desecrating American values every chance he gets. And Laura Loomer being right there, that is just the headline of the story.

TAPPER: And one of the things I can get concerned about this, Mike, and I'm sure you view it the same way, is that it's not just the erosions that Trump is causing. It's what's next? What's going to happen when there's a -- you know, the next president?

It's not as though there aren't Democrats who are -- who are -- they are -- many Democrats are following the Trump playbook. They are now nasty and abusive on social media. And you see -- you hear Democratic politicians, again, Trump played his role, but it doesn't end with him.

DUHAIME: I think they're copying success. They see political success, and they're willing to try to copy and mimic that success.

I think it's difficult. Not many of them are billionaires or on WWE or on "The Apprentice" or have their names on buildings. It's very hard to be the next Trump. He's undeniably charismatic for all of these issues.

TAPPER: Yeah.

DUHAIME: But I think it's going to be very hard to replicate his political success.

TAPPER: Thanks to both of you for being here. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:58:42]

TAPPER: In our pop culture lead, Craig Ferguson is out with yet another episode of "AMERICAN ON PURPOSE". This week, he's digging into one of the most important liberties Americans enjoy, freedom of speech.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: You spoke with the former leader of the ACLU --

CRAIG FERGUSON, HOST, "CRAIG FERGUSON: AMERICAN ON PURPOSE": Yes.

TAPPER: -- about freedom of speech, including for people who have reprehensible views.

FERGUSON: Yeah.

TAPPER: Like Nazis.

FERGUSON: Yeah.

TAPPER: Right?

FERGUSON: She actually defended, when she was head of the ACLU, defended the rights of the Nazis that wanted to march through Skokie, Illinois, which is a, you know, it's a Jewish neighborhood.

NADINE STROSSEN, FORMER ACLU LEADER: Many people say, how can the ACLU defend the Nazis? We never defended the Nazis. We defended the freedom to express ideas that are despised and feared by the majority.

FERGUSON: Well, you know, I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

STROSSEN: I will defend to the death your right to say it.

FERGUSON: She firmly believes that you have to, you have to hear stuff you don't want to hear. This is actually a problem, I think, because freedom of speech may be under attack, but I don't think it's under attack from where people think it's under attack from. It's under attack from the indignation and the inability to hear stuff that you don't want to (EXPLETIVE DELETED) hear.

TAPPER: Yeah.

FERGUSON: That's you restricting freedom of speech on yourself.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: The latest episode of the CNN Original Series, "CRAIG FERGUSON: AMERICAN ON PURPOSE", premieres Saturday at 9:00 p.m. Eastern and the next day on the CNN app. You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, X, and on the TikTok @JakeTapper. You can follow the show on X and Instagram, @TheLeadCNN.

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

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now.