Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

White House Says, Trump's Election Findings Will Shock Listeners; Right Now, Public Viewing for Victim of ICE Shooting; U.S. Launches Sixth Straight Day of Strikes on Iran. Iceberg Lettuce Sold At Taco Bell Linked To Cyclospora Outbreak; Epstein Survivors Meet With Acting A.G. Todd Blanche. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired July 16, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

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

This hour, new details coming in about President Trump's primetime plans addressing the nation on elections after six straight years of lying about elections. What the White House revealed to CNN's Kaitlan Collins about the speech.

Plus, we're hoping to hear from an Epstein survivor just minutes after her meeting at the Justice Department with acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, a meeting that only happened because a key Republican senator threatened to withhold his vote to confirm Blanche for the permanent attorney general if he didn't meet with the survivors.

[18:00:14]

Also, a CNN investigation into the companies that Trump promotes on Truth Social, how often we found mentions just days after he bought stock in those same companies.

And a big moment later this hour, SpaceX testing its Starship mega rocket, its most powerful launch vehicle ever made. The countdown to liftoff happening now.

The Lead tonight, we're just hours away from a primetime presidential speech that the White House says will shock you, but critics fear could be the latest piece of the president's disinformation campaign to undermine faith in elections. CNN reports that President Trump plans to reveal what he says are new findings related to foreign interference in U.S. elections. Sources say top White House officials are now weighing whether to release intelligence files tied to the claims that the president plans to make. State election officials and Democrats watching closely, wary of the president's long history of lying about elections.

Let's bring in CNN's Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, what are we expecting tonight?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jake, obviously we're not getting exact details of what the president plans to say, but generally we do know it's going to be about election security, as the White House frames it. And Karoline Leavitt told reporters today, at her first briefing back in a few weeks, that what the president is going to say tonight will change people's minds about whether or not elections in the United States are secure.

Of course, we know that they are, and we know that they're safe because there have been multiple audits and investigations, many of them centered around the election itself that the president has fixated on the most, and that is the 2020 election that he lost to Joe Biden.

And so we are expecting the president to declassify documents that he plans to talk about in his address tonight related to allegations of foreign meddling. That is something that has also been well investigated, obviously, Jake, not just by Congress, but by Robert Mueller and others, where, yes, they've acknowledged that there were attempts to meddle in U.S. elections by foreign powers and foreign nationals. But, obviously, the question of whether or not that actually changed the outcome of the vote is not something that has happened, according to many of these investigations that were done by Republicans and Democrats alike.

And so, obviously, we'll be hearing from the president in short time on this matter, something that he is especially fixated on, Jake, as we are getting closer and closer to the midterm elections. And so far, polling has not looked favorable for this president.

And so I asked Karoline Leavitt at the briefing earlier today if the president does believe that there has been meddling or fraud in these elections, why hasn't anyone been charged?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Thank you, Karoline.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Sure.

COLLINS: Regarding the president's speech tonight, he's been in office over 540 days now. If what he says is tonight is backed up by evidence, why hasn't anyone been charged?

LEAVITT: Well, he hasn't revealed it yet. He hasn't declassified the documents yet, and you will see what he says tonight, and then we'll move forward appropriately from there.

COLLINS: So, will charges follow tonight from the Justice Department?

LEAVITT: I don't speak on behalf of the Justice Department, Kaitlan, you know that. Rachel?

COLLINS: Karoline, will there be charges?

LEAVITT: You'll have to ask the Justice Department. I don't charge people. I just speak on behalf of the president.

(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: Obviously, Jake, it has been over 500 days, 540-something days since President Trump took office again this time. He has had people leading the Justice Department who have not been shy about going after the people that he wants them to go after. So, presumably, if there was evidence of any kind of systematic widespread fraud that would have affected the outcome of the 2020 election, we would have seen it by now.

But we will have to wait and see what the President says tonight, as obviously Democrats are watching this and criticizing what the president is going to say, saying that he's a sore loser, as Jon Ossoff told you earlier. But even Republicans are watching it with trepidation because they want to be talking about affordability and important issues to voters ahead of these midterm elections in just a couple of months from now.

TAPPER: All right. Kaitlan Collins at the White House, Thank you. And Kaitlan's going to have coverage of the president's speech on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Look for analysis and new reporting. It's all happening tonight at 9:00 Eastern, only here on CNN.

Joining us now, Democratic Senator Mark Warner from Virginia, he's the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Senator, what do you expect the president may say tonight that involves intelligence?

SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): Well, what he may say is anybody's guess. Whether he says anything that's true or new, I am very skeptical. I've been either chair or vice chair of the Intelligence Committee for most of the last decade. You know, a lot of this focus on foreign interference started when Russia interfered in 2016 on behalf of Donald Trump.

And this is the irony, to Trump's actual credit and the first administration's credit, they set up a series of efforts at the Director of National Intelligence, at the FBI, at the NSA.

[18:05:00]

They had their whole cybersecurity agency working with state election officials to make sure that 2020 was safe. And the head of the cybersecurity agency said it was the safest election in American history.

Now, that cost him his job. Trump fired him for telling the truth. And what is going to be particularly, I think, challenging, the president's current head of the CIA is John Ratcliffe. At the end of president's term in 2020 and early 2021, John Ratcliffe was the director of National Intelligence. After the 2020 election, there was a thorough examination of all kinds of activities of foreign actors.

John Ratcliffe, as director of National Intelligence, said, well, there were attempts to influence. And what does that mean? Using social media to try to promote positions, and they said the Russians were doing it on behalf of Trump, the Iranians were doing it against Trump, and that the Chinese had the capacity and they may have done some but they were less about a particular candidate and more just trying to undermine credibility. They said that had no effect or no meaningful effect.

On election interference, where you try to break in and either try to get into a voting system or actually change results, they said, no activities like this were successful. And we had a 2020 election validated by the Trump officials as safe, 2022 validated, 2024 validated.

And then, ironically, Jake, in the first, I guess, whatever 500 days you just said that he's been in power again, he has systemically started to dismantle all of this election security apparatus at the director of National Intelligence office, at the FBI, at CISA, as he's cut that agency by half. He even took something called the Election Assistance Commission, which helps work with state and local elections, and basically fired all the top people, fired the Democrats and made the Republican basically quit.

So, I wonder where he's headed, but if viewers tonight hear some extraordinary claim, you know, take a deep breath. These got to be fact-checked.

TAPPER: Yes.

WARNER: We've seen repeatedly this president has no unwillingness to veer away from the truth or just fabricate things outright.

TAPPER: Well, we know that there are all these unusual moves that the president is making that could impact the 2026 or 2028 elections. You have this guy, Bill Pulte, who's acting director of National Intelligence. His only qualification seems to be loyalty to Trump and the willingness to weaponize access to mortgages that he had when he was head of the Federal Housing Authority, or he -- I guess he still is head of that as well.

Then of course, you have this guy Kyle -- or Kurt rather, Kurt Olsen, an election denier who was fined by a judge. He's running around doing stuff. He signed the warrant for the raid on the Atlanta election equipment. You had the raid on the Puerto Rican election equipment. Both of those are Dominion. In Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan's book, there's this anecdote relayed by Tucker Carlson that Nicolas Maduro offered to tell Trump that the Venezuelans hacked the election. Where do you see all of this headed?

WARNER: You know, time will tell. I think Trump realizes if we have a free and fair election this year, he's going to get whooped. His policies, from the war of choice in Iran to skyrocketing prices, to how America -- you see international polling showing China's more respected than America today. These are all dragging him down politically and his Republican allies. And I think he may be so desperate that he's willing to pull whatever kind of rabbit out of a hat, and it's going to be important for the intelligence community to hold its ground.

And we have seen in this past year as well, when intelligence officials have told the truth, they've been fired. For example, General Cruz, who was the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, after we bombed the Iranians the first time, and he said, yes, we -- he said, Cruz said, we were pretty successful, bombed the heck out of them, but we didn't obliterate their enriched uranium. Obviously not, because we're still trying to go after it, he got fired for saying that.

So, I'm terribly -- and I've been talking about this for the last nine months, and now we're starting to see it play out, that he's trying to get rid of the ability to speak truth to power, the independence of the intelligence community. Lord knows what he's going to say tonight. And if he revamps this tinfoil theory of Venezuela combined with Italy and satellites breaking into voting machines, remember, Fox echoed those false claims a number of years back, and they got sued for libel and paid what, $700, $800 billion -- million dollars?

TAPPER: $787.5 billion.

WARNER: Yes. So, it's just --

TAPPER: Million, rather. Million, yes.

WARNER: Right, a lot of money and a clearly overwhelming verdict. But again, this, we know that Donald Trump is desperate, and when he's desperate, he'll do almost anything.

[18:10:01]

And that's why we're going to need fact-checkers tonight. We're going to need -- if you guys carry it, you need to carry it with hopefully real-time fact-checking, and experts that can come in and debunk some of the charges that will be made.

And, again, I come back to one of the most important points, the election analysis done under Donald Trump about the 2020 election was briefed to Donald Trump on January 7th, 2021, a few days before he left, said there was no major interference, no interference at all, and no major effects of the influence campaigns that take place every election cycle.

TAPPER: Just a quick --

WARNER : So, nothing there.

TAPPER: Just on the matter of fact-checking, just a tiny fact-check of you, the $787.5 million, that was not a verdict, that was a settlement. Fox worried it was going to be -- that if there actually was a verdict it was going to be much, much worse than $787.5.

WARNER: Jake, fair point.

TAPPER: Okay.

WARNER: It was even more egregious. It was even more egregious than --

TAPPER: Yes. You just used the word verdict. I just wanted to make sure. It was a settlement, not a verdict.

WARNER: Amen. You got it. You got it.

TAPPER: Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, thank you so much.

Coming up, a story we've been following closely here on The Lead. The strike on a school in Iran on the very first day of the war, was it indeed an American Tomahawk missile responsible for that strike? Today, we have brand-new details into why a U.S. investigation has been so slow to answer that question.

And breaking news, the lettuce supplier that may likely be the source of cyclospora, the outbreak that is causing explosive diarrhea, the reporting just coming in, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

TAPPER: In our National Lead right now in Houston, people are filing into the public viewing for Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, the Mexican man shot and killed by an ICE agent last week under highly questionable circumstances. And now we are learning some new details about the case. Yesterday, we reported on a newly filed search warrant that alleged that an FBI agent found drugs in Salgado Araujo's van. Today, the family's attorney said that they were actually believed to be just bags of salt.

TAPPER: CNN's Carolina Peguero is live in Houston outside the viewing. And, Carolina, it's pretty unusual for a warrant to be publicly available during an active and high-profile investigation like this.

CAROLINA PEGUERO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake. That's according to the D.A. here at the Harris County, which has now caused more reactions from the community and from state and local authorities. But I want to show you the live images here. We're just moments from the public viewing to begin, where hundreds are expected to attend to pay their respects to Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, the 52-year-old Mexican father who was shot and killed by an ICE agent in Houston last week.

As the separate investigations are underway, the FBI alleged, like you said, an illegal substance found in Salgado Araujo's vehicle. But the D.A., the community leaders completely disagree.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CARLOS ESPINOSA, DIRECTOR, FIEL HOUSTON: It's really unfathomable that the FBI would release this and try to plant the seed of doubt in the character of Mr. Lorenzo Salgado Araujo and everybody that was with him, trying to excuse the actions that they made.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEGUERO: And the family lawyers are saying that the bags that were found were of salt and lemon mixed with water as a homemade electrolyte that are used by outdoor workers in this Texas extreme heat. But I want to read the statement of Ruby Powers, the family's lawyer for Victor Salgado. A search warrant does not equate guilt. An unidentified substance is not confirmed narcotic. And you cannot shoot first and ask questions later.

Now, the viewing is expected to begin here at 6:00 P.M. local time, and the family of Lorenzo Salgado came from Mexico. They were given humanitarian visas, and also is expected Victor Salgado, his brother, to attend. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. CNN's Carolina Peguero, thank you so much.

In our World Lead, another fresh wave of U.S. strikes on Iran today, marking the sixth straight day of active warfare as questions mount about what one of the deadliest U.S. airstrikes against civilians in recent memory, the February 28th school in Iran, the strike on which killed 168 children, according to Iran's count.

Listen to CNN's Karoline Leavitt when asked about why President Trump consistently says the U.S. was not behind the airstrike.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I think the president feels that way because he knows that our military always acts in good faith and absolutely never targets civilians or children, unlike the other side of this conflict, Iran, who is well-known for killing women and children and innocent people in their country for a very long time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: It's the White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt who says that the president feels that way because of such and such.

This isn't about feelings, though. This is about facts. And CNN's Zach Cohen is here with exclusive new reporting on the investigation into these facts. Zach, thanks for sharing this first on The Lead.

So, you found a key part of the standard intelligence review of this horrific incident hasn't happened yet, which is unusual so long after the event.

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: It is, Jake. After nearly every military strike of consequence, I'm told that analysts immediately start working on what's known as a battle damage assessment. Now, this involves a holistic look by intelligence analysts at the satellite imagery and all the relevant intelligence sources to determine what happened and also what was the impact of that strike on the broader mission that's at hand at a given moment.

Now, as of earlier this month, I'm told that that battle damage assessment had not started in the case of this strike, this February 28th strike that hit that elementary school in Iran which killed over 150 children. So, obviously, the question is why is that the case? This is a standard review. It's something that is meant to be a fact- finding mission, and it's one that isn't geared toward finding out who was responsible or at fault per se, but it's done to really understand the broader picture of a military strike.

So, look, one of the sources said that the result of this was that there was no detailed analysis conducted of this strike, that the DIA, which typically is involved in this process, was never brought in or asked to do this broader review.

[18:20:00]

And the source that I was speaking to said, quote, the Pentagon was in damage control at that moment after the strike happened, and effectively locked down the investigation at that moment.

You may remember in March, the Pentagon did announce that independent investigation into this strike, that investigation that we have still not seen the findings from.

TAPPER: Four and a half months later, which is highly unusual.

COHEN: Highly unusual, especially because I'm also told that military officials knew within days not only what happened, but where the mistake was made, and there was consensus among all the people we've talked to that the U.S. was ultimately responsible for what appears to be a horrific accident.

Really, the only person who has not acknowledged that as really the consensus view is the president of the United States. And, again --

TAPPER: Well, and Secretary Hegseth.

COHEN: And Secretary Hegseth, who has vowed to thoroughly investigate this matter. And I'm told that that is happening, was a byproduct of this independent investigation. But, again, the effort to close off this investigation was prompted by, just a year ago, a battle damage assessment is what ultimately determined that Iran's nuclear program had not been obliterated. And you remember the president's reaction once that news became public. There are feelings within the Pentagon and the intelligence community that's a motive here for not conducting a battle damage assessment.

TAPPER: It's shocking. And as you reported a, a week or so ago, the belief inside the Pentagon is that intelligence targets had not been kept up to speed, and they had not been updated, and there was such a rush to bomb, and Hegseth had not done or ordered the, the proper preparations be done. So, this is on him.

COHEN: And no thorough review of that intelligence as far as the DIA is concerned.

TAPPER: Yes. And he can hide this and try to cover this up as long as he wants, and we're going to keep covering it.

Zachary Cohen, thanks so much. Ahead, the work from a forensics reporter out today that may reveal the likely cause of the peeling at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

TAPPER: In our National Lead, new analysis from the Washington Post is undercutting President Trump's claim that vandals cut up the Lincoln Memorial's Reflecting Pool, leading to all that peeling. According to the Post, those who did the renovating made major mistakes when applying the newly painted lining.

Jarrett Ley, visual forensics reporter for The Washington Post, joins us now. Jarrett, thanks for joining us.

So, we're showing this map from the Post reporting, if we could put that up, guys. Explain how you and your team discovered that the way this painting was coated is likely what caused the peeling.

JARRETT LEY, VISUAL FORENSICS REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: Hi, Jake. Thank you so much. Yes. So, we surveyed the pool in the end of June, and we located the seven moments of coating failure that you see highlighted here. We then compared that with satellite imagery, as well as photos and videos that were taken during the construction process. This helped us identify that all seven of these locations take place along seams that are forged during the meeting of two rectangular coating sections that are put down one after the other.

We brought this information to four experts in waterproof coating, who told us that while no precise diagnosis can be made without being on site or with lab testing, that it is strongly indicative of an application failure made during the construction process.

TAPPER: Could this have been avoided?

LEY: All the experts that we spoke to gave varying recommendations as to different methodologies. The key in putting down coating at a scale such as this, something that was made clear to my colleagues and I at the Post, was that this is a very large project, and it's a major challenge whenever you're putting down multiple sections of coating with very sensitive curing and drying times at the same time.

TAPPER: How did the White House take the Post's findings?

LEY: They continued to stand by the fact that this was an action, or rather that this was a failure caused by vandals.

TAPPER: Okay. Jarrett Ley, thanks so much. I appreciate it.

LEY: Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: Coming up next, a CNN investigation into the companies that President Trump promotes on Truth Social, how often we found out that mentions came days after he bought stock in those companies. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

TAPPER: In our Money Lead, how much is President Trump using his office to line his wallet? Well, a CNN investigation found President Trump promoted more than 20 companies on Truth Social just days after buying their stocks. This includes Boeing, and Apple, and Tesla, and American Eagle Outfitters. Trump continues to insist he's unaware of what stocks are being bought on his behalf.

CNN's Tom Foreman breaks down some examples that the White House insists are not conflicts of interest.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My jeans are blue.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Three social media posts by President Trump about a clothing company, Sydney Sweeney, a registered Republican, has the hottest ad out there, about a computer chip giant building new A.I. assets, all necessary permits will be expedited and quickly delivered, and about a plane with components from several large defense contractors, the greatest and most beautiful fighter jet ever made. Pure boosterism? Maybe.

But revelations from a new CNN investigation have watchdog groups barking because each of those positive posts came just days after some of Trump's own money was invested in those firms, raising eyebrows over his role regulating American business.

GARY KALMAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL U.S.: Is he negotiating on what's best for the American people, or is he negotiating what's best for him and his family?

FOREMAN: CNN found the president promoted more than 20 companies through Truth Social posts soon after he became invested in them. He got stock in G.E. Aerospace, Eli Lilly, and Apple, and shared good words for them. He's racked up numerous investments in Tesla, some just days before he appeared with CEO Elon Musk admiring the electric cars at the White House.

Does any of this prove the billionaire president is promoting his own investments, or that any of these businesses did anything wrong? No. But worry over possible conflicts of interest remains.

DAN GREENBERG, SENIOR LEGAL FELLOW, CATO INSTITUTE: Nobody really knows exactly why President Trump's stock holdings have tripled or quadrupled in the last year, but there are inferences that you can draw that are not very pretty.

FOREMAN: The White House says there are no conflicts of interest. The Trump Organization says, neither President Trump, his family, nor the Trump Organization plays any role in selecting, directing, or approving specific investments, which are handled by outside firms which give no advance notice of trading activity. So, it's not clear whether Trump was aware of any of his purchases when he was posting about the companies.

But every other president for 50 years has sold assets, put stocks into blind trusts, switched to widely diversified mutual funds where they can't know what investments they hold.

[18:35:08]

It's not the law but it has been the norm.

DYLAN HEDTIER-GAUDETTE, PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT: We expected a president to go to great lengths to try to avoid even the appearance of any kind of impropriety or any conflicts of interest.

FOREMAN: To be clear, more than 21,000 transactions were made in Trump's name in 2025 alone. He did not remark on all of them. He's always held big stakes in business, and sometimes he posts negative comments. He invested in the cable company Comcast, then ripped its news channels, calling it Concast.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOREMAN (on camera): Still, however much that might muddy the water, these critics say this much is clear, the president is apparently straddling a very thin line between his politics and his pocket. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Tom Foreman, thanks so much.

Joining us now to discuss, Democratic Senator Adam Schiff of California.

So, Senator, I have not seen any action in Congress to move forward with a bill that would ban both Congressional and presidential stock trading since last year when President Trump lashed out at Senator Josh Hawley for supporting that bill. Is that legislation completely dead?

SEN. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): It's not completely dead, but -- and I think it has at least some measure of bipartisan support, much more overwhelming on the Democratic side, but Republicans even that are in agreement with us that we should ban this practice, they hate crossing the president. And the president having singled out one of them, that's a strong deterrent to actually putting in the hard work to get it done, and obviously this isn't going to move in either house unless Republican leadership is willing to move it.

TAPPER: So, there's a lot of social media networks that sell traders access to an early data feed. But Truth Social is special because the president has a stake in it and that's where he posts. And we learned today that Truth Social will sell Wall Street firms quicker access to posts from President Trump, and his posts move markets. He posts something and, you know, negative about Company X, it affects Company X, and now they're offering Wall Street quicker access to see these posts.

SCHIFF: Yes. I think these two stories are very closely interlinked. In the first one, what people I think need to recognize, this is not a blind trust that the president has. So, when the White House says he has no advance notice of what his manager, portfolio manager is buying, that may or may not be true, but he finds out about it once they buy it. And when he later that week posts something favorable about that company, he knows that money, that extra value, goes into his pocket.

And now this added story about how you can pay a premium to get an, you know, first access to his social media posts that move markets, if you'll give him a cut, that's basically what it is, he gets part of the profits of Truth Social. This is the president saying, give me a cut and I'll give you the opportunity to make money off my statements, just as I make money off my own statements.

TAPPER: Let's turn to the president's address this evening. The White House says that the president's going to talk about the security of U.S. elections. He has actually -- because it's hard to argue that the 2024 elections were fixed given the fact that Republicans control the House and the Senate and the White House. So, if you guys are fixing elections, you're not doing a very good job, I have to say. But he has singled out Spencer Pratt losing the mayor's race in Los Angeles. What's your take on that?

SCHIFF: Well, he's made a bunch of absurd claims about California elections always. He's done this going back several years now, made false claims of massive fraud, of millions of undocumented people voting, all nonsense. In this election, he has blamed manipulation somehow for Spencer Pratt's loss. Spencer Pratt lost because he was completely out of step with voters in Los Angeles. The more MAGA he became, the more votes he lost. He also, the president, is taking credit for Steve Hilton making it into the runoff, basically claiming that --

TAPPER: For the governor's race, yes.

SCHIFF: For the governor's race, claiming that because he pointed out that Hilton was falling behind, that somehow California changed the outcome to placate him or appease him or I don't know what, another crazy conspiracy theory without a single grain of truth to it.

TAPPER: Today, the military said it launched yet another wave of strikes on Iran, a war that we were told would last just a few weeks, launched in February. Last Friday, Trump formally notified Congress military action against Iran has resumed. You're planning to introduce another war powers resolution, which would force Republicans to vote one way or the other on it. A lot of them already walked back their initial rebuke of President Trump.

[18:40:02]

You know, either they voted that way or said they would, and didn't. Senator Cassidy comes to mind. What makes you think that they might defy Trump for this new war powers resolution?

SCHIFF: Well, there have been a couple instances where Republicans have voted with us on war powers resolutions, and then when pressured, have backed off. They've generally given some explanation for why they backed off. In that case, it was to -- at least according to one of the senators, it was to give the president leverage in the talks around the ceasefire.

Well, the ceasefire is over. It never really took hold. But now that we're back in a full military exchange with Iran, now that the president is contemplating even potentially putting troops on the ground, I would expect we will get more support. Some of the people who voted with us before will vote with us again, and we might get new people voting with us.

As this war has gone on and on and on, the support for these resolutions has only increased. And it increasingly looks like we're in a quagmire now, where the president doesn't know what he's doing, doesn't know what to do, announces we're going to charge tolls in the strait, something he said was illegal, and then 24 hours later says we're not going to charge tolls in the strait.

So, I think the incompetent handling of the war, the risk that the war may escalate again, and the fear, frankly, a lot of Republicans have that he is killing their chances in the midterms, may motivate Republicans to vote with us.

TAPPER: It's the oldest story in Washington. Wars are very easy to get into and very tough to get out of.

Senator Adam Schiff, Democrat of California, good to see you again, sir. Thank you.

SCHIFF: Good to see you.

TAPPER: Some breaking news, what a source is telling CNN about the lettuce supplier that has now been linked to that massive outbreak of cyclospora. This supplier also has ties to a major fast food chain. Many of you are likely getting the push alerts on your phones right now. We're going to have the reporting here on The Lead next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:45:38]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Breaking news in our health latest, a source familiar with the investigation into the outbreak of Cyclospora, an explosive diarrhea-causing parasite, says that Taco Bell lettuce has been linked to the illness.

CNN's Jacqueline Howard is with us now.

Jacqueline, there's also another popular lettuce brand that people should probably avoid.

JACQUELINE HOWARD, CNN HEALTH REPORTER: That's right, Jake. We are hearing that shredded lettuce supplied by Taylor Farms and like you said, sold at some Taco Bell restaurants has been linked to this outbreak. Now the outbreak is centered in the Midwest, so it is a regional outbreak and some of the Taco Bell locations that reportedly may have had this lettuce are located in Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky. That's what we know so far.

And across the country separately, Jake, we that several states have reported increases in cyclosporiasis illnesses. So, this is something that health officials are keeping a close eye on both regionally, like I said, and nationally, Jake. Nationally, we know that nearly 7,000 cases have been reported among them in the state of Michigan alone. Michigan has reported more than 4,000 cases.

So this is an ongoing situation and, Jake, the reason why it has taken some time for health officials to really identify the source of this outbreak. It's because with cyclosporiasis with this illness, it can take anywhere from two days to two weeks for people to develop symptoms. So that's why it's been kind of difficult to really pinpoint. OK, what has been the source of some of these illnesses?

And right now, Jake, it signs are all pointing to shredded lettuce. Like you said, some have been sold at Taco Bell, Jake.

TAPPER: Jacqueline Howard, thanks so much.

We have some more breaking news ahead, the family of an Epstein victim, just left a meeting with the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, who was trying to get the job permanently. So, what was said in that meeting?

Well, they're going to be here in studio next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:51:50]

TAPPER: So, we have some breaking news for you in our law and justice lead. Some survivors and family members of dead pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and their families, as I mentioned, just got out of a meeting with the Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who's been nominated to be attorney general permanently. This meeting only came after Republican Senator Tom Tillis threatened to vote no if Blanche didn't meet with these survivors ASAP.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): Mr. Blanche said very quickly yesterday that he would meet with the victims, the Epstein victims, today, if it could be arranged. I expect that meeting to occur before I'm willing to vote out of this committee. And I'm trying to get to yes, but this is a very important part of getting to yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: With me now, Skye Roberts and his wife, Amanda Roberts. Sky's sister, Virginia Giuffre, was an Epstein survivor, one of the most vocal advocates for victims of sexual assault. She died by suicide last year.

So, you guys just got out of the meeting. How was it? AMANDA ROBERTS, SISTER-IN-LAW OF VIRGINA GIUFFRE: I think it was everything we expected -- expected it to be. It was everything that, you know, unfortunately, Todd Blanche has been doing to us for the past nine months.

There were no real admissions. There were no real commitments being made. There was a lot of diversions when, you know, we asked about specific comments about, like you mentioned, there weren't investigative leads and a lot of it was like, I didn't really say that. That's not what I meant.

And so, a lot of it was just -- there was no really getting to the bottom of it and us really trying to give him the meat to the story. There was just a lot of circles, and it felt very deflating.

TAPPER: So, Sky, Dani Bensky, who testified today, who's been on the show, she's an Epstein survivor as well. She said the meeting was just lip service. Is that how you view it?

SKY ROBERTS, BROTHER OF VIRGINIA GIUFFRE: Yeah, I mean, here's the thing. I want to be honest with you. We were really trying to work with Todd Blanche in this scenario. Like, I want to be very clear to anybody that's watching this, like, our intentions were very pure. I wanted to go in there and get substance from him.

I wanted, you know, I asked him at one point, I said, Mr. Blanche, respectfully, like, what is it going to take to get investigative leads? Like, subscribe that to me. And he said, well, I need testimony and I need evidence. I said, well, let me give you an example. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, Virginia, provided testimony and she provided evidence. Is that not an investigative lead?

He said, well, he won't cooperate with me. And he also said that Virginia's not here, so I can't use that testimony. And so, it just felt like he wasn't willing to work with us.

But I want to be clear that, like, I'm still willing to work with the Department of Justice to get some sort of exactly what it's called, justice.

TAPPER: Blanche says the meeting was not all cordial. That's his characterization. Was it uncordial?

A. ROBERTS: I don't know if he meant that from our end. Obviously, and rightfully so, I think we walked in very, very dissatisfied with him and we made it very clear that we do oppose his nomination.

I think it was his staff's job and his -- and his job to make us feel welcome, to make us feel like they were there to provide answers. We've been asking for this in meeting.

[18:55:01]

And it felt like he only had it because his hand was forced.

TAPPER: So, one of the things that's been so perplexing about this as a journalist is these are victims of crimes. And sometimes these crimes of sexual trafficking and rape were committed not just on young women, but on girls, young girls, 13, 14-year-old girls. And I have been looking for just some basic compassion and empathy or sympathy to be expressed.

We did not see it when Pam Bondi testified, and she wouldn't look at you guys in the audience. And then when asked about the suffering, she started talking about tax cuts or something. And I just -- so I understand, I guess, that if you work for the Trump administration, that it's-- you're not supposed to publicly express sympathy or compassion for these victims for whatever reason that we can all suspect.

But privately, privately, was -- did you get any sense of Todd Blanche, the dad who has a daughter? Was that person in the room? Anybody just like, I'm so sorry what you went through? Anything like that?

S. ROBERTS: It was not a sense of compassion, unfortunately. I don't -- I think there was a lot of deny, deny, deny until the formalities of what this was supposed to be. Senator Tillis kind of put him in a position today to have to meet with survivors. Same scenario as when we had to get the Epstein Files Transparency Act passed.

When it comes to compassion, I didn't feel that from him. He did whisper in my ear. He's had some personal family stuff happen in his life, and I think he tried to express that with me, but in that scenario, in specific, I don't think it came across genuine in the sense where I don't feel like he's moving forward from that meeting with anything different than when we started.

TAPPER: He whispered in your ear that people in his family had been victims of assault or something?

S. ROBERTS: Specifically. and I just want to be respectful of his own family, but I believe one of his family members had passed, specifically his sister, which I'm sure is public knowledge there, and that he can acknowledge that as a brother, as somebody who's a family member, that that's difficult.

TAPPER: Yes.

S. ROBERTS: So, I'm sure like in some way he was trying to show some compassion there. And I want to work with this department, but the reality is that what they showed us today is that unless there's a future meeting that's going to take place, I didn't leave that meeting feeling, and I don't think anybody did, feeling like we walked away with anything more than what we went in there with.

TAPPER: So when you guys met with the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, James Comer, privately, he met with survivors and he met with you too, and you provided him with leads, and you provided him with testimony, and you provided with him, and you named three people, two of whom are still alive, and, Comer, you told me, seemed compassionate and serious about investigating them.

Did those two leads come up at the meeting with Blanche?

A. ROBERTS: I actually specifically asked about that. And I think they got caught up on verbiage. We didn't get a referral.

I think you're talking about a letter. And I said, OK, so did you receive the letter from Comer with the two suggestions of gentlemen that you should investigate? And then they -- they just wouldn't even answer that. It just completely diverted.

And so, for him to say that there aren't any individuals, I specifically said, we had a very productive meeting with Comer. He did show compassion, he did listen, and then after that, he had action.

And so, at the end of the day, there's this just so much denial. We were so disheartened. We were so disappointed walking out of there.

And we expect more from someone who wants to be the attorney general. We did not walk out there feeling any more confident that we would have him as the attorney general.

TAPPER: So, for Senator Tom Tillis, who, if it weren't for him, I think you would agree this meeting would never have happened, right? You agree. What would you want him to know about the meeting?

Because he seemed to think -- and look, I don't belittle what he said. He said, basically, I'm going to vote no unless you meet with these survivors. And Blanche did it. But what would you want Tillis to know about the meeting?

S. ROBERTS: Thom Tillis is a businessman. He said it very clearly himself. I'm not a politician. When it comes to your word, it's your word.

Did he fulfill his word today? Yes, his hand was forced. He forced his hand. And thank you for that. We appreciate it.

What I think -- what Senator Tillis would have wanted from that was more substance, that something was going to come out of it, that the Department of Justice left the survivors with a feeling that moving forward, we were actually going to see an investigation taking place, or at least in some capacity, understand what the next steps are going to look like.

I can tell you wholeheartedly, Jake, that we didn't leave that meeting feeling that way. And so, if I'm Senator Tillis, I'm requesting that you meet with survivors again and that you provide a full report back to the Senate Judiciary Committee. to understand what the DOJ is going to do moving forward to actually partner with survivors to go after some of these perpetrators. If that's the goal, we got to do it.

TAPPER: Sky and Amanda, every time you're here, every time you advocate so meaningfully and so compassionately and so reasonably and so measuredly, every time you do it, is such an act of love for your sister. Every time you do it, and I know wherever she is, she's hugging you and loving you right now.

Thank you so much.

S. ROBERTS: Thank you, Jake.

TAPPER: "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.