Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Is Interviewed About USPS Whistleblower: New Ballot System Could Fail, Hamper Midterms; Jury Deadlocked After Day Four Of Deliberations In Clancy Trial; U.S. Launches New Strikes In Iran Along Strait Of Hormuz; Speaker Johnson: "Not Qualified" To Address Army Secy Resignation; Some Republicans Say They Won't Be At Trump's Midterm Convention; 4,400 Plus Still Missing, 1,000 Plus Dead Nearly A Week After Flood. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired September 01, 2026 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right, thanks very much my panel. Really appreciate all of you being here today. Thanks to all of you at home for joining us as well. Don't forget you can now stream The Arena live. Catch up whenever you want to in the CNN app.

Scan that QR code below on your screen. You can also catch up by listening to The Arena's podcast. Follow us on X and Instagram. We're at thearenacnn. But don't go anywhere "The Lead" anchored by Phil Mattingly starts right now.

[17:00:34]

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: A whistleblower has quite the warning about mail-in voting. The Lead starts right now.

Almost two months out from the midterms, a brand new whistleblower report calling out the Trump administration and a seemingly rushed plan to change the rules on mail-in voting. Is it intended to create chaos as a U.S. Senator alleges? Will break down all the new claims.

Plus, courtroom shocker. The jury deadlock in the trial of Lindsay Clancy, the Massachusetts mother accused of deliberately killing her three young children. The judge's order as deliberations push into a fifth day.

And a brand new round of strikes on Iran, President Trump warns the biggest attack is waiting in the wings. Ahead, the implications at home as oil prices surge as a result.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Phil Mattingly in for Jake Tapper. We start in our Politics Lead. Just 63 days out from the November midterms, a whistleblower is raising alarms about election integrity, specifically mail-in ballots, alleging some agency officials have called a new internal process at the U.S. Postal Service a, quote, "shit show." Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut released this report today.

He called the whistleblower brave for disclosing a, quote, "seemingly illegal plot to undermine November's midterms."

Now the unnamed whistleblower alleges some planned USPS procedures under mandates from President Donald Trump have been hidden from the public. Right now, multiple courts are considering whether Trump's plan is even legal. It would require states to submit lists of their mail-in voters to the postal service. The concerns about the untested nature of the system are serious. The report says when election officials bring ballots to their USPS site for delivery, either the entire batch of ballot envelopes or a sampling will be physically scanned.

If just a single ballot envelope scan does not align with the information in the portal, the USPS will refuse to deliver the entire batch of ballots while the discrepancy is sorted.

Now to underscore the urgency of the alarm here, North Carolina begins sending out its mail-in ballots on Friday. Other states start later this month. The report says USPS leadership has been speeding ahead with the plan, discarding all best practices to get ready for implementation today. It's not clear if the portal is ready to be launched. CNN reached out to the postal service for comment. The whistleblower says postal service IT teams would be given less than a week to test the system once it is finished, saying, quote, "For a system that manages something as important as handling voting and ballots, four days of user testing is entirely unreasonable."

At the same time, CNN has new exclusive reporting on Trump's Department of Homeland Security planning a surge in its efforts to investigate voter fraud in select states starting today. Offices are expected to take investigative action in nine states, including California, Connecticut, Georgia, Missouri, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, Washington and Wisconsin. DHS has pushed states to share their voter rolls for audit and has vowed to withhold grant funding from states that refuse to adopt broader election reforms.

Now, despite all of these election movements by the government, experts say there is no evidence that widespread voter fraud has occurred in recent elections.

Joining me now, Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman of Indiana.

Congressman, really appreciate your time. Glad to see you guys back in the House and voting today. Just to start, your reaction to what we learned today from this whistleblower report alleging the postal service is speeding through a process potentially at the expense of Americans who vote by mail.

REP. MARLIN STUTZMAN (R-IN), FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE: Phil, great to be with you. You know, obviously we want to always be sure that the elections are managed carefully, that there's transparency, that there's accountability. And I think that's the piece that we're finding here. This is new. This is a new part of the process that obviously we want to -- I think is important.

We want to make sure that the voter rolls match up with those ballots that are coming in through the U.S. Postal Service. And there has to be accountability there. I'm sure there's going to be concerns. But you know what, both sides, that's why Republicans and Democrats need to work together walking through this next election to be sure that every election or every vote that is supposed to be counted is counted and votes that aren't to be counted should not be. Just like in the four states, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California and Nevada, 250,000 names were on the voter rolls that should not have been. So that's why we have to work together as both parties to be sure that the elections are honest and transparent.

[17:05:02]

MATTINGLY: You mentioned the 250,000 names, behind the scenes, DHS officials said that Nevada number was off dramatically. I believe they confirmed only 600 of the names that were on Nevada's list. Why should people believe the veracity of data that doesn't actually have a methodology presented in companion with it? And DHS officials are telling state officials behind the scenes they don't actually have confirmation of those top line numbers.

STUTZMAN: Well, there should be follow up. I -- you know, you have three Democrat governors in three of those states and you have a Republican in the other one. And so let's follow up. Let's be sure that we know for sure that the voter rolls are as clean as possible. You know, we in Indiana, we've had voter ID laws since 2005 and, you know, we just don't have the issues that we see in these other states.

And I think that it's important that these states, you know, that we're keeping each other accountable. That's why we need Republicans at the ballot box, we need Democrats at the ballot box. But when one party is pushed out like we see in Michigan from time to time, that's when, when bad things happen. So I would say to follow up, let's be sure if there is a problem. Republicans should be willing to fix it.

Democrats should be willing to fix it.

MATTINGLY: You raise Indiana's elections process and systems which to be exceedingly clear to viewers here, is not in any way the target of what the administration is alleged trying to go after with their new USPS regulation which was released, I believe it was 96 pages. It was released five days ago. I read it because I love the Federal Register, which is a problem for another time. But if you look at Indiana's process when it talks about vote by mail, excuses required application was required, ID number is required.

STUTZMAN: Yes.

MATTINGLY: This is kind of everything about the process that the Trump administration wants other states to utilize. And yet I think the concern here is the mechanics of what this whistleblower is laying out. But even if you put that aside, having 60 plus days to input kind of a new system for USPS, I guess my question is are you concerned about the fact a constituent who's doing everything right, all of a sudden there's a mismatch barcode when your clerk brings it in to scan, the clerk then has to bring it back, fix it, send it back out again. You have no grace period in terms of when ballots can be received. There's a real possibility that your constituents may actually suffer here.

STUTZMAN: Yes. You know what we want to make sure that those ballots are counted. I mean, my son who voted for the first time in 2024 had to vote by provisional ballot because the address on his driver's license didn't match up with the address when he registered at the polling location. And so he was able to vote by provisional ballot. We need to be sure that their -- those sorts of batches in this case, that there's some sort of follow up.

I mean, we have to go those extra lengths to be sure that those ballots that are properly submitted are counted. And this is where there's got to be cooperation between the states, the clerk's offices, the U.S. Postal Service. I understand and I agree with the decision that the President made regarding the matching of the names on voter rolls and the USPS, because that's where most of the fraud takes place. We used to see that in Indiana where they would use mail-in ballots to abuse the process.

And so that's where -- we both have to work together on this. If we don't have trust in the system, it breaks down and then there's finger pointing and then it becomes even worse for the American people. The American people want both parties to work together to be sure that the system works for every voter that's supposed to be voting. That's where the Save America Act comes in.

If we would pass the Save America Act, a lot of these issues would take -- you know, it may not be this election that they're implemented, but it could be in future elections to solve problems like this.

MATTINGLY: I'm glad you mentioned the Save America Act, which would be a legislative effort to address the issues that the President has, that Republicans have pointed out, the allegations that they have laid out as well. This is working through -- the USPS rule is working through the courts right now. There was a judge last week in the midst of this process who said at this point in time, neither side has presented any evidence of an act of Congress that gives USPS this authority. The Save America Act would be a statutory basis to move forward on things like this. What is the statutory basis for the USPS authority?

The administration now says it's had -- it has and is moving forward on.

STUTZMAN: Well, I mean, first of all, the U.S. Postal Service delivers, you know, millions of ballots every year. And so they have their hands on those ballots. One of the things that we are, you know, very careful of in Indiana is to be sure that our military personnel overseas that they get their ballots counted. And you know, there's obviously dates and timelines that they have to meet and requirements to get those ballots back to the United States to be counted. And that's a process that, you know, we've sorted out over time.

And I think it's the same thing here. If you're going to have a third party, which is the postal service delivering those ballots, there has to be accountability and making sure that those numbers are matching up. Honestly, from my perspective, outside of military personnel absentee ballots, I would -- I would prefer not to see mail-in ballots even be allowed. I think it's important for us as citizens to be going to a polling location, showing our ID that we're in person, and voting at a -- at a polling location rather than mail-in ballots. Mail-in ballots should only really be used for those who just simply can't be at a ballot box around November when it comes to the election.

[17:10:29]

MATTINGLY: I think some of your Florida colleagues on the Republican side may differ with you. They are quite good on the mail-in ballot collecting.

Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman of Indiana, appreciate your time, sir. Thank you.

STUTZMAN: You bet. Thank you. Great to be with you.

MATTINGLY: Well, Republicans about one week out from their big midterm convention in Dallas, even billing it as a "Trumpapalooza." Ahead, the excuses some GOP lawmakers are giving to skip it. But first, what the judge in the Lindsay Clancy trial told jurors after a fourth day of deliberations and still no verdict.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: The breaking news in our Law and Justice Lead. The jury in the Lindsay Clancy trial is headed for a fifth day of deliberations after telling the judge they're deadlocked, unable to reach a unanimous verdict. As they review evidence from more than 80 witnesses and 300 exhibits, they're debating whether Clancy is criminally responsible for killing her three children in 2023. Let's get straight to CNN Legal Correspondent Jean Casarez outside the courthouse in Massachusetts. And former prosecutor Mimi Rocah joins me as well.

[17:15:20]

Jean, to start with you, no verdict yet, but the jury's indication that its deadlock probably gives us some insight into what's going on right now. What are you learning?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, here are the facts. The facts are that after they sent that note at 10:00 this morning, they went back, they deliberated all day. We do know, though, that they asked to leave early at 3:30 instead of 4:30, which technically is the time to end deliberations for the day. We know when they came in at the end of the day, one juror was wringing his hands, another juror was wiping their face, but the judge asked them to come back tomorrow at 9:00. A female juror at that point had a faint smile.

They left and they should be back tomorrow morning.

MATTINGLY: Mimi, what's your read on what transpired today?

MIMI ROCAH, FORMER DISTRICT ATTORNEY, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, N.Y.: Well, I think, you know, the jury did not come out this morning and say we are absolutely, positively deadlocked. And so the judge did absolutely the right thing. He did not read, you know, a full kind of what we know in the federal system is an Allen charge or a dynamite charge, which really kind of steps up the pressure, if you will, to reach some consensus, whatever it is, by the judge. He just said, no, you know, this is too early, this is too soon, long trial, go back.

And it's pretty clear that yesterday they went home kind of exhausted and maybe wanted to see if by the time they got there this morning, someone -- you know, we don't -- we don't know what the divide is, but maybe someone would have changed their position or been willing to consider something differently. And that didn't happen. They came out and said it, the judge said, go back. So that's where we are. And then the next step is going to be a fuller charge from the judge to the jury.

MATTINGLY: You know, Jean, to that point, where do we go from here? What happens next?

CASAREZ: Well, they're going to come back. So long as they continue to deliberate, the judge should allow them to do that. If they come with another note, it is called the Tuey-Rodriguez charge in Massachusetts, it's very serious because a judge has to read. And this is based on case law precedent in Massachusetts of the jury going back, keeping an open mind, continuing to deliberate to a verdict, or they could at some point decide they have a verdict. We don't know what they will do.

But tomorrow should be indicative to really show where this trial is heading at this point.

And we want to say that at the end of court today, Kevin Reddington made a very interesting comment that the media always wants to talk with him. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if you have to retry this, do you think that your client is emotionally prepared to do it again?

KEVIN REDDINGTON, LINDSAY CLANCY LAWYER: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't think she is? Would you do anything different in the second trial, if you have a second trial?

REDDINGTON: I don't know. I'll think about it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: And the defense does not want to go a second round on this at all. But that is the prosecution's prerogative if, in fact, in the end, a mistrial was declared.

MATTINGLY: And, Mimi, I would turn that straight to you, the jury -- if it remains deadlocked, the judge declares a mistrial. The key question for prosecutors, will they retry Lindsay Clancy? As a former prosecutor, what are your thoughts on this?

ROCAH: I think it's really hard to walk away from this case once you've had this trial. Believe me, the prosecution does not want to try it either. Retrials are very, very difficult for the prosecution as well. I've done them. And, you know, I think they would have to change their strategy somewhat.

There were kind of some obvious missteps, and you can see that in the change from the opening to the closing in terms of how they painted Lindsay Clancy and sort of denying somewhat or minimizing the existence of the mental health issues. But I think it's really hard to walk away from this at this point, unless they reach some kind of agreement, which is possible, right? There is an incentive on both sides to possibly reach some kind of agreement. But short of that, I don't see them just walking away from it.

MATTINGLY: Yes. A very big day ahead.

Jean Casarez, always grateful for your amazing continuous reporting. Mimi Ro -- Mimi Rocah, always grateful for your expertise. Thank you both.

[17:19:45]

The breaking news in our World Lead, the U.S. launching new strikes on Iran. Today, the president warning Iran could be, quote, "totally wiped out" if it retaliates. The political implications of these new attacks, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: Breaking news in our World Lead, in just the past few hours, the U.S. carried out new strikes against Iranian targets in the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. says this was in response to Iran trying to attack commercial ships and U.S. troops. President Trump confirmed the strikes threatening, quote, "If the failed nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at much harder and higher level. But it will not be the biggest attack of them all that is waiting in the wings. And when it was over -- when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

On that note, let's bring in the panel.

Maria, we are back to a hot back and forth war in the midst of first we were economic outcasting, now we are firing back and forth again. What's your take on kind of where things stand right now?

[17:25:07]

MARIA CARDONA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: The take is that we are in a much worse position now with Iran than we were before the war started. And there is no end in sight. The Trump administration has no strategy on how to get out. I don't think they even agree on why we went in the first place.

And what voters are seeing is twofold. From a national security standpoint, Phil, every time they see a bomb drop, if they've heard the coverage about our munitions not being up to par, they're going to say -- they're not going to say, oh, this president is making me safe, which is what they think is the message, the White House, they're going to think maybe, oh, no, we're using up our munitions. This is going to make us less safe. But more importantly, from an economic standpoint, every bomb that is dropped is an economic bombshell in the pocketbooks of voters here because it is millions of dollars that are being spent in Iran, and it's money that is coming out of the pocketbooks of people who cannot make ends meet here. And that's why the midterm elections are going to be so important.

And they're not going well for Republicans.

MATTINGLY: And Sabrina, to that point, and I think that's, like, if you read between the lines when Bessent announced the kind of economic pressure campaign, the latest iteration of the economic pressure campaign, a big piece of that was they didn't want this anymore. They are -- they will wait them out. They have a blockade. They believe they can suffocate the Iranian government, like every administration in the last 40 years. But it was important to take some, I think, pain out of oil prices and just kind of the general economic distaste that people have had.

If you look at WTI or Brent over the course of the last couple of hours, you're the Journal, you probably have to, I think they piped that in for you, it's going the wrong way. And the impact at home is in exactly the wrong direction for an administration that's been trying to go the opposite direction.

SABRINA SIDDIQUI, NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: And this has been one of the biggest challenges for the administration. They were already staring down the barrel at an election that is primarily about inflation and cost of living. And then that's compounded by the impact that the war has had on gas prices, where the national average is just over $4 a gallon compared to just over $3 a gallon at this point in time last year. And I -- it's been frustrating for Republicans I've spoken to, that the administration has kind of gone back and forth between what the strategy is. The fact there is doesn't appear to be an exit strategy.

Is it an economic pressure campaign or is there going to be another escalation of military strikes, even if the administration says that this is an act of retaliation. And I think that one of the things that we've seen throughout the course of the war is there have been these shifting objectives. And so, yes, there's been this consistency around ending Iran's nuclear program, but they're nowhere closer to reaching that goal. And most of the last couple of months have really been about control over the Strait of Hormuz. That's a problem that would not have even existed had the administration not gone to war in Iran in the first place.

So as they get closer to November, Republicans tell me this has always been about how long will we be talking about this. We're still talking about it, and there's no end in sight.

MATTINGLY: It's a really important point. And also, you know, what's fascinating is yesterday the secretary of the Army resigned. And if you're -- if you've been in Washington, you knew there were issues like Driscoll and Hegseth have had issues for a long time. Driscoll's advanced guy. He's actually very well-liked and respected on Capitol Hill.

A rarity at the Department of Defense slash war depending on who's saying it. But what's fascinating is it's happening in the middle, Scott, of an ongoing conflict that appears to be ramping up again. And this was what the speaker said about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), HOUSE SPEAKER: I don't really get involved in personnel decisions at the Pentagon. OK. I trust the secretary of war to handle his business over there. And I frankly have not delved into those individual cases. I mean, I literally don't have the bandwidth to go over there and micromanage the Pentagon.

OK. So I have to trust that they're doing the right thing and lots of opinions about all this, but I'm really literally not qualified to address that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Now, in his defense, not that he needs it, got a lot of stuff going on with his conference right now, very slim majority. That's a bandwidth problem, I'll grant you that. But this is a big deal. And this was actually one of the emissaries that the Department of Defense had on Capitol Hill that was effective for them. What's your response to what you heard there?

SCOTT MACFARLANCE, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, MEDIAS TOUCH NETWORK: This is a big deal to his members in the House Republican Conference. Here's the thing. Democrats have any number of bones to pick with Pete Hegseth. They don't like his social media clowning. They don't like the fact that he's fixated on testosterone.

They don't like a lot of the culture war things he's fighting. Republicans join them in not liking the resignations and firings, this purge that's underway. And Republicans don't like the lack of briefings Hegseth is giving them on the war. So they've got issues with Dan Driscoll standing down. And we heard Don Bacon right here on CNN an hour ago say, Pete Hegseth, not my kind of guy, not the guy I want in charge.

That is a Republican who is perhaps liberating more in the Republican conference to say, you know what, maybe we want some distance between us and Pete Hegseth when guys like Dan Driscoll stand down.

[17:30:01]

MATTINGLY: Mike, if -- I've been going back and forth on this in the sense of, like, in any other administration, do you really care if the Secretary of the Army is randomly stepping down? In the middle of a conflict, probably, but are Republicans concerned about this? MIKE DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: I think they are concerned about it. I also, I'm sat here patiently. Very quietly listening to this.

SCOTT MACFARLANE, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, MEIDASTOUCH NETWORK: Tee off man.

MATTINGLY: The floor is yours.

DUBKE: No, I'm not teeing off, but I think I have a little bit more optimism of where we are in this conflict today than I did maybe even a month ago. And it has more to do with the movement through the Strait of Hormuz. I mean, that was -- it was a double whammy that the President kind of found himself with, with Iran in this active warfare and the Strait being shut. We are, with the blockade and the removal of the mines, we have now seen some transport through there. So I don't want to not talk about that.

I think that is something that's really important, that's really important to point out. And we're moving strategically in the right direction. So I'm a little bit more optimistic.

CARDONA: But the problem is, Mike --

DUBKE: Yes.

CARDONA: -- that that -- the Straits of Hormuz would not even have been an issue if Trump had not attacked Iran in the first place.

DUBKE: And as you notice, I went back a month. I didn't go back to February. So my point being is, I do have some optimism to this. And to your point about the midterm elections, I do think they're going to be partially a referendum on this. So when we talk about the price of oil, when we talk about the price of gasoline, which is actually more important, I think, to everyday Americans, that is going to be what we're talking about.

And whether or not Driscoll, you know, he really -- we probably in a normal administration wouldn't be talking about the Secretary of Army. But this was a direct threat to Hegseth, and that direct threat has been removed. And I think from that perspective, you can have folks on Capitol Hill talking about that, because there seems to be unease in the Pentagon.

MATTINGLY: Can I just ask real quick though.

DUBKE: Yes.

MATTINGLY: Because I actually agree with what you're saying about, in terms of where everything had been for the course of the last six months, this was as good a position strategically as the Trump administration had been.

DUBKE: Seemed to be moving in the right direction.

MATTINGLY: In terms of, and I cover energy and economic stuff very, very closely, like, it was in a better spot. There was no question about that, which raises the question going back into striking back and forth. And I understand the rationale for the U.S. side strikes were they saw things cropping up in the Strait of Hormuz that could have threatened that. But it seems like they're back in a place now that is the opposite of where they were.

DUBKE: Well, I think that's the tipping point. If this is just to remove the threat from the Strait of Hormuz that is now partially open, then that's one thing. If we are full on, and when you listen to the President's words, I think he was pretty clear on this. This is not the full fury of the United States. This is just a part of this operation.

CARDONA: But you know that's not how voters are looking at this.

MATTINGLY: Oh, yes.

CARDONA: They're not going to delve into a month ago, six months ago.

MATTINGLY: No, they're going to look at gas prices.

CARDONA: They're going to see the difference between what I'm paying at the pump today, what I was paying a year ago. Why the hell did we go to war? They still don't understand why. Everyone keeps saying a different reason. And that's not good for Republicans.

MATTINGLY: It's what complicates the entire dynamic. All right. You guys stick around. We're going to do this again because I enjoy your company.

[17:33:14]

Up next, we're talking about next week's Republican midterm convention or Trumpapalooza, as some call it. Why some GOP lawmakers say they're making other plans. We're going to talk about it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATTINGLY: In the Politics Lead, with the House back in session, Republicans are now being pressed on how they'll defend their razor- thin majority this November. Some lawmakers from key districts told CNN's Manu Raju they're not all in on the GOP's midterm convention next week in Dallas.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Are you planning to go to the Republican convention next week?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I plan to be in my district.

RAJU: Are you going to the Republican convention next week?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm thinking about it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have to be in the district because I have events. I would love to go. I was thinking about it. I'm going to miss out on something important, but I cannot be in two places at the same time yet.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Honestly, you know, this time of year is like Manu goes back to work, and it makes me happy to see him in baseball gloves chasing Republicans.

DUBKE: Where do you put him when they're on recess?

MATTINGLY: He has a show. He's a big-time anchor, and we all love him for that. But no, otherwise, I think he just walks around in a circle with a camera. Mike, for lawmakers right now, this is a tough question both to answer publicly, as you kind of saw there, but like Republicans I'm talking to, lawmakers, political officials, like people that are involved in the campaign right now don't want anything to do with this, not because of Trump but because they have their own race to run.

DUBKE: Yes, it really is less to do about Trump and more to do with it's post-Labor Day. We have 60-odd days until the election. People need to be in their districts. They need to be meeting with their constituents. There is a reason why we're doing this, you know, almost sprint in the House and the Senate of being in session so that in October they can be home. So to sandwich between Labor Day recess, this sprint, and then your final electioneering, it's very difficult to be in Dallas for that.

MATTINGLY: Are you skeptical that this isn't about Trump?

CARDONA: Yes, very. I guarantee you that in all of the swing districts, and frankly in any district that Trump won by 10 or less, it is about Trump because those are all of the districts that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is now targeting. They've amplified their map because Trump's approval rating numbers are so horrific. So I guarantee you they won't -- they will never say it publicly.

I have heard some people that have heard them say it privately. They don't want anything to do with Donald Trump at this moment. I, as a Democrat, am hoping that Donald Trump is front and center in all of these elections in all of these districts and that he speaks as long as he can about every issue on the planet at this convention.

[17:40:13]

DUBKE: I am going to push back a little bit on that, and this is really just to be intellectually consistent. One thing that we've seen as Republicans is that when Donald Trump is on the ballot in '16 and '20 and '24, his base turns out. When he's not in '18 and '22, Republicans suffered because those low-propensity voters did not show up.

One of the theories in 2026 is that putting Trump out there, having MAGA, Inc. spend their $400 million, putting more Donald Trump out there is going to bring some of those low-propensity voters out. It is one thing, one hook that the RNC is hoping to hang their hat on.

MATTINGLY: Sabrina, can I just ask you, because you were in one of the most important states for House races, but also just in general when it comes to electoral politics. In Pennsylvania a couple weeks ago, you were talking to actual people. God bless. What is your sense of the things that are motivating and moving? Is it the guy on the top of the not, I guess, on the ticket, the guy at the top of it? Is it about daily issues they're dealing with? What are you hearing?

SIDDIQUI: Well, midterms are typically a referendum on the incumbent, and that's not usually a plus for whoever is in the White House and which party is in control of Washington. I mean, what we have seen time and again in polling, including our own at "The Wall Street Journal," is that inflation and cost of living is at the top of mind for voters in poll after poll after poll.

So when I was out in Pennsylvania hanging out at gas stations or outside of grocery stores and talking to voters firsthand, many of them were very frustrated, and that included some of the President's own supporters. Now, does that mean the President's supporters are going to go cast a ballot for Democrats? No, but it comes back to the point of are they going to turn out? And they don't feel as motivated. And so I think one of the concerns I'm hearing from Republicans about this convention is which version of President Trump are we going to also get?

And is he able to stay focused on the issues that matter to voters, or is he going to continue to downplay issues like affordability and inflation, which he has done in some of his public comments? One more thing real quick that was really interesting to me is that, you know, voters themselves are making some of the connections.

When they were trying to put gas in their car, when they're filling up gas, they were talking about the impact of the Iran war unprompted. When they were coming out of the grocery store, some voters brought up tariffs to me on their own without any prodding. They were kind of making a connection between some of the higher prices that they're seeing and some of the President's own policy.

So while presidents don't typically have much control over inflation, I do think that one of the liabilities that Republicans see is that some of the administration's policies have actually compounded some of the problems.

MACFARLANE: I was so struck by what Congresswoman Salazar told Manu. I almost wanted to cheer her on. She said, point blank, I can't be in two places at one time. How many parents at this table? How many spouses at this table?

MATTINGLY: Especially this time of year.

MACFARLANE: After Labor Day, they're going to have a convention in Dallas. You know how bonkers this idea is? First of all, the Vice President speaks Wednesday against the debut of the NFL football season. The President speaks Thursday against game two of the NFL football season. Who is going to be watching that? Perhaps a very narrow subset of Americans. Perhaps. Maybe they'll defy expectations and beat the football game.

Also, this arena in Dallas hosts 20,000 people. They're going to get 20,000 people to fill that arena? That could be a heavy lift. They're still trying to push out tickets, and the RNC says it's going to be a Trumpapalooza. I'm not sure if that moves tickets or not.

CARDONA: I hope it is. It is a Trumpapalooza.

MATTINGLY: Sabrina, can I ask you, because you bring up a really good point about affordability. It's been interesting to listen to the President and watch some of his actions the last couple of days, because this has been something that, obviously, he kind of tends to reject. The beef quota tariff-related issues, which I would love to talk about at length, and no one will let me, was a sign. Like, they see it. They get it. They understand hamburger is too expensive right now, up 9 percent year over year. But he was also talking about this at a health care event. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We all talk about affordability.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today is fundamentally about affordability.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Great job you're doing, Jim. By the way, affordability is so precious. They're coming down.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Today is first and foremost about affordability.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTINGLY: Seems like they know the message.

SIDDIQUI: Well, they know. It's just hard to keep the President on message, right? I mean, on the one hand, Republicans love it. He kept talking about plans to lower prescription drugs or some of the other efforts that they're taking to rein in costs. But there are any number of days where he suggests that inflation or affordability is a hoax and that inflation is not a real problem. That's just an attack ad.

DUBKE: And then you have today, and I get very excited because they're talking about no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. Today is a good day.

MATTINGLY: Enjoy that fleeting moment, Mike Dubke. Thank you guys very much. Appreciate you all.

[17:44:55]

Well, some chilling new video next. A woman in Nepal grabbed two young children and escaped last week's floods by just seconds. See more of this moment. Plus, the aftermath of the disaster six days later. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) MATTINGLY: Dramatic new video as that violent wall of water rushed a town in Nepal last week. You can see a woman grab two young children. You can see flooding inundate the area just as they made it to higher ground. Six days later, officials say more than 1,000 people are dead, thousands more still unaccounted for. Meanwhile, in one hard-hit town, displaced families living in a makeshift shelter say they worry about more flooding. CNN's Will Ripley spoke with a girl who lost 17 members of her family, and a 13-year-old whose school bus was almost swept away by the floods.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

[17:50:04]

WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On this unfinished rooftop of a small municipal building in Bidur, Nepal, 50 men left homeless by the flood try to sleep, but the nights are long and cold, and Subba Tamang says, full of tears and fear.

SUBBA TAMANG, LOST 8 FAMILY MEMBERS: This place is not also safe.

RIPLEY: So you're afraid the floods could even come to this roof?

S. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY: How do you sleep at night? Do you -- are you able to sleep?

S. TAMANG: No, we could not. Because many people cry because of -- because they lost their family members too. So many people cry here at night remembering their members. And every day goes like that.

RIPLEY: You've got the helicopters always flying over.

RIPLEY (voice-over): Every day, the choppers fly out searching for survivors. Every night, they fly back. And those he lost are still gone.

S. TAMANG: And I lost my eight family members there.

RIPLEY: You lost eight family members?

S. TAMANG: Yes. I lost my uncle, aunt, and my siblings.

RIPLEY: I'm so sorry.

S. TAMANG: This one also.

RIPLEY: This is your brother?

S. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY: How old is he?

S. TAMANG: He's two years old.

RIPLEY: What's his name? S. TAMANG: His name is Sagar Anjana (ph).

RIPLEY: How old is Anjana (ph)?

S. TAMANG: She's two years old. Her name is Dolma Tamang (ph).

RIPLEY: So she's your aunt?

S. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY (voice-over): Camera phone pictures are precious commodities for Subba and his cousin, Kopila Tamang. They have little else left.

KOPILA TAMANG, LOST 17 FAMILY MEMBERS: When he was born, I took this one.

RIPLEY: You took this one?

K. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY: How old?

K. TAMANG: One month. She is first daughter, second daughter. My mom is third one. This also lost. My mom and my two siblings also, and two cousins, auntie and our daughter.

RIPLEY: Both were lost?

K. TAMANG: Yes, both lost. This is my sister. She also lost. This is my grandma.

RIPLEY: She was also lost?

K. TAMANG: Yes, she also lost. She's so innocent. She used to love me so much.

RIPLEY: Everyone in this picture is gone?

K. TAMANG: Yes, these all are gone. They are like my children. When I came home, they always come back with me and call me pupu. So, I miss them.

RIPLEY: Seventeen family members?

K. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY: That's really hard to even wrap your head around.

K. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY (voice-over): The 2015 earthquake destroyed her old family home. Back then, everyone survived. This time, the wall of water consumed her family's new home in Lusabat (ph), leaving nothing and no one behind.

RIPLEY: So you were trying to call your dad? Your mom? K. TAMANG: My relatives, there is no answer.

RIPLEY: Because all of them are gone?

K. TAMANG: Yes.

RIPLEY: What's keeping you strong?

K. TAMANG: I have one small brother. I have to take care of him. Now I am the mother for him. So I have to be strong. When I cry, he will also cry.

RIPLEY: Hello.

K. TAMANG: He's my brother.

RIPLEY: What's your name?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Koben Tamang (ph).

RIPLEY: Koben Tamang, nice to meet you.

RIPLEY (voice-over): Time passes slowly here. Most people are still in a state of shock with only the clothes on their backs. About 100 women and children sleep in this yoga center. They tell me every time there's a rumor of another flood, everyone runs up this nearby hill and hides. The rumors often come late at night, they say.

There are no showers and everyone shares a bathroom. They get their drinking water from a truck or fill their bottles at nearby waterfalls. Children like Rojina and Rosita Bhatta can't go to school because it was also destroyed.

RIPLEY: So what happened when you're on the bus going to school?

RIPLEY (voice-over): We could see the water chasing us from our window, she says. Everyone started crying and shouting. The driver drove very fast and took us to a safer place. I was extremely scared. We thought the flood would not be this big, but when we saw how huge it was, we were terrified.

Her dad, Rajendra Bhatta (ph), says the bus driver saved his children's lives. He saw dozens of houses being washed away, along with a bridge and a road. The raging water dragged this bus hundreds of feet.

RIPLEY: Did you ever think you'd see a flood like this?

RIPLEY (voice-over): No, I've never seen this type of flood, he says. Not just me, but my father and grandfather also never witnessed such a devastating flood in their lifetimes. I think a large number of schoolchildren may have died. Since some of their parents may also have died, there's no one to ask about their whereabouts.

RIPLEY: You really got to watch your step. This is quicksand, probably about 20 feet deep. Some of these guys out here said they've stepped in it and it went right up to their neck. That makes recovering bodies very difficult and dangerous.

[17:55:13]

RIPLEY (voice-over): Nobody knows how many bodies are buried beneath, or when or where it'll be safe to rebuild all the homes, all the lives swept away.

Will Ripley, CNN, Bidur, Nepal.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY: And our thanks to Will Ripley for that report.

Well ahead, the Trump administration rolling out a new hunt for voter fraud, 63 days out from the November midterms. Why does Homeland Security need to be involved? We'll ask a Republican and a Democrat who both helped run the agency. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:59:55]

MATTINGLY: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Phil Mattingly in for Jake Tapper. This hour, a new effort is underway to investigate what President Trump claims is widespread voter fraud despite no proof it's actually happening.