Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Mayor Demands Immediate Actions at Cornell University; Hegseth Reveals Priorities in Address to Troops; Hero Passenger Says He Put Plane Attacker in Chokehold. Trump & Tech Execs Sign Statement On A.I. "Self-Policing"; As Cuba Grapples With Current Blackouts, An Abandoned Nuclear Power Plant Stands As Relic To Past Power Plans. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired September 30, 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 documents obtained by CNN are raising fresh questions tonight about the investigation, or lack thereof, into an alleged gang rape at Cornell University.

[18:00:07]

And now Ithaca, New York mayor -- the Ithaca, New York mayor is demanding that the campus take immediate action, not just into this case, but how it is going to ensure that every student on its campus is safe. That mayor is going to join us live in moments.

Plus, terrified moments -- terrifying moments on board a flight as Israeli officials say passengers stopped an attempted terrorist attack. Those officials say that one pilot attacked the other, stabbed him, causing the plane to drop 17,000 feet. But the injured pilot was able to open the cockpit door, which allowed passengers on the plane to rush in and restrain the suspect. The new details we're learning as officials scramble to figure out how and why this all happened.

And Secretary of Defense Hegseth attempting to rally troops today during his State of the Force speech. He attacked what he called woke policy and lots of Americans as he announced he's removing more senior officers from the ranks. But how will that message resonate with the rank and file?

The Lead tonight, new details about the 2024 alleged gang rape at Cornell University, raising questions as to what exactly law enforcement knew at the time. CNN's Pamela Brown obtained a six-page signed statement by Jane Doe to Cornell University Police when she first went to school officials about the alleged gang rape by several members of the Chi Phi fraternity.

Now, some of the contents of this report that we're about to share with you are disturbing. According to the six-page statement, Jane Doe told police that she was okay with an initial encounter she was having with two men, but that later in the night she did not consent to sex with other men who entered the room. Jane Doe also described being physically hit and having bruises. Then there is a separate document, which was obtained by CNN affiliate WCBS. This one is a transcript of a November 2024 interview with campus police, Cornell University Police, where Jane Doe makes a more explicit rape accusation.

Now, according to that transcript obtained by WCBS, Jane Doe said, quote, I can say with 100 percent confidence I was raped.

Now, on that transcript, Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten tells CNN his office, quote, never received it, and still don't have it. It was not part of what Cornell provided to us. Cornell University did not specifically address the transcript, but said, quote, it shared all investigatory information with District Attorney Van Houten's office.

There's also more information about that damning Snapchat group among the members of the fraternity that Jane Doe says the men used to invite others to join this alleged assault or rape, referring to her as free pussy. According to CBS News New York, at 1:42 A.M., during the hours-long alleged assault, another message in the group said, quote, shop still open, unquote.

These new details continue to prompt uncomfortable questions, including why did the district attorney not ask for more information from either campus police or from Jane Doe, or from any of the men in the fraternity? Why weren't any criminal charges fired at the -- filed at the time of the incident? And why does it appear that Cornell and campus police and the district attorney's office were not on the same page when it came to the allegations the survivor was making?

My next guest is calling for an immediate pause on any Greek life events and student gatherings at Cornell following the reopening of this investigation into the alleged 2024 gang rape. Ithaca, New York Mayor Robert Cantelmo, thanks for joining us.

So, Mr. Mayor, you want to see a pause on all student event and special event permits until Cornell, quote, conducts an accounting of its protocols to prevent and prosecute crimes of sexual violence, and publicly releases new standards and practices to keep our community safe, unquote. What does that look like? What does the university have to do?

MAYOR ROBERT CANTELMO (D-ITHACA, NY): Thanks, Jake. I really appreciate you having me and for CNN helping to shine a light on this issue and the problem of sexual violence on campuses writ large. From where I sit, we have three demands that we're making of the university. One, I want assurances in writing that going forward, crimes of a violent or sexual nature are disclosed to the Ithaca Police Department immediately and allow our department with trained professionals to assist in those investigations where appropriate. The fact that this was handled solely by CUPD is a failing in my mind, especially given that universities treat these matters like disciplinary actions in most cases.

Secondly, as you noted, we want to make sure that the university complies with the governor's call for an independent investigation. [18:05:00]

And I want to see public and concrete measures to both prevent, monitor, and punish sexual violence on campus. And I'd also like to see the university get on board with efforts statewide to close what they refer to as the intoxication loophole, which allows people to claim a defense in sex crime cases that just because someone is conscious, they are able to consent to sex, which I feel is wildly inappropriate.

TAPPER: Yes, we're going to talk more about the intoxication loophole in a second with a state legislator. We are just learning that Cornell University has agreed to an independent investigation into how it handled the Jane Doe case, according to Governor Kathy Hochul's office. Your reaction?

CANTELMO: I'm glad to see it. It's a necessary bare minimum step. Again, I think the case that we're talking about here is heinous and very tragic, but I really don't want to lose sight of the fact that there are incidents of sexual violence that occur on this campus and campuses around the country on a regular basis. And there is a deep rot in higher education that needs to be addressed, and I think that it is a bare minimum that we do an investigation so that we can try to address this problem nationwide.

TAPPER: So, I'm not going to defend Cornell University, but I have a lot of questions about others involved here. Like, for example, Jane Doe said that explicitly she was raped in an interview that WCBS broke from 2024, but that was not in the six-page report that the campus university police officer wrote. So, I don't understand that. Why the campus police didn't go to Ithaca Police, I don't understand that. And why the district attorney read this document, which is horrifying, and didn't ask police to find out more about it, that I don't understand. Why the focus just on Columbia and not -- I mean, on Cornell and not some of the other players here?

CANTELMO: Well, I completely agree that we need to have a full accounting of what was happening in the district attorney's office. I know my colleagues at the county legislature are really interested in pursuing this further the level of government that oversees the district attorney's office. And I would also say with respect to CUPD, one of our demands is that they hand those things over to Ithaca Police going forward.

I don't understand why some of these common sense feeling steps were missed. And I think when I look at my community, when I look at the students here, they have an expectation of safety. The parents that send their kids to these schools have an expectation of safety. The community that lives in coexistence with the campus has an expectation of safety.

And it's really hard to see how those needs are met when the university is not trained in the same way that our officers are. They're not handling this with the same level of trauma-informed care and attention that our officers are. And there's a lot of open questions that I think we really need a full accounting of, but I think we need to make sure that, at a bare minimum, this type of thing doesn't happen again, and that is going to require real action by the university.

TAPPER: Yes. Ithaca Mayor Robert Cantelmo, thank you so much. I appreciate your time.

According to the Associated Press, New York State is one of 19 states in this country that has rape or sexual assault laws that do not consider somebody mentally incapacitated if they knowingly drank alcohol or took drugs. In other words, somebody can get super drunk or super high or whatever, and because they did that to themselves, there are no issues when it comes to consent. That person can, gives consent.

Now, a short time ago, New York State's Assembly speaker announced that he's forming a legislative working group to examine New York State's sexual assault laws. My next guest is going to be part of that working group, New York Assembly Member Anna Kelles. Her district includes Ithaca, where Cornell is located. Thank you so much for joining us.

So, New York state law makes it more difficult to prosecute those who take advantage of people who are super drunk or super wasted if they did so -- if they got in that state on their own voluntarily. Now, the Tompkins County district attorney cited the law for why his office did not initially file any criminal charges against any of the men who were part of this alleged gang rape. Is that something that your working group plans to address?

ANNE KELLES (D), NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY: Yes, we absolutely plan to look at this gap, but I do, Jake, want to note that the D.A. had, had more than enough information from Jane Doe's statement alone to follow up on an investigation in this case. He chose not to do that but that is not a problem with statute.

TAPPER: Absolutely. There's no question that, investigatively, he could have asked campus police, Cornell Police, or Ithaca Police to get involved and even do an interview another interview with the woman or any of the witnesses or anyone else.

I want to ask you, I was shocked, I was shocked when I learned that this loophole existed.

[18:10:04]

You don't exactly come from a -- well, it's a very Democratic state, and one would think theoretically with very progressive laws when it comes to sexual assault and rape. Who has been standing in the way of this becoming law?

KELLES: So, just to clarify, what you are referring to is a gap in the way the law is currently written. So, the law is written, and some prosecutors do cite this as a reason for not prosecuting, and they call that the voluntary intoxication loop, so -- loophole.

So, you could have two women, for example one of them gets roofies in her drink and is raped, and that is prosecuted as rape, and another woman who chooses to get to drink and becomes intoxicated and is raped, and that is the loophole that you're referring to that you cannot say that she did not consent to that.

And I agree, that is an antiquated interpretation. There is case law that does close that. But, you know, that is something that we should explore, and we will be exploring in this task force to make sure that that law does -- is very, very clear in this case. So, that is hugely important.

And, Jake, I do really want to lift up the fact that as a survivor, it took me 35 years to come to terms with what I experienced. It took this woman two weeks, two weeks to not only see what she had experienced, but be willing to come forward to speak to law enforcement for hours, probably a room full of men, to not confess. This wasn't a confessional. She went to report a crime.

TAPPER: Yes, it's a heartbreaking story. But maybe, hopefully, people will be educated in a dark way, but maybe some good can come of this in some way.

New York Assembly Member Anna Kelles, thank you so much. Thank you for your courage, and thanks for coming to talk to us today.

KELLES: Thank you so much for having me.

TAPPER: We want to remind people who might be dealing with any similar crisis or know someone in a similar situation, there are resources who can help anytime at the RAINN network. That's short for Rape Abuse Incest National Network, R-A-I-N-N. You can reach them anytime at rainn.org, two Ns, or you can call 1-800-656-HOPE, 1-800- 656-HOPE.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speaking to troops today, where he launched a new autonomous warfare command, said he's removing woke from the military and used a slur to describe transgender service members. How will those comments go over with the rank and file? Well, we're going to talk to a retired Army major general next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth addressed U.S. service members at the U.S. Marine Corps Base in Quantico, Virginia this afternoon. He started his speech defending the, quote, patriotic cowboys, unquote, of his new war department, and his 20 percent cut to senior officer positions, including admirals and generals. Here's an excerpt.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: The media calls that a purge. I call it accountability and long overdue, and, frankly, the bare minimum.

You see, you can't change a culture with the same people who enabled it.

No fatties, no trannies, no beardos, no weirdos, no wimps, no radicals.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: No transparency in the Pentagon, a war with no end in sight, 19 dead service members, more than 160 Iranian children killed with no accountability, in addition to the list he cited.

All this after Hegseth's morning sweating with service members of the Pentagon. They were wearing matching shirts emblazoned with this is war, which is interesting because the administration insists we are not at war.

Retired U.S. Army Major General Randy Manner joins us now. General, thanks for joining us.

So, some of the people that Hegseth has fired in the, quote/unquote, name of accountability are some of the most decorated and respected officers we've had in the modern era. And I'm thinking specifically of Army Chief of Staff General Randy George and General Chris Donahue. What do you think of Hegseth's characterization?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.), U.S. ARMY: So, first of all, I completely agree that he has been firing people based on their political ideology in his perception, which, of course, military officers are not political, but anybody who does not agree with him is actually labeled as such.

The concept of reducing the number of admirals and generals is a good one. Just as an example, the British Navy has over 35 admirals, but yet they only have 15 combat ships. That's clearly out of sync. The problem is that the secretary of defense has already proven that he's trying to purge the military, already fired 80 people, 80 generals and admirals, and because of their gender, because of they're not white like him, or because they were associated with General Milley or others. Incredibly competent generals, and he's getting rid of them.

TAPPER: Do you have any concerns about now being the right time to cut senior military positions given the fact that the U.S. is engaged in an active war with Iran?

MANNER: This is just unbelievable and it's sophomoric. Think about this if it was a, a business of $1.5 trillion budget and over a million-and-a-half people in it. Any corporation would be very thoughtful to be able to figure out how to restructure the organization so there was not a loss of ability to serve the customers and to reduce any kind of risks. So, a thoughtful restructuring would be very smart. He's not doing that. He literally is purging people who don't agree with him.

[18:20:00]

The problem is this incompetent secretary of defense is actually dealing with not the profitability of a corporation, but is instead playing Russian roulette with the security of the United States. This is extremely dangerous.

TAPPER: So, earlier this week, the Pentagon said that Secretary Hegseth signed a memo directing the U.S. military to deploy, quote, advanced intelligence and cyber capabilities to thwart any foreign interference from impacting the midterms. The efforts in the memo are largely things that the U.S. and spy agencies are already doing. What are you hearing, if anything, from military officials about this new memo and what the point of it might be?

MANNER: It is -- that was rather shocking, but it was something that was absolutely predicted. I'm a member of an organization of 1,600 retired generals, admirals, and ambassadors called National Security Leaders for America. We saw this coming. We predicted it in writing, and it's something where he's laying the groundwork with false flags of foreign interference to be able to cause the military to mobilize against it. This is all propaganda and fake news.

It's not even the military's responsibility to be able to defend against this. It is the NSA and the FBI. So the idea that he has put out that memo two days ago directing it, is actually inappropriate to have the military start to do this.

It sounds good, but it's not appropriate in any way, and it is a precursor for the governors of Georgia and possibly Texas to deploy their own national guards in certain precincts to theoretically defend the voters around election time.

A lot more to follow, and so we need to buckle up and be prepared.

TAPPER: Retired U.S. Army Major General Randy Manner, thank you so much, sir. I appreciate it.

Today, the Justice Department announced its ginning up its fight against almost all of the federal judges in Minnesota. We're going to explain why, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

TAPPER: We're back in our National Lead, the Trump administration today escalating a fight with the judicial branch. Attorney General Todd Blanche announced that the Justice Department filed a judicial misconduct complaint against six of the seven federal judges in Minnesota. The Justice Department is demanding those judges be disqualified from any immigration-related case.

At issue is a New York Times article from earlier this month in which those judges describe the Justice Department's failure to comply with court orders during the ICE surge in Minnesota earlier this year as a grave threat to the rule of law. Of the three judges identified by the Times, one was appointed by Trump, one by George W. Bush, and another by Bill Clinton.

Let's bring in CNN Senior Justice Correspondent Evan Perez. And what is in the article that has the administration so upset, and what are the rules when it comes to judges speaking to the press?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Look, it's extraordinary Jake, for judges to speak on the record, to sit for a interview like this. At times in their story a few weeks ago that they published said that they've spoken to seven judges on the bench there in Minnesota, and all of them describe this extraordinary, very tense situation, which you, of course, covered in your coverage of Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota.

And they describe how the Justice Department was essentially ignoring court orders, going above the heads of some of the judges, going, for instance, to the appeals court when they didn't like a ruling and not going through the proper process. They describe a process where the Homeland Security Department is seemed to be trying to what one judge said was a law onto itself, and so that's what they were describing in that story.

The attorney general today took very strong issue with that, saying that that broke a lot of the rules that govern judges. Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD BLANCHE, ATTORNEY GENERAL: This is a flagrant violation, in the department's view, of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The comments are not only overtly political, itself a violation, but also concern matters pending before these judges or still in the appellate process, a separate violation.

Aside from the fact, on top of the comments themselves, the comments are not even true and blatantly false.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREZ: And without a doubt, Jake, this is unprecedented. And you have to look back, too, at what happened in Minnesota. That was also unprecedented.

And I should also note that the criticism from those judges is not just in Minnesota. There are judges around the country that no longer take the Justice Department's word for what it stands for. I mean, we have seen that in cases around the country. We've also seen grand juries reject indictments. We've seen juries reject cases because the Justice Department has lost some of the normal faith that people have in its word.

So, this is a problem nationwide. This is not just an issue in Minnesota. Obviously, Minnesota is at the center of this of this immigration surge, and these judges, of course, got the attention of the attorney general there.

TAPPER: All right. Evan Perez, thank you so much.

Tonight, a hero passenger is sharing more details about how he and others were able to restrain an attacker in the middle of a flight. That's next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

TAPPER: In our World Lead, investigators are scrambling for answers tonight after what Israeli officials are calling an attempted plane hijacking. The Flydubai plane was traveling from the United Arab Emirates to Israel earlier today when all of a sudden it plummeted thousands of feet in just a few minutes.

Here's what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told CNN just moments ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: So, the amazing heroism here of the Indian pilot, the Israeli passenger and his colleagues and those pilots managed to prevent a 9/11 disaster.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Here's how one passenger described what transpired on the plane.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKA BAUMAN, FLYDUBAI PASSENGER: We just felt the plane drop completely and start spinning a little. And everyone was screaming, there were children crying and it was just like a death in front of our eyes moment. Like I was just sure I was going to die.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: CNN Anchor and Correspondent Richard Quest joins us now. Richard, what else do we know about the suspect in this and how it all unfolded?

RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE: We only know, according to what the prime minister just said, that the suspect was -- is Omani, who may also have dual citizenship. And we don't know anything about his history, his flying background, other than what the prime minister said today, which was that he attacked the other -- he attacked the captain who heroically managed to open the cockpit door, thus allowing other passengers into the cockpit.

They then overpowered the assailant, who was not in his seat at the time, and one of the passengers then took the controls, having watched Air Crash Investigation, knew to pull back on the stick, to pull back on the yoke and then, of course, other pilots came in.

This is the big -- look the reality here, Jake, we've always known someone has to fly the plane, and that has always been the number one weakest link in aviation at the moment, when the rogue pilot is the problem. We saw it with Egypt Air years ago, we saw it with German Wings. There have been other cases where the pilots have done this. And there really is, except for vetting, except for certain procedures. Because at the end of the day Jake, you know, many of the things that prevent these attacks were put in place after 9/11. But thank goodness the people were able to get into the cockpit today because the captain was able to open the door. It would have had a very different ending if they hadn't.

TAPPER: So, Richard, how was the plane able to land if one pilot was seriously injured having been stabbed, and the other one was being restrained?

QUEST: And so there we have the first passengers come in and pull back slightly, pull back on the yoke and get the plane so it's stabilized. Then you've got these two off-duty pilots who are deadheading to Tel Aviv. They come into the cockpit. They then take over the plane and fly it the emergency landing in Saudi.

But here's an interesting point. If you look at the picture of that 737, the rudder, part of the rudder has been shorn off, hence forces as that plane was put into a steep descent. Now, you estimate, what, 15,000 feet over two minutes. It's about three or four times faster than you would normally do in a normal top of descent in the initial phase.

So, it would have been terrifying. Okay? Let's be clear. This would have been horrific. To have been, to have seen this taking place, to have felt the aircraft falling out of the sky, having no idea what was likely to happen, and then you have this sort of next bit where the other pilots come in, take over. A challenging landing without the rudder, not impossible, but, of course, they won't have known what else might.

This was a very close. This was way, way too close, and will once again focus attention on pilots, the sort of stresses and strains, and who is actually flying the planes. Rightly or wrongly, that's where the focus is now going to be.

TAPPER: A horrific tragedy averted thankfully. Richard Quest, thanks so much.

QUEST: Indeed.

TAPPER: Here to discuss is U.S. Air Force Reserve Colonel Dr. Josh McConkey. He's an emergency physician who also deployed during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Dr. McConkey, what are the biggest questions you still have unanswered right now?

DR. JOSH MCCONKEY, U.S. AIR FORCE RESERVE: Well, the biggest question's on, you know, the culprits who actually partook in this attack, the pilot, his background. And it was much more harrowing. It was actually almost 15,000 feet, just about 14,000 feet in 30 seconds. So, if you can just imagine like the worst carnival ride of your life, and then it lost about 17,000 total over those two minutes.

So, the initial 30 seconds were incredibly dangerous, and those were the forces that damaged the aircraft. But lots of questions to be answered, we're going to hear a lot of stories of heroism to come, for sure.

TAPPER: You've trained for hijacking scenarios. What stands out to you here about how the pilot who was attacked behaved and how the passengers on board reacted?

MCCONKEY: Boy, with 25 years of military service as a crew member, as a flight surgeon, I saw how things changed after 9/11. But what do you do when that threat is actually inside the cockpit? And so this pilot, his ability to actually keep the plane from crashing and getting that cockpit door open saved so many lives and allowed the rest of them to rush in there.

I don't know if this is policy for Flydubai, but having those two pilots on the aircraft, they were deadheading, but having them there to land the aircraft, you can imagine the immense loss of life had they not had all of those lucky events occur. But what a scary scenario.

TAPPER: Very scary. And it occurs to me also, by the way, that this is a very post-9/11 thing to happen in the sense that the pilot had the wherewithal to open the door, and the passengers had the wherewithal to think, we have to take action to save our own lives. It reminds me of Flight 93, which is, if memory serves, those passengers and the let's roll Todd Beamer bravery, they knew that other planes had hit the towers. They were aware that they had to do something. And we see that now in passenger behavior and pilot behavior.

[18:40:00]

MCCONKEY: Boy, that's exactly what I was thinking. You just hear those and see those echoes of Flight 93. You know, our recent 25th anniversary of 9/11, I sat down and watched a documentary of that flight with my children. It was very emotional. And, boy, that's exactly what they were going through, and, fortunately, they were successful in stopping that hijacker.

TAPPER: What kind of safety reviews do you think officials are going through right now, not just about U.S. airspace, but the airspace of our closest allies and who they allow to fly planes and such?

MCCONKEY: Well, that's going to be the biggest questions, is their background checks and where they're from, probably getting a lot more involved with questioning and background, family, prior jobs. I don't know how well that was scrutinized before for Flydubai, but I can assure you to have any access to European, Israeli, or American airspace, it's going to have to be much more due diligent than that.

TAPPER: Dr. Josh McConkey, thank you so much for your time and expertise and as always, of course, thank you for your service, sir.

President Trump seemingly praised A.I. leaders for what he calls tremendous self-policing, but are those actions truly enough to protect the public? I'm going to ask a former Facebook whistleblower what she thinks, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [18:45:00]

TAPPER: And we turn once more to our series, "A.I.: Friend or Foe?", where we weigh the benefits and the risks of this emerging technology. This week.

Leaders from nearly 20 tech companies met with President Trump in the White House and signed a commitment to regulate themselves as they continue to develop this technology, which, according to their own researchers, has the potential to wipe out all of humanity.

Joining us now, someone intimately familiar with the internal workings of major tech companies, former Facebook data engineer and whistleblower, Frances Haugen.

Frances, thanks for joining us.

Do you trust these companies to self-regulate?

FRANCES HAUGEN, FACEBOOK WHISTLEBLOWER: Self-regulating is going to lead to the same problems that we saw with social media. as long as there are financial rewards for cutting corners and there's no consequences for those same, you know, lack of rigor, we're going to see them over and over again, prioritize profits over people.

TAPPER: We saw a story in "The New York Times" about how OpenAI earlier this year was ignoring warnings from its own people. How can that culture change? I mean, you're a whistleblower, so obviously you didn't think you could come forward with your complaints internally. What do you think needs to happen for these tech giants to listen to their people inside the company?

HAUGEN: When I was inside the company, I raised my concerns time and time again to my boss, to coworkers. But what you see when someone comes forward as a public whistleblower, it usually means that there are many people inside the company expressing similar concerns, but those concerns are not being taken seriously.

The fact that we have seen major whistleblowers come out of basically every major ai lab with similar or kind of resonant concerns, you know, issues about people moving too fast, not giving enough time to adequately audit the models. Or in the case of OpenAI, having dangerous circumstances for how they're testing the models shows that we need to have more access from independent people from the outside.

TAPPER: I want to shift gears and discuss a new CNN flash doc that you participated in, and it's called "Zuckerberg: Facebook and the Cost of Connection", which explores the influence of Facebook founder or Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg and his impact on our society. Here's a quick preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARTURO BEJAR, FORMER SAFETY ENGINEERING & PRODUCTION LEADER: Man, when the Facebook files broke, it was crazy. There was a great disturbance in the force. You could feel it all over the company. KATIE HARBATH, FORMER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC POLICY FOR GLOBAL ELECTIONS:

We had no idea who had leaked these documents.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): Our witness this morning is Frances Haugen.

HAUGEN: I'm here today because I believe Facebook's products harm children. Stoke division and weaken our democracy. The company's leadership knows how to make Facebook and Instagram safer, but won't make the necessary changes because they have put their astronomical profits before people

REPORTER: Ms. Haugen, do you think your testimony will be --

HAUGEN: I wanted people to understand Facebook knew they were hurting kids. Fundamentally, how Facebook operated was the problem. If I didn't act, and I knew that I was one of the few people who could, I would always feel that I was responsible in some way for what happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I'm sure it was frightening to be a whistleblower against one of the biggest, most powerful companies in the world. What was the worst-case scenario in your mind about what might happen because you came forward?

HAUGEN: For myself or like what?

TAPPER: For yourself. For yourself.

HAUGEN: So, for myself, I wasn't that worried about consequences, you know, up until when Sarah Wynn-Williams came forward with her book, "Careless People", no employee of Facebook that had blown the whistle had ever been sued. You know, I'm a -- I'm a data scientist and I have a lot of experience working with algorithms and A.I. I assumed some startup would hire me or there'd be a place in academia for me.

But the kinds of things that I had not considered could be threats were things like people on the internet targeting me. And so a lot of the worst scenarios that were presented by my lawyers were actually about external threats. Like once you become a public figure, you can't control how the public will respond to you.

TAPPER: Now, Zuckerberg and Facebook and Meta, they deny claims that the company prioritized profits over mental health. They cite changes that the company has made to its algorithms in an effort to increase well-being. Do you see those changes having taken effect? Do you think it's a sufficient?

HAUGEN: In the year after I came forward, I saw a lot of really meaningful changes inside the company. They invested almost twice the budget in trust and safety. They expanded to cover many, many more languages because my primary concern was about violence caused by a lack of safety systems in places outside the United States and African countries and Southeast Asia. But after Elon Musk bought Twitter and fired the whole safety

infrastructure there, we saw the same drastic reductions in headcount inside of Meta. Mark Zuckerberg has been telling us, you know, people shouldn't launch A.I. models if they think they're not safe. We've already seen from Meta before that as soon as they have the opportunity to spend less on trust and safety, they do. So, we clearly -- they're not going to be able to make those assessments independently.

TAPPER: It's been almost five years since you came forward. You still think it's important to continue to talk about these issues, obviously.

HAUGEN: The issues that I reported on when I first came forward. So, this is around many places outside the United States. Meta still serves as the internet in those countries. You know, if you go to the Philippines, the average person spends six to eight hours a day on Facebook's products.

When you have people around the world, at least a billion people, two billion people who are dependent on Meta's infrastructure to connect their societies. And at the same time, Meta doesn't take seriously the safety of those people. You're setting up some of the most fragile places in the world for chaos caused by our tech choices.

TAPPER: Frances Haugen, thank you so much. Appreciate your time.

And be sure to tune in the all new CNN flash doc, "Zuckerberg, Facebook and the Cost of Connection" premieres Sunday at 9:00 p.m. on CNN, and next day on CNN All Access.

Coming up next, as Cuba's nine million residents struggle with energy blackout after blackout, CNN traveled to Cuba to look at the ruins of Fidel Castro's nuclear power dream, one that failed to ignite prosperity.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:55:35]

TAPPER: And we're back with more in our world lead. As CNN remains the only U.S. network with a permanent presence in Cuba, the communist nation continues to grapple with blackouts amid the U.S. embargo on oil shipments. But Cuba has had issues with reliable power for decades.

CNN's Juan Carlos Lopez now takes a look at a fascinating look at a time when Cuba thought it could solve that problem by going nuclear.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JUAN CARLOS LOPEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Blackouts aren't new to Cuba. They've been a part of life since at least the 1980s. Although not at the scale of the current crisis triggered by the Trump administration's ban on the sale of oil to the Cuban government. In 1982, Fidel Castro made a bold move. FIDEL CASTRO, FORMER CUBAN LEADER (translated): The Juragua nuclear

power plant has been the largest and most complex construction project undertaken by our country.

LOPEZ (voice-over): The nuclear plant at Juragua would be the first step of a plan to wean the island off oil with the help of the Soviet Union, which would build and finance the project.

Driving down the coast, we spot the concrete giant, long abandoned. It was once expected to provide at least 15 percent of the island's electricity needs.

LOPEZ: Now that was back at the end of the '80s. At the beginning of the '90s, it wasn't the best moment for this type of project so close to the United States. A project that took too long, cost too much, and at the end ended up just being what it is today. Just ruins.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Cuban premier, Fidel Castro, in Russia for a visit with big brother.

LOPEZ (voice-over): That's because Havana bet everything on being in the Soviet Union's sphere of influence during the Cold War. And on Moscow's assistance for ambitious projects like the Juragua power plant, which sat under 200 miles from the Florida Keys and sent Washington into a tailspin over national security. Even though the Turkey Point nuclear plant in Homestead, Florida, had been operating 200 miles from Havana since 1972.

NICHOLAS BURNS, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESMAN: We've had longstanding concerns about the quality of the plant's construction and about Cuba's ability to operate it safely.

LOPEZ (voice-over): Fears of an accident stemmed largely from the world's worst nuclear disaster in Chernobyl in 1986.

But the U.S. nuclear regulatory commission reported that same year to Congress that even though they had reservations about the project, Juragua resembled western nuclear plants and was not considered a threat. In the end, when the Soviet Union collapsed, Havana came up dry, and this now eerie monolith was left unfinished.

This is ciudad nuclear, built to house the plant's workers. It's where I meet Luis Vargas, an electrician who was involved in the project.

"What do you feel when you see the structure?" I ask him. "I don't know," Luis says. "I feel a deep sorrow inside because many things were ruined. It's a shame that it ended up this way because unfortunately, millions were invested and we weren't able to finish it."

Francisco Perez, who also worked at the plant, remembers when Fidel Castro came to tell them it was over. "He told us the truth," Francisco tells me. He explained the situation, the problem they faced, and that they had to shut the plant down.

Uruguay was the first of three nuclear plants that would help Cuba overcome a monumental challenge. The island faces to this day, a growing demand for electricity and a lack of capacity to produce it.

This fading sign in Russian and in Spanish reads, "May the atom be a worker and not a soldier."

In Juragua, it was neither.

Juan Carlos Lopez, CNN, Juragua, Cuba.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: And our thanks to CNN's Juan Carlos Lopez in Havana, Cuba.

A reminder, it's going to be a big night for politics tonight. CNN's hosting a debate in California's race for governor between Democrat Xavier Becerra, the former HHS secretary under Biden, and Republican Steve Hilton, a former Fox host. I'm here in Los Angeles to moderate alongside CNN's Dana Bash.

That's coming up in just a couple of hours, 9:00 p.m. Eastern or 6:00 p.m. Pacific only here on CNN.

You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X and on TikTok @jaketapper. And you can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. You ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.