Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Ceasefire in Question as U.S. and Iran Trade Shots; New Details About Ex-Congressman Eric Swalwell Emerge; Supreme Court Temporarily Restores Mail Access to Mifepristone. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired May 04, 2026 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: It is unclear at this hour whether the fragile ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran will hold after the two countries traded shots in the Strait of Hormuz today. The U.S. military says it blew up several small Iranian boats in the Strait after Iran launched multiple cruise missiles, drones, and small boats at U.S. Navy ships and commercial vessels. Now, President Trump did not mention Iran's attempts to target the U.S. military, but in a Truth Social post, he did note, quote, "Iran has taken some shots at unrelated nations with respect to the ship movement," adding, "other than the South Korean ship, there has been, at this moment, no damage going through the Strait."

Well, he then told Fox News just a short time ago in an interview that Iran will be, quote, blown off the face of the earth if Iran targets U.S. ships. This latest flare-up coming as the U.S. military begins to guide stranded ships through that critical choke point for much of the world's oil.

I'm joined now by Matt Miller. He, of course, served as State Department spokesperson under President Biden. He's also a former National Security Council special advisor. So, Matt, when we look at where things stand in this moment, the president, as I just noted in that interview with Fox News, threatening to blow Iran off the face of the earth if they attempt to target U.S. ships in the Strait or in the Persian Gulf.

We saw the exchange of fire. How do you read that moment? Is this an escalation?

MATT MILLER, STATE DEPARTMENT SPOKESPERSON UNDER BIDEN: It's, of course, an escalation. It absolutely is. I think we are in this place now where, for the past month or so, or almost a month since we got the ceasefire that was supposed to open the Strait of Hormuz but didn't actually open the Strait of Hormuz, we've been in a bit of a standoff with the Iranians. Where the question has been which side would either, one, blink and concede at the negotiating table or, two, try to take some action on the ground that would change the situation to their advantage.

And what you saw over the weekend was the president doing the latter, trying to change the situation on the ground to our advantage, to help guide ships out that would help our economy, that would help the economy around the world, but keep the blockade that continues to hurt the Iranian economy. And the question -- there are two questions I think we have to ask, one of which appears to already be answered.

The first is, can that be successful? Not just operationally successful. Can we shoot down every drone, every guided missile? Can we blow out of the water every fast boat that the Iranians could send against these commercial vessels? But the related question to that is, do the owners of those ships have enough trust in our ability to do that, to even send these vessels through in the first place? And I don't think we know the answer to that.

But the second question is, how would the Iranians respond? And I think we know from their history, not just over the past decades, but throughout this conflict, that of course they're going to respond, and they're likely to respond not just directly, but asymmetrically, and we see them doing that today by targeting the United Arab Emirates once again.

HILL: So when we put all that into context, just a short time ago, there was a briefing from CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper, who emphasized, right, as you pointed out, this is guiding, these ships are being guided, they're not being escorted. And he really doubled down on that, saying in this briefing, "If you're escorting a ship, you're kind of playing one-on-one." He said, "I think we have a much better defensive arrangement in this process, where we have multiple layers that include ships, helicopters, aircraft, airborne early warning, electronic warfare."

Basically what he put out there is he was stressing that this is about this overarching defensive play, right? And this is a deterrent. Based on what we are seeing, does any of this feel like it has been a deterrence for Iran in this moment?

MILLER: No, I think if anything, it's likely to lead Iran to escalate the conflict. One of the things that we've seen, Iran is not going to concede its core strategic assets, the thing that it believes are important to its national security. And right now it sees its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz and keep it closed as a core national security asset.

They're not going to concede those assets without taking some step to respond. And so we see them responding both by targeting commercial vessels, and again, widening the conflict by taking it to the UAE. They could be back targeting Saudi Arabia, they could be targeting other countries.

[14:35:00]

HILL: There was some sense, I will say, before some of this back and forth started earlier today, there was some sense that this could actually work, right? That this could, this move, right, in this announcement from the president, that this could actually push Iran a little bit, push Iran's hand.

Clearly that's not what we're seeing in this moment. But based on where things stand, the concern that this goes back to essentially an exchanging of hostilities, that the war resumes. What are the other options?

MILLER: So let me, first of all, I think it was a mistake by the -- I think the White House has continued to have the wrong assumptions. They have continued to think that they can just bludgeon Iran into making these core strategic concessions. And I don't think that's the case.

I don't think that's ever been the case. I think it's one of the strategic mistakes that the president made in entering this war in the first place. And you've seen that same error be doubled down again in all the negotiations.

Here's some things that the White House could be doing. Number one, we are now two months into this war. The Strait of Hormuz is closed.

Every country in the world, except for maybe oil producers outside of the region like Russia and Venezuela, but every other country in the world has an interest in it being opened. And yet the nation's chief diplomat, Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, was in Miami DJing at a wedding this weekend. In the two months since this war began, he has left the country exactly one time to attend a meeting in France and he was on the ground for less than 24 hours.

The president's chief envoys, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, are not traveling to any of the countries either in the region or around the world who want to see the Strait opened. We could be talking to China about this. China imports 90 percent of Iran's oil, has a core interest in seeing the Strait open.

At times after the October 7th crisis, we were able to convince China to put -- we, the Biden administration, convinced China to put pressure on Iran. That was successful.

HILL: The president goes to China next week.

MILLER: He does. But we see, ostensibly, we saw that trip canceled once before when this war was over. My point being, we see the United States taking none of the diplomatic steps we could to try to find out leverage points that we could bring to bear or that our allies and partners could bring to bear against Iran or to do anything diplomatically to end this war.

HILL: And do you think those efforts -- we're basically out of time -- but do you think those diplomatic efforts would be having an impact in this moment?

MILLER: I think they would be having an impact, but again, you have to be realistic about what you're going to achieve. I think they would be smart to focus on just getting the Strait open and leaving the nuclear negotiations to a later day.

HILL: All right, Matt, appreciate it. Thank you.

MILLER: Thank you.

HILL: Still ahead here, new claims of troubling behavior for more than a dozen women now speaking out for the first time about their alleged interactions with former Congressman Eric Swalwell. The new reporting ahead.

[14:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: From overly friendly to strange and predatory, more women are speaking to CNN after our exclusive reporting of sexual misconduct claims against Eric Swalwell. Their accounts, none of which had previously been reported, add new depth to a portrait of questionable behavior. CNN found it unfolded as Swalwell ascended Democratic ranks, even as he supported women's causes.

He dropped out of the California governor's race and resigned from Congress last month after a former staffer told CNN and the San Francisco Chronicle that he raped her. An attorney for Swalwell said in a statement that he quote, categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation of sexual misconduct and assault. Here is CNN's Pam Brown with her special report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PAMELA BROWN, CNN CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT AND ANCHOR: So, for the last few weeks, we've been digging into the sexual misconduct allegations against now former Congressman Eric Swalwell after CNN reported a former staffer accused him of rape. Swalwell denied the allegation but resigned from Congress and dropped out of the California governor's race.

We wanted to know how far back Swalwell's questionable behavior went and how extensive it was. Now, more than a dozen other women have come forward and told us about how interactions with Swalwell, both online and in-person, left them uncomfortable.

So, their stories suggest a pattern of Swalwell using social media to contact young women, including Congressional staffers, and eventually escalating into flirting or inappropriate messaging. One woman described him cornering her as a young intern and slipping his private phone number into her back pocket. He then sent her flirtatious messages on Snapchat.

Another told us about Swalwell initiating contact with her on LinkedIn after she briefly served him at a restaurant when she was 19. All of this was allegedly happening as Swalwell built a public persona in politics as a fierce defender of women's safety.

ERIC SWALWELL, FORMER CALIFORNIA CONGRESSMAN: I will always stand not only with the women in my family, but every woman in America to make sure they're always free from violence.

BROWN: But throughout his years in office, Swalwell was different behind closed doors from behavior described by younger women, as weird and inappropriate to his behavior with his Capitol Hill staffer who said he raped her. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No one protected me. I'm sorry. No one protected me and I don't want someone else to suffer because I know what I know.

BROWN: Swalwell's alleged behavior runs in stark contrast to his work in office where he pushed for transparency on members of Congress sexually harassing staff.

SWALWELL: I think we should unseal the names of anyone who conducted themselves this way, to protect every woman who works on the Hill, from working in one of these offices.

BROWN: In 2018, he voted to ban sexual relationships between members of Congress and their staff. And when TIME Magazine honored the women of the Me Too movement, as the 2017 Person of the Year, Swalwell praised the decision, good choice, TIME, he wrote in a Facebook post, touting his work to combat sexual harassment in Congress.

[14:45:00]

Despite his professional reputation, young women were seeing a different side to Swalwell through his use of social media.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There was the Eric that I would staff, and most of the time, business is normal. And then there was the Eric that I would talk to on Snapchat, and that was a different person completely.

BROWN: Early in his career as a congressman, Swalwell earned praise for his savvy use of social media to connect with young voters. In 2016 media outlet dubbed Swalwell the Snapchat king of Congress, an app where messages disappear after they're read.

But beyond the professional work, he used the app to add young women and send them personal messages from his verified account, some of those messages which CNN reviewed.

Ally Samarco described a similar playbook Swalwell used with her on Snapchat where she says he once her a photo of his genitals.

ALLY SAMMARCO, ERIC SWALWELL ACCUSER: The conversation started out professionally. We were talking about how I could work on The Hill. He told me to send over my resume. From there, the messages shifted to much more personal, much more inappropriate and crossing a line.

BROWN: And while all this was happening, Democratic leadership was elevating his status in Congress. He eventually launched a bid for governor of California.

One through line we learned in our reporting is that a lot of these young women were in the early stages of their careers in Democratic politics, and Swalwell would often offer to help move them up the ladder, highlighting the power imbalance that some of these women felt in their interactions with him.

A lawyer for Swalwell said he doesn't deny having extramarital contact, but that he does categorically and unequivocally deny each and every allegation of sexual misconduct and assault that has been leveled against him.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Our thanks to Pam Brown for that special report. In the wake of Swalwell's resignation, the women he interacted with say they are struggling to understand how he ascended in politics at the same time that he continued pursuing them in private -- Erica.

HILL: All right, Boris, thanks. As we take a look at some of their headlines, we're watching for you this hour. Britney Spears today pleading guilty through her attorney to a lesser charge that allows her to avoid jail time on DUI charges in California.

The 44-year-old pop star did not appear in court. Her lawyer, though, agreed to a common lesser charge that allows her to be sentenced to a year of probation, a required DUI class and state mandated fines. Spears was arrested in early March for driving under the influence of alcohol and at least one drug. She has since voluntarily entered substance abuse treatment.

Surveillance video capturing someone driving an SUV full of explosives into a popular -- watch this -- that's going into a popular health club. This was in Portland, Oregon, early Saturday morning. The Oregonian is reporting the driver was a disgruntled former employee. They say two law enforcement sources. Newtown Portland Police, say a person was found dead in the vehicle. They say some of the devices went off inside igniting fires that caused major damage to the club as well, which was thankfully closed at the time.

The biggest auction yet for eBay may actually be for eBay itself. Video game retailer GameStop is offering to buy the e-commerce giant for nearly $56 billion. In his pitch, GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen says he'd combine eBay's online presence with GameStop's 1,600 brick and mortar storefronts to create a new national marketplace. He says he believes that the combined companies would create a quote, legit competitor to Amazon.

Ahead here, a major change when it comes to access to the abortion bill. The Supreme Court stepping in now to restore the availability of Mifepristone with telehealth visits. What this could mean for the legal fight that still looms? That's ahead.

[14:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HILL: A judge today is weighing the jail conditions for the suspect in last month's shooting at the White House Correspondents' Dinner. Cole Thomas Allen is being held in a Washington, D.C. jail until he's tried on charges of attempting to assassinate the president. The court of public opinion, though, a number of people have already determined the entire incident itself was faked, despite the overwhelming evidence that it actually happened. CNN senior correspondent Donie O'Sullivan has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just because Trump and his filth have lied to you about everything, every day for 11 years, that's no reason for you to get cynical and think that was staged.

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As soon as gunshots were heard at the White House Correspondents' Dinner on Saturday night, conspiracy theories started spreading online. Posts like this one, with no evidence claiming it was staged. A Fox News clip of the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, also went viral.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: It'll be funny. It'll be entertaining. There will be some shots fired tonight. So everyone should tune it. It's going to be really great. I'm looking forward to hearing it.

O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): This was to be President Trump's first time addressing the Correspondents' Dinner. Traditionally, at the event, presidents poke fun at themselves and at the press. These jokes and jabs are clearly what Leavitt was referring to when she said shots fired.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I didn't want to say this, but this is why we have to have all of the attributes of what we're planning at the White House. We need the ballroom. That's why Secret Service, that's why the military are demanding it.

O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): This statement from Trump, along with a bunch of posts online, had some people speculating that the whole thing had been a set up to justify the building of Trump's controversial ballroom on the White House complex.

[14:55:00]

There is zero evidence to support this.

TIM DILLON: THE TIM DILLON SHOW: Just admit you staged it in Butler.

O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): Saturday's attack came on the heels of renewed skepticism among some former Trump supporters about the Trump assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I have obtained a copy of this so-called manifesto. It says administration officials are targets prioritized from highest ranking to lowest.

O'SULLIVAN (voice-over): Marjorie Taylor Greene took to social media Sunday, writing, "I want to know why the Trump admin released Cole Allen's manifesto immediately, but they still keep a tight lid on Thomas Crooks." The FBI, under both Biden and Trump, has repeatedly said Crooks has acted alone and has released information about Crooks, including his online search history. On Monday, Press Secretary Leavitt was asked about the widespread misinformation.

LEAVITT: It's very important to us that we get the truth and the facts about this case in any case out there as quickly as possible to dispel some of that crazy nonsense that you do see running rampant online.

O'SULLIVAN: And we see this all the time now, particularly here in the United States, with virtually every major breaking news story, whereas journalists and law enforcement and authorities try to gather the facts before that information can get out, we have people jumping to conclusions online. Some of them with hundreds of thousands or sometimes even millions of followers. It is just part of the modern day information ecosystem and a reason to always be careful on what you read online.

Back to you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Our thanks to Donie O'Sullivan for that report.

We have some new developments to tell you about today. In the legal fight over access to the abortion pill Mifepristone, the Supreme Court has temporarily restored access to the pill by mail.

The drugmaker appealed to justices after a lower court ruling temporarily blocked access by mail. But this may not be the last word in this fight. CNN's Joan Biskupic joins us now.

So Joan, Mifepristone has proven to be safe going back decades, and the Supreme Court had already ruled on access to it a year or so ago, about two years ago. So what is this legal fight over now?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: OK, we're into a whole new chapter of the abortion wars, Boris. This involves a new challenge to the Food and Drug Administration's not just approval of the drug but allowing the drug to be dispensed without an in-person doctor appointment, to allow it to be prescribed online and obtained by mail. And the FDA originally did that during COVID and then formalized that in 2023, said that that could happen.

An appellate court on Friday, after a challenge by Louisiana, a state that bans abortion, agreed that those loosening of restrictions should not have been allowed. And so if that ruling had not been put on hold today, Boris, there would have been even more confusion about could people obtain this abortion pill, Mifepristone. Now, as you I'm sure understand, most abortions these days are obtained through medication, through the abortion pill rather than surgery.

And a good percentage of those are done through the mail, through telehealth. That's kind of what we've, so much of what we have today. And it's going to states where abortion is banned.

And let me just take you back to essentially where this began in 2022, when the Supreme Court overturned nearly 50 years of abortion rights precedent with Roe v. Wade and said that states could ban abortion. And Louisiana, which triggered this case, outlawed abortion.

Now, what you're referring to when you said, didn't the Supreme Court bat away a case before? And it did. Two years ago, what it said was that a group of anti-abortion doctors who had brought a suit against the FDA and its loosening of the regulations, the court said that those physicians didn't have what's known as legal standing.

They could not show that they were harmed in some way. In this case, what Louisiana is saying is, first of all, allowing telehealth and the drugs by mail encroaches on their abortion ban, because pregnant women in their states who need to end their pregnancies are able to obtain the pills. And then they also say that sometimes things might not go -- there might be flaws, problems, medical problems, going to emergency rooms of women who might have taken Mifepristone. And they say that they end up paying for that.

Now, as you said at the outset, Boris, this drug has been found to be widely available in a safe manner, or the FDA wouldn't have approved it in the first place.

So Louisiana is claiming a legal standing that will now be tested if the justices take up this case. But right now, what they've done is sort of given us a week of breathing room. They've said that by Thursday, the parties have all got to submit kind of their responses to what the Fifth Circuit has done.

And by next Monday, this administrative stay might run out. They might then put a more permanent hold on the ruling while they can actually assess the merits of it, or they could lift it. And starting next Monday is when serious ...

END