Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Blasts Judges, Including One He Nominated, In Lengthy Tirade; RFK Jr.'s MAHA Report Cites Studies That Don't Exist; Bongino Laments FBI Deputy Director Role: "I Miss Me." Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 29, 2025 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: And instead of what we see so much of, which is the officer draws his firearm, says, Drop the knife, Drop the knife, Drop the knife, 10 times, and then 10 more times. If the person approaches, they open fire. It's, instead of Drop the knife, 20 times, it's, What's the matter? What's going on with you today? Let's talk about that.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Interesting. John Miller, thanks very much. Fascinating stuff.
The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN HOST: After more than 24 hours of silence, President Trump just responded to that bombshell ruling against his tariffs.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, after a day of letting his team speak for him, President Trump is exploding on social media. So much in one post, we had to make a scroll, just so you can see the entire thing that he just posted on Truth Social, this evening. In it, President Trump attacks the three judges that ruled he didn't have the power to impose his sweeping tariffs, and instead overstepped his authority.
Even as late this afternoon, we heard from a federal appeals court reviving those tariffs, at least for now, as the appeals process is playing out.
The President is particularly upset that one of the judges who ruled against him is one of his own appointees. Referring to his first term in office, President Trump writes on Truth Social that he was new to Washington, and relied on the Federalist Society to recommend judges that he should nominate. He goes on to call the former head of the group, Leonard Leo, a, quote, "Sleazebag" and a really bad person.
President Trump nominated Judge Timothy Reif in January 2019, more than two years into his first term, when, of course, he wasn't exactly new to the office.
But in his post tonight, he goes on to attack what he calls, quote, Radical left judges, and he also calls for the Supreme Court to step in and save his sweeping global tariff plan. Declaring, quote, that "It would be the harshest financial ruling ever leveled on us as a Sovereign Nation," if they don't.
The President's post tonight comes after many of his trade advisers were in front of the cameras today, making sense of the 24-hour whiplash and conflicting court rulings on his tariffs, which frankly, confused a lot of people, as it was all playing out.
And amid this scramble at the White House, today, we pressed the President's top trade adviser about what is their next step.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Given this appeals court temporarily reinstating the tariffs, what does that mean for you, and your position, and does it buy the administration more time, in your view?
PETER NAVARRO, COUNSELOR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Me and my -- yes, you're not talking about me personally. You're talking about the administration.
COLLINS: The administration, of course.
NAVARRO: Yes. So, look, the tariff -- the tariffs remain in place. The court told us, they didn't all but tell us, they told us, Go do it another way. So you can assume that even if we lose, we will do it another way. And I can assure you, American people, that the Trump tariff agenda is alive, well, healthy, and will be implemented to protect you, to save your jobs and your factories, and to stop shipping foreign wealth -- our wealth into foreign homes.
COLLINS: So you are working on a Plan B, right now?
NAVARRO: Of course. There's no Plan B. It's Plan A, OK? Plan A accomplishes--
COLLINS: But isn't Plan A in place right now?
NAVARRO: --all strategic options. And when we move forward, we had a full view of what the battlefield looks like. We are not naive about rogue justices in the judiciary, and Democrats filing lawsuits.
This has got to stop, by the way. This, this -- this weaponization of the judiciary, to stop the Trump -- President Trump from doing what he promised the American people, this has got to stop. It's -- the people of America have the lowest level of confidence in the American judiciary they've had in a 100 years, and it's getting close to what they think about Congress. And that's a low bar to hit.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Speaking of Congress, my lead source tonight is a Republican from Texas, who sits on the D.O.G.E. Subcommittee. Congressman Brandon Gill.
We won't hold you responsible for all of Congress' approval ratings, sir. And it's great to have you here. But on the President's post tonight, having him weigh in, really, the first time we've seen him respond, and he's blaming the Federalist Society for these judges. Congressman, isn't President Trump responsible for who he nominates?
REP. BRANDON GILL (R-TX): Well, listen, I think that there's a huge problem in this country with rogue judges who are overstepping their authority, abusing their authority, to usurp the President's power, and to thwart the agenda that voters elected him to do, whether it's deporting illegal aliens or instituting tariffs. That's not democratic, and that's a huge problem. And I think that's what the President is speaking out against, right here.
[21:05:00]
COLLINS: But do you consider a judge that he appointed a rogue judge?
GILL: Well, I think, in this case, I don't agree with the ruling. I agree with the President. I think that this was an overstep of that Court's authority.
I think that the American people can see that we have a huge problem, right now, with large and persistent trade deficits. That's a national security issue. That is an issue that falls under President Trump's powers, as Commander-in-Chief of the United States, and he is taking action to alleviate that problem. That's what he's doing here.
I don't think that that ruling was proper. In particular, given the context that just a few months ago, the Senate took up the question of whether the President have the power in the first place to institute these tariffs, they decided not to stop him. That this is something that the President was elected to do, a power that he has. And I think these judges are overstepping their authority.
COLLINS: Some people might ask, how do you convince a court that it's an emergency, if we've had a trade deficit since 1975?
GILL: Well, you can have a trade deficit since 1975 that is getting worse, and worse, and worse, and is also something that culminates into a problem.
Listen, there's a major issue, in this country, whenever our manufacturing base is being shipped overseas, whenever jobs are being shipped overseas, whenever our entire industrial base has been outsourced, whenever we're reliant on hostile foreign nations for key pharmaceutical inputs, for energy, for all sorts of things that we need in our everyday life. These are the kinds of things that President Trump is going after with these tariffs. That, by any measure, is a national emergency.
COLLINS: Yes.
GILL: It's a problem for our national security, and it's a problem for our economy.
COLLINS: And some people might agree with you on pharmaceuticals, or semiconductor chips, or something that relates to national security, but then also say, Well, why are bananas and coffee and Chilean sea bass included in that? How does that constitute a national emergency?
GILL: Well, I think it's important for the United States to have, to consume food that was produced in the United States, so that we are not reliant on other countries for our food supply. That seems pretty straightforward to me. But listen, this is exactly what the people elected the President to do.
COLLINS: One way to avoid a court challenge would be to have Congress handle this. And Congress has the power to regulate trade. Republicans have majorities in both houses. Why not just have Congress put these tariffs in place?
GILL: Well, listen, Congress can do that. I would support it if we could. But that process takes time. The President mentioned that in his post, it would take weeks for us to do that.
The President is aggressively acting in our country's interests, again, doing what the people want him to do, as Commander-in-Chief. That is the purpose of the Executive branch, to be able to act swiftly and decisively in our country's interests. So perhaps we'll take that up at some point. But right now, the President put these tariffs in place, and I think that they should stay there.
COLLINS: But why not put them in place on April 2nd? You knew what the President wanted. He laid it out on, what they called, Liberation Day. I mean, you're saying it's going to take weeks. A court battle is also going to take weeks, months, maybe even years.
GILL: Well, the Appeals court ruled that the tariffs can come back into place. We'll see where that court process goes. The President has other options that he can pursue, which have been referenced in the past. So I think that we're going to continue this process.
Remember, tariffs are one part of a broader economic agenda that the President has implemented. The other legs are lower taxes, which Congress is working on, right now, with the one big, beautiful bill. We passed it out of the House. It's in the Senate's hands right now. We're clawing back onerous regulations that the Biden administration put into place that is hampering economic growth in the United States, and we're slashing spending as well.
This is one part of a much larger economic vision that President Trump has--
COLLINS: Yes.
GILL: --for this country, to bring jobs back, to bring manufacturing back, and to revitalize American innovation, to get us on a sound and sustainable economic footing.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, one big question is, how you're going to pay for the big, beautiful bill, if there is not revenue from the tariffs to offset it over the next two years, or 10 years. But the President said tonight what you just referenced. He said, quote, "The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these Tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around D.C. for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly. If allowed to stand," it would "Destroy Presidential Power," and "The Presidency would never be the same."
Do you agree, though, that it is your job, as a member of Congress, to regulate trade, that that lies with you, not actually with the President?
GILL: Well, first of all, let me go back to something that you said, just a second ago. It's about how we would pay for this one big, beautiful bill.
[21:10:00]
This big, beautiful bill pays for itself. We have $1.6 trillion in mandatory spending reform. That's the biggest mandatory spending reform in American history. That's put up against $4 trillion, in tax cuts, making the 2017 Trump tax cuts, that were so wildly successful, that put our economy on a massively upward trajectory--
COLLINS: Yes, but the White House has said--
GILL: --and that's put up -- that is paid for--
COLLINS: --the tariff revenue would help pay for it.
GILL: --with the spending cuts and then with economic growth.
COLLINS: Yes, and the White House has said the tariff revenue would help pay for it.
GILL: Tariff revenue is icing on the cake.
COLLINS: But on what is your responsibility, isn't -- is it regulating trade, in the Constitution, that it is Congress' responsibility, not the President's?
GILL: Congress has oversight over this. This is part of the President's authority. This was a national emergency that the President has talked about at length, that he talked about on the campaign trail, that he's talked about since then. He has the powers to implement these tariffs, under his national authority -- National Emergency Authority, and that's exactly what he did.
COLLINS: But Congress could also just implement them. Right?
GILL: Certainly Congress could, and perhaps there's a role for it. But in this case, President Trump implemented this. These were lawful tariffs. We have been working on the one big, beautiful bill. We've got things that we have -- we have been focused on. He's been focused here. We'll see what the Supreme Court says here. I think the Supreme Court is going to side with the President. COLLINS: Will you wait for the Supreme Court to step in before you could take something that really, theoretically, you could do tomorrow, as a member of Congress?
GILL: Well, we are working on getting this one big, beautiful bill signed into law. We're going to do it by July 4th. That's the deadline that the President would like to see. That's the deadline we have set in Congress. So, we have got our work cut out for us as well.
One other thing that we're going to be working on, now that we got this out of the House, is codifying the DOGE cuts and getting -- making those permanent.
COLLINS: Yes.
GILL: Taking all of the work that Elon Musk and the President's team has done in identifying waste, fraud and abuse, billions of dollars, waste, fraud and abuse that we, on the D.O.G.E. Subcommittee, have highlighted time and time again, that the American people are ready to see permanently gotten rid of. That's what we're focused on, right now.
COLLINS: Yes, are you going to codify every single thing that Elon Musk said he cut?
GILL: Well, the first thing that we're working on is a rescission bill that we're getting from the White House. We're told it's going to come Monday. That's going to claw back money that pays for propaganda outlets like NPR and PBS, and defunds parts of USAID.
I don't think that we ought to be spending taxpayer dollars on state- sponsored media, in this country, and most Americans agree with me there. So that's the first place we're going to start, and then we'll see where we can go from there.
COLLINS: But it's not clear that you'll do all of them. Is that correct?
GILL: Well, listen, we are working through all of this, right now. Rescission bills have to come from the White House, in order for them to be privileged in the Senate, as you know, so that we only need a 50-vote threshold to pass these bills in the Senate.
We'll see what the White House gives us. I suspect that a large portion, if not all of the DOGE cuts, are going to be made permanent.
COLLINS: OK. So, you said, most of them, if not all.
Congressman Brandon Gill, thanks for your time tonight.
Also this evening, my insiders are here.
Justin Wolfers is a Professor of Economics and Public Policy at the University of Michigan.
Shelby Talcott is the White House correspondent for Semafor. And Elliot Williams is a CNN Legal Analyst and former federal prosecutor.
Justin, let me talk to you, just in terms of what this looks like and where this is going, with what you heard from the Congressman there, in terms of what happens next with these tariffs, and what the President is saying tonight.
JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS & PUBLIC POLICY, UNIV. OF MICHIGAN: Yes. So he sounded a little angry, didn't he?
Let me try and unpack things. So, first of all, where are things going? One of the words we heard a lot on Wall Street recently was the so-called TACO trade. TACO, T-A-C-O. Trump Always Chickens Out. And as the Congressman was talking, I realized that he was actually more interested in a BURRITO. B-U-R-R-I-T-O. That would be a Blatantly Unconstitutional Rewriting of the Rules of International Trade Obviously.
And that's really the court's decision here. If you read Section 8 of the Constitution, it's crystal clear. It says that the right to levy taxes, duties, excises, that is to say, tariffs, rests with the Congress. It doesn't rest with the White House.
The real question is -- so, I feel, I don't want to say -- you know, I'm an economist, not a lawyer. I don't know how the court case is going to go. I suspect it's going to go against the President. And so, then the real question is--
COLLINS: Could you just--
WOLFERS: --what next in the trade war?
COLLINS: Yes.
WOLFERS: And I can think about two ways forward.
One is the Wizard of Oz. We pull back the curtain and reveal that the great magician is just a lonely old man with no magic.
[21:15:00]
Or the other is the Terminator. The Terminator keeps coming back in different forms, and fighting different ways, using different legal authorities, and I suspect that's what the White House is thinking about.
COLLINS: Elliot Williams. And just in terms of what the President is saying tonight. I mean, he is so angry at the judge, who was one of those three last night. One was an Obama appointee.
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes.
COLLINS: One was a Trump appointee. The other was a Reagan appointee.
And calling Leonard Leo, who is the former head of the Federalist Society, that is a known figure in Washington, a sleazebag, as a result of his anger over this.
WILLIAMS: Kaitlan, respectfully, the President is losing his mind on this issue, particularly about Leonard Leo.
Leonard Leo has spent, I believe, the last three, if not four decades, trying to shift the federal judiciary to the right. He has pledged to, quote, Crush the liberal dominance of the Supreme Court, Leonard Leo is probably, singlehandedly, more than anybody in America, responsible for the rightward shift to the Supreme Court.
And quite frankly, President Trump owes Leonard Leo a debt of gratitude for carrying out much of what he wanted to do with the federal judiciary. So the idea that Leonard Leo is some problem for President Trump is simply ludicrous.
Now, there's a different -- I guess, a difference they have on tariffs. But if it's about the judiciary, Leonard Leo has more than delivered for President Trump. And it's sort of nonsense. He just doesn't like that he lost. He's undermining faith in the judiciary.
COLLINS: Well, and then, of course, they -- appeals court came in today.
WILLIAMS: Yes.
COLLINS: But the President is also making clear that they are counting on the Supreme Court to step in here, Shelby.
SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: Right. And this is not the only legal issue in which the White House ultimately hopes that this goes to the Supreme Court. Really, almost all of these legal issues, whether it's on tariffs, whether it's on immigration, they're hoping that things go up to the Supreme Court, because they believe that the makeup of the Supreme Court, ultimately, they will win that.
And what I also think was notable in all of this today is Peter Navarro's answer to you. He mentioned that they're just going to sort of find another way to implement these tariffs. Now, it's going to take time, it's going to cause delays.
But that's what they're also -- this is sort of the playbook. That's what they're doing with all of these other issues, right? They're doing it with immigration, the Alien Enemies Act. That has not stopped them from deporting people. They have simply found another way around it.
WILLIAMS: And the Court of International Trade said, there are other ways to get this done. It's merely the declaration of an emergency that was the problem.
COLLINS: I mean, that includes Congress as well.
And Justin, on that front, when you look at this, and what the White House is doing here, I think the question is, what this means for other countries that are trying to negotiate with the White House, right now, or were in these negotiations. Peter Navarro told us at the White House today that they heard from a lot of world leaders, this morning. We know he spoke with the Japanese Prime Minister.
What do they do, as they wait for the courts here to weigh in?
WOLFERS: Oh, if there were foreign leaders calling the White House today, it was to say, Don't bother returning my call. It looks like that you don't have the powers you thought you once had.
Look, you could go in and you could negotiate based on the White House's weak bargaining position, right now, these foreign countries could. But then if the Supreme Court ends up ruling the President's way, he's going to rip up that agreement and go back and renegotiate anyway. So the right thing, the obvious thing, that any foreign country will do right now is sit on their hands. They weren't being given a real reason to negotiate anyway.
Recall, the one deal that we have, the one with Britain, the Americans walked into the room, and said, The tariff will be 10 percent, full stop. That's not a negotiation. That's an assertion. And then, they had a little tiny asterisk where they said, Here's a few carveouts for you. If you give me a few carveouts. There's no real deal. Not only that, the bottom line of that deal said, This is not a legally-binding deal.
And so, if you get to be publicly humiliated, the way Keir Starmer was, in order to please the President, that's not a very appetizing dish for any foreign leader.
COLLINS: Yes, the President is clearly quite angry about it.
Justin Wolfers. Elliot. Shelby. Great to have you all here.
Up next, you know the Make America Healthy Again report that we touted -- that you heard the Secretary of HHS touting here, on THE SOURCE, last week, as a huge milestone. It turns out that it has multiple mistakes, and it cites some studies that do not even exist. My sources tonight were the first reporters to break this story, right after this.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Just last week, when we interviewed the HHS Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his message was, Don't trust the experts, but rely on gold-standard science, instead.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., HHS SECRETARY: Trusting the experts is not a feature of science.
What we should do is trust the science. And we are going to do the science, and the science is going to be replicatable, and it's going to be gold standard, so that parents can make their own choices about what they -- what is best for their family.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Consider that when you hear this. CNN has confirmed that the Secretary's Make America Healthy Again report that came out last week, on children's health, actually referred to several scientific papers that don't even exist.
Take the citation of a study by Dr. Robert Findling, suggesting a suggestion that pharmaceutical labs could be driving the overprescription of drugs to teenagers. But Dr. Findling says he didn't write it. And they also can't find a study by that name anywhere.
Other studies were cited in the report that were either misrepresented, according to the researchers who conducted them, or riddled with errors, like listing the wrong journal, the wrong authors, and sometimes the wrong year.
Today, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, was asked about this, and blamed it on, quote, "Formatting issues."
[21:25:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I understand there were some formatting issues with the MAHA report that are being addressed, and the report will be updated.
But it does not negate the substance of the report, which, as you know, is one of the most transformative health reports that has ever been released, by the federal government, and is backed on good science that has never been recognized by the federal government.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: An updated version of the MAHA report has now been posted online, has changes to the text and to its citations, and it no longer includes that reference to Dr. Robert Findling.
My sources tonight were the first to break this story for NOTUS, the news organization. Reporters Emily Kennard and Margaret Manto are here with me.
And it's so great to have both of you, and excellent work on this scoop.
And Margaret, you and Emily basically went through all 522 citations. There were many listed in this 78-page report. What did you find? And how did you start realizing that some of this did not add up?
MARGARET MANTO, REPORTER, NOTUS: Yes, so I got a tip about there being maybe some issues with the MAHA report citations, Saturday morning. And when I started looking at them, I pretty quickly realized that I was going to have to look at every single one, because, like you said, some of them had the wrong author, or the wrong year, or just broken links. And so, I pretty quickly caught on to the fact that there were some issues. But it was only after Emily and I went through all of them that we found that some of them just didn't appear to exist at all, you know.
COLLINS: And so some of them just simply, they were saying that, Here's the study we're citing to back up this finding. But when you went to look for the study, you could not find that study?
EMILY KENNARD, REPORTER, NOTUS: Yes, and even the direct -- Object Identifier, the DOI link that researchers are used to seeing, we couldn't locate that. We looked at the table of contents of these journals, couldn't find them. Eventually, we realized, these researchers are real people being cited in some cases. How about we just reach out and ask, Did you do this paper, because the White House is citing your work.
COLLINS: And what did those -- what did some of those researchers say when you contacted them? They must have been surprised, I would imagine.
KENNARD: They were surprised. I would imagine, a little disappointed, because usually researchers and academics are super-excited when people refer to their work, but -- and especially the federal government, endorsing your research. But then they probably saw the body of the email and realized, Oh, she's asking about a paper I never worked on, and I don't even know the people I supposedly wrote it with.
MANTO: And some of them were actually really helpful and, like, sent Emily, alternative papers that they wrote or other people wrote, and were like, They could have cited this instead, like, This is a real paper that says basically the same thing.
COLLINS: But they didn't actually cite those real papers with those real authors, and instead, were citing them--
MANTO: Right.
COLLINS: --in instances of things they didn't write?
KENNARD: Yes.
MANTO: Yes.
COLLINS: And so, you take this information, I imagine, you go to HHS. And what did you hear from -- did you hear from them, what we heard from Karoline Leavitt, today, that it was formatting errors?
MANTO: So, Karoline Leavitt's statement at the press conference, earlier today, was the first I had heard from anyone with the Trump administration about this. So, they -- I reached out to them, yesterday, or the day before, and they didn't get back to me until after that press conference, and they basically said, yes, the exact same thing that Karoline did. COLLINS: So CNN confirmed your reporting, which was an excellent scoop. And we talked to a professor who tracks fraud in medical publishing. Obviously, this is a thing. Actually, Secretary Kennedy, last week, during our interview, said that some scientists, there's cheating in science, made that allegation. But this professor said that the nature of the errors seemed to indicate that they were generated by artificial intelligence, in some cases.
Did that seem to line up? Did you see anything that seemed like that, when you were going through this?
KENNARD: Well, you know, I was in college not too long ago, so I knew some not so academically honest people who relied on AI, and they would get in trouble for things similar to this. But it is something that we're looking into. Obviously, the press secretary didn't deny it, and deferred to HHS for comment. So, it's definitely something we're hoping to do more reporting on.
COLLINS: I think one thing that this really strikes at the heart at, which is something we've heard a lot from Secretary Kennedy, and his allies, which is talking about good science, as he refers to.
I want you to listen. There's one thing that he said about being able to rely on studies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENNEDY JR.: The only way you can get good science is through replication. If you don't have replication, you don't know whether other scientists looking at the same data will arrive at the same conclusion.
If you don't have replication, you have incentives to cheat, and there's a lot of cheating that goes on in science.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I think there are questions about finding studies to bolster your claims that maybe are not that gold standard that he's talked about.
MANTO: Yes, I agree. I think the Kennedy movement and the MAHA movement are really fighting an upward -- uphill battle, right now, when it comes to establishing themselves as the scientific leadership, for the federal public health agencies.
[21:30:00]
And I was a scientist in a past life. And I can tell you that these kinds of issues, citation issues, they seem small. But when it comes down to it, like, if you really have to get the basics right, in order to then build on them, and to really be able to stake a claim as a credible researcher.
COLLINS: Yes.
Margaret Manto. Emily Kennard. Great reporting, and excellent job with the scoop here.
MANTO: Thank you.
COLLINS: Thank you both.
KENNARD: Thank you so much for having us.
COLLINS: Coming up here on CNN, we have an exclusive. A report that you heard about last night, from the Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, where she said a migrant threatened to kill President Trump. Investigators, though, are now telling a very different story. That exclusive reporting, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:35:00]
COLLINS: CNN has some exclusive new reporting, tonight, on a stunning allegation, and a serious one, if it's true, made by the Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, yesterday, accusing an undocumented immigrant of sending a letter, threatening to kill President Trump.
Tonight, though, sources tell CNN that investigators actually believe, that individual was set up. Law enforcement believes the man, Ramon Morales-Reyes, never wrote this letter that the Secretary posted here, and which promises to, quote, "Self deport" back to Mexico after shooting, quote, "Your precious president" in his head.
CNN's Law Enforcement Correspondent, Whitney Wild, has this exclusive reporting.
Whitney, what exactly do investigators believe happened here?
WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, Kaitlan, what they think happened here was that this was an effort to try to benefit a man in another case.
So, to put it plainly, Reyes was the victim of an assault and robbery case. And what sources we spoke to believe happened here was that the intention was to try to get Reyes deported before that robbery and assault case went to trial, later this summer.
And here's how investigators figured it out, Kaitlan. This was a pretty standard investigation. They reviewed this letter. They went to investigate the threat, and they had Reyes do a handwriting sample. And what they found was that the handwriting sample that Reyes provided did not match the handwriting of the letter that you see on your screen, right there. And that was sent to multiple different agencies.
And further, Kaitlan, investigators reviewed jail calls, involving a person they believe was involved in actually penning this letter. The Milwaukee Police Department told CNN, they are investigating an identity theft and -- identity theft in a victim intimidation case, surrounding this incident. There are no charges filed yet. The Department of Homeland Security told us, when we presented, what we were prepared to report to them, said that the threat against the President remains under investigation. They say that through their investigation, they have determined that Reyes is an undocumented migrant, that he is here illegally, and that he is going to remain in custody.
Certainly, many more questions to answer, Kaitlan. But very -- very stark 180--
COLLINS: Yes.
WILD: --from the narrative that was being pushed yesterday, according to sources that we've spoken with.
COLLINS: Yes, absolutely.
Whitney Wild, great reporting, and keep us updated as you learn more in this investigation.
My law enforcement sources are also here with me tonight.
Andy McCabe is the former Deputy Director of the FBI.
Tom Dupree is the former U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney General.
And when you see this, and you hear what he's reporting there, it does raise questions about why officials were so quick to tout this, if maybe there was more to the story that investigators seem to be clearly learning tonight.
ANDREW MCCABE, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes, bad idea to get out in front of the investigation on your social media account.
This is a very common thing. When you receive an unsolicited threat or a confession from someone, one of the first things that goes through your mind, as an investigator, is the infamous poison pen. There are many people who will provide a false statement, trying to get somebody else in trouble for their own advantage.
And this seems to be kind of a classic one of those capers, something that the investigators on the ground probably considered right away. But it seems that Miss Noem did not.
COLLINS: Well, and Secretary Noem not only put out the statement, saying that this arrest had happened. She also posted a picture of the man, who is at the center of all of this. We're not sharing that picture tonight, just given, of course, what Whitney just reported there. He may have nothing to do with this. But he's still in custody, this evening, as they're investigating this.
TOM DUPREE, FORMER U.S. DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Yes. And look, I mean, this is a classic example, yet another illustration, of why you don't want kind of political leadership getting out in front of an investigation as it's unfolding, precisely because things like this happen. People go to conclusions. They get names, they get faces out there, and you can't really walk it back, once it's out there.
I think what's also unfortunate is this kind of overshadows the fact that, by all accounts, it seems like law enforcement actually did a pretty good job. I mean, they took the threat seriously. They got right on it. They got to the bottom of it. They looked at the letter. They did a handwriting sample. They traced phone calls. They found the guy who penned the letter. All within 48 hours or so.
So, it's actually a law enforcement success story. But regrettably, the Secretary's somewhat premature tweeting has kind of overshadowed it.
COLLINS: Yes. And speaking of, who is running the FBI now, what the leadership looks like. The person who has your former position, the Deputy Director of the FBI, is Dan Bongino. And he did an interview today, essentially lamenting the stress of the job and the hours of the job.
I want everyone to listen to what the Deputy Director of the FBI had to say.
[21:40:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAN BONGINO, FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: People ask me all the time, you know, Do you like it? I say, No, I don't. But I didn't -- the President didn't ask me to do this to like it, you know. You know what he likes, going into an organization like that, and having to change things, and make big, bold changes.
But, you know, I was at one of our facilities, yesterday, down in Winchester, and a woman who worked there, very nice, said, You know, I used to watch your show. I miss you. I said, You know what? I miss me too.
You know, part of you--
(LAUGHTER)
BONGINO: Part of you -- part of you dies a little bit--
AINSLEY EARHARDT, FOX NEWS HOST: Yes.
BONGINO: --when you see all this stuff from behind-the-scenes.
EARHARDT: Yes.
BONGINO: I don't know what people think me and Kash are doing all day. I mean, I gave up everything for this. I mean, you know, my wife is struggling. I mean, I'm not a victim. I'm not Jim Comey. It's fine. I did this, and I'm proud I did it.
But if you think we're there for tea and crumpets? Well, I mean, Kash is there all day. We share -- our offices are linked. He turns on the faucet, I hear it. He's there at -- he gets in at, like, 6 o'clock in the morning. He doesn't leave until 7 at night. I'm in there at 7:30 in the morning. He uses the gym. I work out in my apartment.
But I stare at these four walls all day in D.C., you know, by myself, divorced from my wife -- not divorced, but I mean, separated divorced, and it's hard. I mean, you know, we love each other, and it's hard to be apart.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I mean, that was a lot.
MCCABE: Yes.
COLLINS: You're--
MCCABE: No kidding, right? Maybe the hardest job in this town. You are in charge of all of the FBI's investigative activity and intelligence collection. 37,000 employees around the globe, 12,000 of them carry guns every day. A lot can happen.
The fact that he's getting out of the office at 7 o'clock at night, that's a pretty early night by the standards that I saw other deputies work under and then I experienced myself. It is an incredibly hard job.
But the saddest thing to me about that is the fact that he can't find anything good to say about it. There is so much to love about that job. You get to work with the greatest people on earth, in the most righteous mission in this country, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution. You see that organization make miracles happen every day.
Yes, there's problems. There's all kinds of issues that will keep you there much later than 7 o'clock. But you get to see the majesty, and of the service, and the dedication of the people who do it. It is -- it is something that so few people will ever see from that perspective. And it's truly a thing of beauty and patriotism. So hopefully, he gets to the point where he appreciates that.
COLLINS: Tom, what did you hear on that? I mean, saying, staring at four walls every day. I think maybe the rank-and-file might hear that and say, you know, have questions about it.
DUPREE: Yes, look, I mean, there's no question, number one, that it's a hard job, number two, that a lot of other people have done that, a lot of public servants have, equal or at even worse hours.
I guess, from my perspective, I mean, yes, it's -- there's kind of a man bites dog, I mean, kind of big, tough Dan Bongino who's knows talking in very personal terms about the job.
I think he, and I think all of us, at the end of the day, though, would want him just to be judged on results, on how he actually does, whether or not he succeeds in reforming the FBI, whether or not he's successful in accomplishing the FBI's core missions. I mean, protecting us, keeping Americans safe, law enforcement, just these bread and butter blocking and tackling tasks that he was put there to execute. I suspect that, at the end of the day, is going to be the measure of whether all the personal sacrifice was worth it.
COLLINS: It's a great point.
Tom Dupree. Andrew McCabe. Great to have you both here tonight. Thank you so much.
Coming up for us here, ahead of the busy summer travel season, one airline quietly added a surcharge if you're flying solo. A new report on how much you could pay depending on how you are booking. Our excellent travel sources are here, next.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: If you're flying solo on the nation's biggest airlines, American, United, or Delta, you might be paying more, a lot more, for your ticket, than if you had booked as a group.
According to a new finding, from the travel website, Thrifty Traveler, U.S. airlines have quietly been hitting solo and business travelers with higher fares.
For example, the site found that a single passenger flying one way on an American Airlines flight from Charlotte, North Carolina, to Fort Myers, Florida, can expect to pay at least $422 in mid-October. But change that same booking to two passengers, and that price drops to just $266 a person. You can also book the Basic Economy fare for even cheaper, an option that does not come up, if you were booking for one.
My sources tonight are:
Kyle Potter, the Executive Editor of Thrifty Traveler.
And Brian Kelly, who is the Founder of The Points Guy, and author of the new book "How to Win at Travel," which everybody wants to know how to do.
But Kyle, let me start with you, because you noted in your reporting that this isn't widespread. It only happens for certain routes. How did you realize that this was happening?
KYLE POTTER, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THRIFTY TRAVELER: It started as all selfish travelers do, by trying to book a flight for themselves.
So, I was looking for flights to New York City for later this summer, and I started just for -- by searching for myself, and then added a second passenger to my search, because my wife is going with, and I was surprised that the price changed from $206 a ticket, to $154, which is really strange. That's not how airfare typically works. It's usually the reverse.
[21:50:00]
So our team, at Thrifty Traveler, this is what we do, we search for not hundreds, but thousands of fares a day, looking for deals. And we pretty quickly found that this was happening in dozens of routes, and dozens and dozens of searches. It is not widespread. It's pretty hit or miss. But this is undeniable that it's happening.
COLLINS: But even though, Kyle, it's -- maybe it's happening quietly, but is it actually spelled out in the fine print that technically they are doing this?
POTTER: Exactly. This is not a glitch. It's not an accident. This is something that airlines have actually begun to write into the fare rules that says, If you want the lowest fare, you need to be searching for at least two adults.
And if you're just searching for one passenger, the airlines, by writing this into their fare class rules, are actually bumping solo travelers, whether they're business travelers or just solo travelers, bumping them into a higher ticket price, so you don't see, as a solo traveler, that cheaper ticket at all.
COLLINS: And Brian, we reached out to Delta on this. They didn't comment or confirm the reporting. We have not heard back from United or American as well.
I just wonder, as you, or someone who have has so many people who rely on you, for travel guidance and advice as well, what you make of this tactic?
BRIAN KELLY, FOUNDER, THE POINTS GUY: Yes. So we're also waiting to hear back official details.
I think, off the bat, and certainly the pulse on social media, is that this is a tax on single travelers. While the airlines may be trying to target business travelers, it sure doesn't sit well.
And while supermarkets can do bulk pricing, they're usually transparent about it, and everyone's given an option, and you can take home extra towels. Well, with airfare, a single traveler can't just bring an extra person with them. So, it just seems deceptive to me, and it's very interesting that the airlines have been very mum on this story as it continues to grow.
COLLINS: So, I mean, asking for the advice of someone who is often a solo flyer. I mean, Brian, what would you say, what is your tip to people when they're -- if they're dealing with something like this. Or is it, unless the airlines change it, this is kind of just how it is?
KELLY: Yes, well, I mean, in the short-term, just always search for a second person, see if there actually is that lower-fare class. Sometimes you might be able to book two tickets, and cancel another one the next day, within 24 hours. We can play the same game with airlines, and I'm sure there will be clever ways consumers can get back at the airlines.
But I just think it's stupid that we have to waste even more time, just trying to find the cheapest fare, when airlines need people to be traveling. The numbers are slowing. Airfares are down a little bit. So, I think the airlines need to be careful here, because if they continue prodding and poking consumers, you're just asking for government regulation, and often no one wins when that happens.
COLLINS: Yes, we'll see what happens.
Brian Kelly. Kyle Potter. Great to have both of you on to break this down tonight. Thank you so much.
KELLY: Thanks for having me.
POTTER: Thanks for having me.
COLLINS: Up next. A far-right activist who has a history of anti-gay rhetoric says he was just fired from the Kennedy Center, after very briefly being appointed to his job there, as a result of a CNN investigation.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Before we go tonight, three things you may have missed.
Trump ally, and former New York City Police Commissioner, Bernie Kerik, has died tonight at the age of 69. FBI director, Kash Patel, shared the news in the last hour saying that he passed away after, quote, "A private battle with illness."
Kerik rose to national fame, guiding the NYPD in the aftermath of 9/11. He later pleaded guilty to tax fraud and lying to officials, and served three years in federal prison for those charges. The President pardoned Kerik in 2020.
Also tonight, here in Washington, we're following this story. The far- right activist, who is President Trump's newly-appointed Vice President of Development at the Kennedy Center, is out, after CNN's KFILE reached out for comment about his past statements.
Floyd Brown says he was fired hours after KFILE asked for comment on his history of anti-gay remarks, including calling homosexuality a, quote, "Punishment," and his promotion of birtherism conspiracies about former President Obama. Brown told CNN, quote, it was an "Honor," to work at the Kennedy Center, and said, It was truly not my intention to offend anyone with my comments.
And finally, before we go tonight, we have a preview of this week's episode of "Searching for Spain," where Eva Longoria takes viewers to a hidden gem on the country's northwestern coast.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
EVA LONGORIA, AMERICAN ACTRESS AND FILM PRODUCER, HOST, "EVA LONGORIA: SEARCHING FOR SPAIN" (on camera): Look at how these waves are crashing into them.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
LONGORIA (on camera): Like, they could be swept away any moment. UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Can you see, it's so incredible.
LONGORIA (on camera): I know. I know. I know. I know. I know.
LONGORIA (voice-over): Percebes used to be a survival food. Now, they're served in high-end restaurants, with Galician percebes rated the best in the world, thanks to these mineral-rich waters.
LONGORIA (on camera): Oh, my God, he's jumped in the water.
Where did he go? Oh, my God. Oh, my God.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): He has to swim to get to the other boulder.
LONGORIA (on camera): How is he swimming in that current?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Well, they are experts. I could never get in there.
LONGORIA (on camera): You could never do this?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Never.
LONGORIA (on camera): No? Oh, OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): Never.
LONGORIA (on camera): (FOREIGN LANGUAGE)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): They are fish. Galician fish..
LONGORIA (on camera): Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): They are heroes of the sea and the coast.
LONGORIA (voice-over): Arturo Pablos' (ph) bravery is giving me the courage to confess, I don't like percebes.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: That brand-new episode of "Eva Longoria: Searching for Spain" airs this Sunday, 09:00 p.m. Eastern, only here on CNN.
Thank you so much for joining us tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" is coming up next.
