Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Vance Blames "Legitimate Misunderstanding" For Israeli Strikes; MAGA Revolt Grows Over Iran War Even As U.S.-Iran Enters Truce; DOJ Says Bondi Won't Appear For Next Week's Epstein Deposition. Aired 9- 10p ET
Aired April 08, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --John King, thanks very much.
Quickly, before we go, pictures from Artemis II. It's not a crescent moon in the window you're seeing. It is a tiny crescent Earth getting closer by the minute. However, scheduled press conference from space is not. It was scheduled at 09:45 Eastern. It is being pushed back an hour to 10:45, Houston saying it's so they can troubleshoot a propellant tank issue.
The news continues. "THE SOURCE" starts now.
JOHN KING, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight, a chaotic ceasefire. The United States says the Strait of Hormuz is open. Iran says, Not so fast. The backlash threatening to derail peace talks even before they begin.
I'm John King in for Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, the White House insists, the ceasefire with Iran remains in place, even though the President's key condition, reopening the Strait of Hormuz, has not happened. That, though, is not stopping the Trump administration from declaring victory.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: President Trump started Operation Epic Fury with strategic military objectives, and the United States has clearly achieved them.
PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield, a capital V military victory.
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: What we know is that the United States accomplished its military objectives.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: It was the President himself, you see his words right there, who made clear, any ceasefire was, quote, "Subject to the Islamic Republic of Iran agreeing to the COMPLETE, IMMEDIATE, and SAFE OPENING of the Strait of Hormuz."
His top officials spent this day offering somewhat conflicting takes on whether that has actually happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: The Strait is open.
LEAVITT: We expect that the Strait will be opened immediately.
VANCE: We actually think that we are seeing signs that the Straits is starting to reopen.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: The reality looks like this. Oil tankers idling or backing up near the Strait of Hormuz. In normal times, those ships, you would see the little blips moving, crisscrossing the water, carrying a fifth of the world's oil.
Iran says the Strait is closed because of scenes like this. The Israeli Defense Forces saying it carried out the largest coordinated strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon since the war began. Israeli officials say they hit 100 targets in just 10 minutes. Lebanon's health ministry says at least 182 people were killed.
And two American allies, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates, say they were targeted by Iranian drones.
The Vice President chalking it all up to a misunderstanding.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I think this comes from a legitimate misunderstanding. I think the Iranians thought that the ceasefire included Lebanon, and it just didn't.
The Israelis, as I understand it, again, I'm supposed to get a full report when I get on the plane, have actually offered to be, frankly, to check themselves a little bit in Lebanon because they want to make sure that our negotiation is successful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Vice President Vance will get a chance up close and personal to avoid any more so-called misunderstandings. He is now leading the U.S. team that will negotiate with Iran, the talks planned for this weekend in Pakistan. A lot, of course, can happen between now and then.
My sources tonight:
CNN Global Affairs Analyst, Brett McGurk, who has firsthand experience negotiating with Iran.
And retired Vice Admiral Bob Harward, who spent part of his childhood in Iran, later serving for decades as a Navy Seal and then as Deputy Commander of the U.S. Central Command.
Gentlemen, thank you for being here.
Brett, you like the term, there's signal and there's noise, when things like this happen. Sort it out. Where are we?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, FORMER MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA COORDINATOR, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: Look, any ceasefire, early on, John is a little shaky. But I've really never seen a ceasefire start like this. We really didn't have a ceasefire. We had some of the largest waves of attacks, missiles and drones across the Gulf, UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia.
And then you had the Straits of Hormuz, which is supposed to be open, closed. No oil tankers got through the Strait of Hormuz today, and Iran has made very clear, We still control it. We will meter what ships go through, and you have to pay a toll to the Revolutionary Guards navy. So basically, nothing has changed in that most critical artery.
And then you had Israel launch this massive wave of strikes in Lebanon, and then the confusion of what exactly is in the ceasefire that we just heard from the Vice President.
So, none of that is a good start. Let's hope, over the next 24 hours, things calm down, set the conditions for some of these talks.
I'd make one final point. If these talks happen this weekend, big if, I think, still, and the Vice President sits down with Mohammad Ghalibaf, who is the Speaker of Iran's parliament, who's kind of a central figure in the Revolutionary Guards and in the system? That would be the most senior meeting, I think, the most senior meeting between the United States and Iran ever. So that, in itself, is extraordinary.
[21:05:00]
But even on that issue, John, the two sides are just so far apart. It's hard to see how we would come out of there, with any sort of an agreement. So, you could have a breakdown, and this war could very much start up again.
KING: Let's come back to that part in just a second.
As the diplomat's perspective, from a military perspective, is what happened today, a ceasefire? And when you hear all those White House voices saying, We've achieved, and the Vice President, Our military objectives are achieved?
Strait of Hormuz is not open. It is under Iranian control. There's no public commitment anyway for Iran to never try to enrich uranium again. Iran is still under -- it's a different Ayatollah, but it's an Ayatollah.
Has the United States achieved its military objectives? VICE ADMIRAL BOB HARWARD (RET.), U.S. NAVY (RET.), RETIRED U.S. NAVY SEAL, FORMER DEPUTY COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: Well, I would say, this is definitely a strategic pause from both sides. Iran has been getting hammered, for over 30-some days now, so they needed some time. And their communications, their command and control, who is actually in charge, and how he gets agreement in that organization is problematic.
We still have forces closing the region. And as the President said, we're going to get oil flowing. So let's wait. Daybreak is now coming. The sun is coming up in Iran and the Gulf. Let's see what today. But both sides are going to leverage that time to enhance their positions.
And again, the U.S. can resume operations anytime they want, including if Iran cannot let oil flow. So, I think we're going to see today some big activity and indicators of where would--
KING: So day two almost more important than day one?
HARWARD: Things are--
KING: There are misunderstandings, see if they can work them out and see where it goes.
Let me get your view, each of you, quickly, on this Israeli question. The Vice President says it was a misunderstanding. Both the Iranians and the Pakistani negotiators say, Israel was supposed to stop. Israel clearly did not stop today. Is that another piece of do you think Netanyahu saying, I'm going to take one day and then back off, what?
HARWARD: Well, both. You've seen two different strategies in that part.
We were focused on the Straits, the missiles.
They were definitely focused on the IRGC, and the regime, and an extension of that Hezbollah. So, I think they considered this outside of the realm of the ceasefire, and they needed to do what they need. Clear southern Lebanon. So, they took advantage of that.
Again today, if there's repeated activity? That becomes more problematic. So they took their shot, they leveraged that strategic pause to their advantage. Let's see what they're going to do today.
MCGURK: Iran saying that, If Israel goes after Hezbollah, we will shut the Strait of Hormuz? That is a -- that's an equation in the region that has never been seen before. That's Iran saying, We will continue to support our terrorist groups all around the region. And if Israel, or anyone else goes after them, we have this tool, to close the Strait of Hormuz. I mean, that is new.
Bob and I, we've been doing this a long time.
HARWARD: Yes.
MCGURK: We've always talked about, Maybe they might close the Strait of Hormuz. They've now done it.
So, I believe this has to end, either with a diplomatic resolution to the Strait of Hormuz. Let's hope we get there. Let's hope what the President said, that's where we go. Or, I think we might have to go back to the military campaign. I hate to say it, but--
KING: What the President said was essentially a dual U.S.-Iranian toll gate.
MCGURK: I can't see that.
KING: How?
MCGURK: This is the Revolutionary Guards.
KING: Yes.
MCGURK: This is the Revolutionary Guards. I cannot -- it's unfathomable to imagine. This is an international Strait -- let's get back to first principles. International Strait. Shipping has to be free, complete, immediate and safe, exactly as the President said. That's the standard, and we should work to hold the Iranians to it.
KING: I want to come back to you. This would be the highest level meeting with Iran in quite some time. You also said, after CNN's Kylie Atwood reported a couple weeks ago, that Iran would prefer to negotiate with Vance. You're of the opinion that it would be a bad idea to give them what they want.
Now we are where we are. Is it good to have Vance there?
MCGURK: Well, if -- so, if it's Ghalibaf, and if he's actually going to show up and meet? The Iranians are very protocol conscious, John. So, Foreign Minister Araghchi would meet with our envoys, or with, say, Rubio. Ghalibaf is seen as he's really a fixture of the system, and right now it's kind of the top guy. So, they would probably say, Let's meet with the Vice President.
It's an extraordinary meeting, if that happens. Again, something like that, though, should be set up. You got to do the groundwork, so when the two senior figures get in the room, you got something kind of pre- cooked. Right now, I mean, we're very far apart on everything.
KING: I want to quickly ask you about Secretary Hegseth today, who said, If the Iranians don't work on a deal to essentially voluntarily hand over the uranium, the United States will go in and get it.
I assume, when you were at CENTCOM, this was table-topped at least once, if not twice, that if the United States had to send in forces to get that uranium, buried underground, now more buried underground because of bombing and bombing and bombing and bombing. What would that take?
HARWARD: Take a large force. But again, if we go back to shutting down the Straits, the free flow, putting down their missiles? Time is not an issue. And as demonstrated by the rescue of the pilot, we can go anywhere in Iran at any time we want, and do anything--
KING: And on the ground for months?
[21:10:00]
HARWARD: Well, you don't need to go on the ground for months. Maybe you go in and do a raid like they did, call forces, come into -- and you decimate them. You pull out and you do another raid.
So, there are all sorts of ways, depending on your strategy. And the strategy and the objectives is to recover that material. So there's a lot of different ways to do that. And time is on our side, if they pose no threats from the missiles and flow of oil. So, which way do you -- both ends toward the middle, bottom, up, top? So that's the strategy. We'll have to see the Secretary of War leverage and what he decides--
KING: We'll see what happens.
HARWARD: --approach to do it.
KING: See what happens in the second 24 hours. We'll know what questions to ask next, I guess, Gentleman.
Brett McGurk. Admiral Harward.
MCGURK: Sure.
KING: Thank you so much for coming in for us tonight.
A government affiliated news agency in Iran has said the team, Vice President Vance and others will meet with, will be led, as Brett just noted, by the Speaker of the Iranian parliament, a big deal.
But Vance today said this, about the official he'll be sitting across the table from, this weekend.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I actually wonder how good he is at understanding English, because there are things that he said that frankly, didn't make sense in some of the -- in the context of the negotiations that we've had.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Going into these talks, the Vice President insisting the United States is operating from a position of strength.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: The President of the United States has made very clear that the United States has a lot of leverage here. We have economic leverage. We've got military leverage. What he's trying to do is make sure the American people are safe, and strike a deal that's good for the American people. I just, look, I encourage the Iranians to come to the table seriously. We've seen some signs that they're going to do that. We've seen some signs of bravado. Fundamentally, we're in a good spot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: My congressional source tonight, the Democratic senator, Andy Kim of New Jersey.
Senator, grateful for your time. Let's just start.
The White House says, the United States has achieved all its military objectives, and now it's time to negotiate a piece, or a detente, or whatever. You accept that?
SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): No, this has been an absolute strategic failure. I mean, as someone who has worked at the White House National Security Council, worked in these issues, for my career, I've never seen anything more of a debacle in this way, right from the outset.
And we see, the President is flailing right now. He jumped on board to be able to have a ceasefire based off of these 10 points from Iran, that would basically amount to unconditional surrender from the United States on nuclear, on removing our troops from the region. I mean, I think this is something that the American people see very clearly as a failure.
KING: I know you don't want to be here, at this point where we are right now. But the Vice President, assuming nothing goes wrong in the next couple days, is going to sit down for negotiations this weekend.
Take off your Democrat hat for a second. Put on your diplomat hat for a second. From all your years of experience at that. What would you like to -- what piece of paper coming out of it -- I assume a piece of paper which we haven't seen about this current deal right now -- what piece of paper would you look at and say, OK, they negotiated the right deal. What would that have to say?
KIM: Well, first of all, it needs to focus in on what I'm hearing from the American people, who are often really left out of all of these discussions right now. What do the American people want?
I just came back down from New Jersey. I spent the last couple days, talking to them. They want something that's going to lower their costs, provide some security. They want this administration to actually focus in on them, and that's what's really missing.
So, what I hope that we see, going forward, is something that's going to have assurances that the American people can see some relief down the road, that we're not going to have our service members in harm's way.
But what we're seeing right now is the President talking about some joint venture with the Iranians to have control over the Strait of Hormuz. Like, nobody in America thinks that that's a good idea. And the fact that that's even on the President's mind gives me great worry, about whether or not they're actually prepared for something that the Iranian regime seems incredibly well-prepared for. So, I do worry about this immensely.
KING: You had wanted Congress to come back, during the recess, to vote to end this war. You still want that? Or do you want to wait and see how the negotiations play out?
KIM: No, I think we need to have immediately--
KING: Right.
KIM: --Congress come back into session. I mean, what we heard from the President, the other day, of threatening the death of a civilization? I mean, that was something, as soon as I heard, I said, I have to come back here. I'm calling for my colleagues to come back to D.C. immediately.
I mean, I tried to reach out to the Pentagon for a briefing today, they denied me. We should be having public hearings about this, to be able to have transparency for the American people, on this war that was done without the American people's approval.
KING: I don't think -- I doubt the votes are there, but if you passed the War Powers Resolution that you would prefer, would that not leave, at this moment, given the current state of play, Iran in charge of the Strait? And is that acceptable?
KIM: What we need right now is an actual strategy here, a multi- lateral effort that the President has been unwilling to do. I mean, we see how insulting he has been to NATO, to our allies and our partners.
[21:15:00]
What is happening here is not good for the American people. What we saw in that 10-point plan from the Iranians, if the President is calling that workable? I saw nothing in there that is workable, and I worry that this President is going to try to get a deal that's going to be worse than what we started with even before we began.
KING: But Iran today, and we'll see how the next 24 to 48 hours play out, but Iran today says it is in charge of the Strait and any ship passing through has to pay, essentially, the Revolutionary Guard, the Republican Guard. It's a toll, a fee. That leaves Iran in charge.
Under any circumstances, can that stay? Or should now -- I know you don't want to be in this situation, but should the United States, regardless of its President or what you think of him, keep a military leverage now to make sure that's not the end, Iran in charge of the Strait?
KIM: Look, I certainly, as someone who worked in diplomacy before, want to see that option open in terms of diplomacy. I'm not worried about the idea of talks, but I'm worried about this administration actually going into those talks, with the American people in mind, rather than just trying to save face. The President knows that this is arguably the worst decision. I mean, this is really the end of his presidency, if he's not able to pull this out. And so, they are flailing, and I worry that they're going to do something that tries to save face for them, but that's going to sell the American people short.
KING: You say, the end of his presidency.
We do see political damage, and this is another complication for Republicans heading into what was already a problematic midterm cycle. But there are others. More than 70 Democrats in the House and Senate, who say the President should be removed using the 25th Amendment. Now, his Cabinet would have to start that. That's the way it works. And they're not going to do that.
But do you support that? Do you think the President should be removed? Do you see him as unfit for duty?
KIM: I see this president, President Trump, unfit to be Commander-in- Chief. He has lost the trust and faith of the American people. And honestly, everyone can see that. Everyone can see that he's not fit for--
(CROSSTALK)
KING: But that's your view. Do you think Congress should go on the record to state that? Or is that just your view that you hope voters accept in November?
KIM: Well, personally, I hope that we can see him removed from office. I mean, he is someone that is dangerous to the American people, right now, doing actions that are completely against what the American people want, and want to focus on.
And if he is not removed by this Cabinet, and we certainly don't see the prospects of Speaker Johnson growing his spine anytime soon, you know, certainly, the voters will have to hold him and the Republican leadership accountable in November.
KING: It's a long way off. But if the Democrats take the House, which today would be likely, and if the Democrats take the Senate, which is still, who knows, steep hill, but a closer prospect now than it was six months ago? Would you support impeaching the President? Or is that just Been there, done that, don't want to do that?
KIM: Well, look, I, as I said, think he is unfit for to be Commander- in-Chief. I think he should be removed from office. And I think the American people are going to be able to--
(CROSSTALK)
KING: Impeachment is the way to do that, though.
KIM: Oh, and look, and we understand how steep of a curve that is, with the Republicans right now in Congress. I mean, like, his Cabinet is just doing everything they can. They're just sycophants that are just falling at and bending a knee to him. We see Speaker Johnson just kissing the ring. So, we have to be realistic about that in terms of what is tactical.
But I think the American people deserve to hear and need to know that there are leaders in Washington that want to stand up against a president that is reckless, and out of control, and against what the American people want.
KING: Got the impression of what you want, but you weren't clear on the particular process. But we'll see what happens in November. We'll circle back.
Senator, grateful for your time.
KIM: Sounds good.
KING: Thank you so much.
And coming up for us. The Justice Department says Pam Bondi won't go to Capitol Hill next week, to talk about Jeffrey Epstein, even though the ousted Attorney General was subpoenaed by lawmakers. My legal source will explain.
But first, a MAGA meltdown over the war in Iran. Big-time Trump supporters now furious with the President. Hear what they're saying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALEX JONES, RADIO HOST: Iran has basically gotten everything at once in the agreement, because Trump was desperate to open the Strait of Hormuz. This is a huge black eye to the United States.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Tonight, a MAGA revolt growing over the President's war with Iran, even as President Trump claims victory with a shaky ceasefire deal. Listen right here for yourself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JONES: Iran has basically gotten everything at once in the agreement, because Trump was desperate to open the Strait of Hormuz. This is a huge black eye to the United States.
This thing, 39 days in, is a total and complete disaster, and we have been right about it.
MEGYN KELLY, PODCAST HOST: I am sick of this shit. I'm just I'm -- I'm sick of it. Can't he just behave like a normal human? I mean, honestly, like the President, all right -- 3D Chess. Just shut up. (bleep) shut up about that shit. You don't threaten to wipe out an entire civilization, we're talking about civilians, just casually in a social media post.
TUCKER CARLSON, PODCAST HOST: Those people who are in direct contact with the President need to say: No, I'll resign. I'll do whatever I can do legally to stop this, because this is insane. And if given the order, I'm not carrying it out.
JOE ROGAN, HOST, "THE JOE ROGAN EXPERIENCE" PODCAST: I'm confused. I can't believe we went to this war, all right? When we started bombing Iran, I was like, This can't be true.
Supposedly, they're trying to stop the terrorists.
THEO VON, AMERICAN COMEDIAN AND PODCASTER: That's crazy, though, if you're the (bleep) terrorist.
(LAUGHTER)
VON: You know what I'm saying? Like, if you want to stop them, (bleep) stand in front of the (bleep) mirror.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: My political sources tonight.
Karen Finney, former senior advisor to Hillary Clinton.
And Scott Jennings, the former senior adviser to Senator Mitch McConnell.
Thank you for being here.
[21:25:00]
Scott, you may not agree with all those voices. But there are a lot of Trump voters, out in America, who listen to them. Maybe not all of them. But some listen to Tucker. Some listen to Megyn. Some listen to Joe Rogan. Some still listen to Alex Jones. This is going to hurt.
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SR. ADVISER TO MITCH MCCONNELL, FORMER SPECIAL ASST. TO PRES. GEORGE W. BUSH, HOST, "THE SCOTT JENNINGS RADIO SHOW" ON SRN: I mean, we're treating Alex Jones like a credible voice here? We're treating Tucker Carlson like a credible voice here?
KING: I don't consider them as, you know, as a credible voice.
JENNINGS: You were playing the--
KING: But there are people--
JENNINGS: Yes.
KING: --you travel the country and talk to Trump voters, who do.
JENNINGS: OK, so let's just say you're right, and some people listen to them. Who do you think they'd listen to more? Those people? Or President Donald Trump?
I know what the polling says, and I know what my instincts tell me, is that Donald Trump runs the party, he runs the country. Not the podcasters. They're welcome to have opinions, and I don't begrudge anybody having an opinion. And you could have a different opinion than Donald Trump.
But I know who has more influence over the Republican Party and the conservative movement, and there's no doubt about it, and there has never been any doubt about it, really all that much for the last 10 years. So, their opinions are fine. But the person in charge right now, was in charge, is in charge, and will be in charge, until he leaves office.
KING: Mike Cernovich, another MAGA influencer, one of the most popular on X, tweeted today, Trump ran on idealism, good people trusted him, they feel deeply betrayed. I hear it every day.
Just another lonely voice to you or?
JENNINGS: OK. And well -- well, look, OK, I can -- I can also play the, I hear people saying every day that this is exactly what they voted for. They voted for a Commander-in-Chief to restore American strength on the world stage. They voted for a Commander-in-Chief to keep Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. They voted for a Commander- in-Chief who would do what the seven previous presidents would not do, and that's deal with these people with a firm hand. So, I hear things too.
And again, everybody is welcome to an opinion. I don't begrudge anybody their opinion.
But you can't deny that Donald Trump has always been a hawk on Iran. He's always said he would never permit them to get a nuclear weapon, and he's taking those actions to prevent that right now.
That is the direction he is doing, and it's not -- it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone, because he's always been very clear that he believes they're fanatics, and he believes they cannot have a nuclear weapon, and he believes that dealing with them, and cajoling them, like, they don't understand that language. They only understand the language of strength.
KING: I'll come back to some of that.
But I want to let you into the conversation.
KAREN FINNEY, SENIOR ADVISER TO HILLARY CLINTON 2016 CAMPAIGN, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thanks.
KING: So, when you watch all that as a Democrat, as a Democrat, you're celebrating. I get your point.
FINNEY: Well--
KING: I get your point. I get your pushback. However, if you look at the polling, there's a slice of the MAGA base that doesn't like this.
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: If you look at recent elections, Republicans clearly have an enthusiasm and a turnout problem, going back to 2025. And you can say, Special election, Special election, Special election. But there have been dozens-plus now, and the Democrats have been winning.
FINNEY: 30.
KING: So, you're not going to--
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: You don't care to talk to them. But is there something Democrats should be saying to any Trump voter who might have just even pause or like, Where are we?
FINNEY: Sure. But two things.
Number one, I think, more influential than Donald Trump, and this goes to your question, is what people see and feel in their own lives every day. So, when you go to the gas pump, if you're a farmer? We've had stories on all day on CNN today about the strain that farmers are feeling and the fear that they have when they're trying to plant for next year. So, I think people trust their own pocketbooks.
For Democrats, I think there's two pieces to this. One, speak to the anxiety, but talk about what we would -- what we would do. One of the ways Democrats made inroads in the 2006 midterms, I happened to be at the DNC. I'm sure Scott remembers those midterms quite well.
JENNINGS: I do. I was at the White -- we called them the salad days there--
FINNEY: Yes.
JENNINGS: --at the Bush White House.
FINNEY: But it was the time, one of the things we were able to do--
KING: Right.
FINNEY: George Bush had, as you know, dramatically dropped in terms of people's faith in his ability around the Iraq War. Democrats didn't just have our critique about the Iraq war. We had ideas about what we would do differently, and a positive agenda that spoke to the economic concerns.
That's what Democrats need to do now, is yes, speak to the concerns, because there are people -- let's talk about this. There are people who feel like the President doesn't need to be using vulgarity, when you're talking about bombing people out of existence, who feel like, That's not actually what I voted for. And it's a war of choice that is actually harming people here at home. So, speak to that, and encourage the fact that that's what people are feeling, but then give them something else.
KING: I suspect you're going to say, There you go again, to borrow an old term.
But we mentioned all those other voices in the Trump ecosystem, MAGA ecosystem. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the former Congresswoman. Candace Owens, the podcaster who's out there on many things. They say Trump should be removed.
FINNEY: You can have her, by the way.
KING: They say Trump should be removed, the 25th Amendment, saying his threat to end Iran civilization, to wipe a civilization off the planet went--
JENNINGS: You think there's a single--
KING: --went too far.
JENNINGS: --average Republican voter out there, if you went out and knocked on their door tonight and said, Yes or no, should we let podcasters and Democrats remove Donald Trump by the 25th Amendment?
KING: But let me -- let me -- let me flip it--
FINNEY: But--
JENNINGS: You'd be thrown off of every porch in America.
KING: Yes, let me flip it just a little bit. Because I agree with you that the overwhelming majority of Trump voters will listen to Trump. I don't think there's any question.
FINNEY: Yes.
[21:30:00]
KING: However, Trump has benefited enormously, enormously, from having an echo chamber, having allies that include all of those people, right? Part of his success has been because of that. They've brought him into unconventional places in the electorate. They've brought out people who didn't vote before.
JENNINGS: Well--
(CROSSTALK)
KING: If now they're -- if now they're -- they've helped him. You're shaking your head. You're one of them. You have a podcast now.
JENNINGS: I'm going to--
KING: It helps--
JENNINGS: I'm going to--
KING: It helps if people are echoing the President and saying he's right.
JENNINGS: I don't deny, I don't--
KING: If they have influence with his voters, it cannot help when they say he--
JENNINGS: I don't deny the usefulness of having surrogates and allies. But I think you're oversubscribing their importance, and undersubscribing the importance of Trump himself. And I think, frankly, the only reason we're playing them on our air right now is because they're useful to a narrative. We don't consider these people to be credible.
FINNEY: Well--
JENNINGS: --at any other time--
FINNEY: That's not--
JENNINGS: --until they are attacking Donald Trump.
FINNEY: That's not--
KING: Not -- not--
JENNINGS: Otherwise, we call them crazy.
FINNEY: No. No. No.
KING: No, I'm being--
FINNEY: That's not fair.
KING: --I'm being careful -- I'm being--
FINNEY: Hold on.
KING: I'm being very careful about it, because I said, I don't view Alex Jones as credible. I don't view Tucker Carlson as credible.
FINNEY: But a lot of people--
KING: What is a conservative anyways, what is -- however, I do travel the country and talk to a lot of Trump voters--
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: --who listen to these people. And I respect them and their choices. And they do listen to them. I'm not saying they side with them. But they--
JENNINGS: I'm not disagreeing, they listen.
FINNEY: Well, and people were willing to give Joe Rogan a lot of credit--
(CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: I'm not disagreeing, they listen. But again, I would just say, listening to someone and taking their word for everything, over Donald Trump, every day -- I just disagree.
FINNEY: Well--
(CROSSTALK)
KING: But let me -- let me ask you a question.
And I'm sorry, Karen.
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: Then I'll yield you the rest of the conversation.
FINNEY: OK.
KING: No, I'm not -- I'm not--
FINNEY: No, no--
(CROSSTALK)
KING: --for at the moment.
FINNEY: You know--
KING: But you, earlier, used the term, fanatics, talking about the Iranians, which is a term that people have used for a long time.
Marjorie Taylor Greene's point actually is that the President said, wipe out a civilization.
When the Iranians say, Wipe out Israel? When the Iranians say, Wipe out the Jews?
FINNEY: Yes--
KING: We say, they are extremist fanatics.
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: So, why is it OK when the President of the United States says it?
JENNINGS: I think the President was speaking to them in terms and stark language that he thought would get their attention.
And let's just draw a line between that moment, when we didn't think a deal could be had, until later that day, when all of a sudden they were at the table and interested in possibly dealing. So, I'm not going to say--
FINNEY: And-- (CROSSTALK)
JENNINGS: --I'm not going to take away the space of the Commander-in- Chief to deal with these people in the way that, that he thinks is best, and now we have the possibility of a deal. I understand it's ragged around the edges, and there's things going on. But he's dealing with them in the way -- and by the way, he's always had pretty good instincts on Iran. He had them since he was -- since they took power. He had them in his first term. And I think a lot of Republicans recognize that.
KING: Senator Kim was here just a moment ago.
FINNEY: Yes.
KING: Yes, he says Congress should still come back and pass the War Powers Resolution.
FINNEY: Absolutely.
KING: He says he believes Trump's unfit. But he wouldn't answer directly when I asked him, does that mean you should go ahead with another impeachment or something?
FINNEY: I mean, if people want to get--
KING: What should Democrats do?
JENNINGS: Well, look, if people want to get into the 25th Amendment. There was a clip, actually, from -- was it CPAC, or one of the recent conferences, where somebody talked about Trump being impeached, and they -- and everybody cheered, and they were told that was the wrong answer.
But here's one quick thing I'll say, John, about this. Midterm elections are about excitement to vote. Who is more mobilized to vote? And at this point, that momentum is with Democrats. And again, I don't think that necessarily, MAGA Republicans are going to vote for Democrats. But if they feel disappointed in the President, it means they may not vote.
KING: We'll see how that one plays out.
Karen. Scott. Stick around. We have much more to talk about, as we go on, including this.
The House Committee still wants to question Pam Bondi about the Epstein files. The Trump Justice Department now insists she doesn't have to testify because she's no longer the Attorney General. Can she dodge accountability because she was fired?
Our top legal source, Elie Honig, joins the panel next.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) KING: Tonight, lawmakers, on the House Oversight Committee threatening, contempt of Congress charges against the newly-fired Attorney General, Pam Bondi, if she does not testify about her handling of the Epstein files, next week.
The Justice Department tried to give her cover today, saying, quote, "Because Ms. Bondi no longer can testify in her official capacity as Attorney General, the Department's position is that the subpoena no longer obligates her to appear" next week.
The top Democrat on that panel now threatening to hold her in contempt of Congress. And he may just get support from the Republicans on the committee, at least Representative Nancy Mace, who led the subpoena effort in the first place.
Congresswoman Mace, posting this today, Pam Bondi cannot escape accountability... The American people deserve answers, and we expect her to appear as soon as a new date is set.
My political sources are back with me, and joined by my legal source, the former federal prosecutor, Elie Honig.
Elie, so the DOJ says she's not Attorney General, subpoena is not valid. True?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, FORMER STATE & FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: No, that's a bogus argument, John.
So, here's why. A subpoena is simply a command to a witness to provide relevant information if they have any. As we sit here right now, former Attorney General Pam Bondi has the exact same information that she had a week ago, when she was still the sitting A.G.
Now, DOJ has come up with this distinction of, Well, she's not the A.G. anymore, therefore the subpoena is invalid.
First of all, the subpoena is to Pam Bondi. It's not to current occupant of the office. Second of all, if that subpoena meant whoever the current A.G. is? DOJ would be offering up Todd Blanche, which they're not doing. And third of all, John, this committee has already subpoenaed several prior A.G.s, including Eric Holder, including Bill Barr, and including Merrick Garland. So, this remains valid.
KING: Democratic Congressman Garcia, the Ranking Member, says he would try to hold her in contempt if she doesn't appear. How would you expect that to play out? They wouldn't have the votes, would they?
HONIG: So, the Oversight Committee, all the Democrats would need to be joined by three Republicans on the committee to get a majority. So, we know Nancy Mace is one. Will they have two others? Who knows?
[21:40:00]
If it gets through the Oversight Committee, then it goes to the full House. But here's the thing, John. If the full House votes contempt, then it goes over to DOJ for potential prosecution. I am quite certain Todd Blanche will not authorize a prosecution of Pam Bondi.
But it's worth saying, for a DOJ, Pam Bondi and Todd Blanche alike, who love to congratulate themselves for being the most transparent in history? That would be a bad look to take a contempt charge from the Oversight Committee or the full House.
KING: Quick one here. Is it possible they may have to reissue the subpoena for Pam Bondi, citizen, not Pam Bondi, Attorney General?
HONIG: Yes, if they're going to -- if the defense here is going to be on some technicality, then it may be worth the 10 minutes it takes to just retype the subpoena, if that's going to settle this, sure.
KING: So Scott, when she was Attorney General, Pam Bondi, says, this is the most transparent administration in history. As you know, a lot of -- several Republicans, I shouldn't say a lot, several Republicans who say, That doesn't hold water. Democrats say, That doesn't hold water.
Do you think she should just testify? I mean, clearly, the White House would like this to go away. She would like this to go away. But there are enough Republicans to make sure it's not going to go away. And there's an election in November. Should they get this over with?
JENNINGS: Well, I don't have a problem with her actually testifying. I also don't have a problem with the White House asserting whatever privileges it thinks it has. And I don't have a problem with the Committee asserting whatever authority it thinks it has. But, bottom line, if she goes and answers questions and answers them truthfully and transparently, I don't personally have a problem with it.
I think Commerce Secretary Lutnick is also going into the Oversight Committee, sometime in the next few weeks. So, whether she goes in right now or not, there's going to be another round of this.
Look, people still have questions about it. She was obviously there at the top of DOJ, when that law was passed and all these files were being released. So, I think the American people would have some expectation that you would show up and answer to the best of your ability.
But again, the administration may have some legitimate arguments about information that they would deem privileged, and of course, there's ways to litigate that.
KING: Is part of the argument here. Congressman Garcia says he'll push for contempt. They might get that through the committee with Congresswoman Mace, and a couple others. They're not going to get it through the floor.
FINNEY: Yes--
KING: Should part of the argument be here, you know, the odds are today, seven months is a long time, but the odds are today, there will be a Democratic majority on that committee, next year. So, you're coming now or come in later? FINNEY: The main argument is the victims deserve it. And if you -- I have worked with victims of sexual assault and rape. And if you are serious about being transparent? Then you go and you answer the questions. And if you don't? Then you're not serious.
And in the context of this midterm election. It reminds voters that this DOJ is protecting Donald Trump and is -- and asked the question, What are you afraid of?
And these victims, these survivors, they're not going away. It doesn't matter who is in Congress. They're going to keep up this fight. And the echo chamber that we were talking about in the last segment, they're going to keep up this conversation.
So, either you believe that these women deserve justice, or you don't. And if you there -- you're going to be found out, if you won't go and answer questions.
JENNINGS: Wait. Protecting Donald Trump from what?
FINNEY: Protecting Donald Trump from whatever else is in the files. I mean, it is the appearance -- whether they are or not, it gives, certainly gives the appearance that they're protecting him.
JENNINGS: So you're--
FINNEY: If you're not willing to--
JENNINGS: You're promoting the unfounded conspiracy theory that he has something to hide and there's--
FINNEY: I'm promoting the theory to you--
JENNINGS: --not a shred of it?
(CROSSTALK)
KING: So let's--
FINNEY: --they release all the files.
KING: So, let's agree with you on that one, but say he did promise he would release as much as possible--
FINNEY: That's right.
JENNINGS: He signed the law.
KING: --and they haven't done that.
(CROSSTALK)
FINNEY: And he hasn't made them do it.
KING: Elie. Karen. Scott. Appreciate it very much. Up next. You don't want to miss this. Kaitlan Collins' conversation with Kara Swisher, on Kara's new CNN Original Series, "Kara Swisher Wants to Live Forever."
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Kara Swisher wants to live forever? You've probably seen the promos for the new CNN Original Series, debuting this weekend, and wondered why and how. The series is a deep dive into the rapidly expanding world of longevity science, as well as humanities and, really, a bunch of tech bros' enduring quest to cheat death.
Kara's journey that is both personal and scientific brings her to experts of all kinds, including the founder of a company who wants to help dogs live longer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KARA SWISHER, PODCAST HOST, "ON WITH KARA SWISHER" & "PIVOT", CNN CONTRIBUTOR (on camera): Welcome to my backyard. Actually, it is my backyard. I live two blocks from here for 20 years in San Francisco. I still have my house. And this is where I took my dogs and my kids.
SWISHER (voice-over): Which is why I'm curious about a company trying to turn a big scientific question into a product.
SWISHER (on camera): Oh.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, Della (ph), please don't bite her.
SWISHER (on camera): That's all right. Look at that.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Paws? Oh, yes, good girl.
So, I mean, I've grown up with dogs and cats, and the worst part is always watching them decline.
SWISHER (on camera): Decline.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They're so perfect and innocent. They don't deserve to be in pain.
SWISHER (on camera): Right. Right. And they do. My dog--
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.
SWISHER (on camera): --just before we could put him down, remember seeing the life go out of his eyes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. SWISHER (on camera): And remembering--
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Putting down my previous dog--
SWISHER (on camera): Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: --and like, it's very traumatic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And Kara Swisher joins me now.
And Kara, obviously--
SWISHER: Yes.
COLLINS: --I'm pro longevity science for dogs.
SWISHER: Yes.
COLLINS: But obviously, there are a lot of people trying to do this for themselves.
SWISHER: They are. They are. They are.
COLLINS: What was your biggest takeaway, as you did this?
SWISHER: Well, the dogs is interesting, because it's about the first FDA approved thing is coming for this thing, and it's to extend life of dogs and have a better life for dogs.
So, a lot of the longevity stuff is around life extension. Some of it is quite miraculous, like GLP-1s, I think are really interesting, mRNA vaccines, some of the -- if it keeps getting funded, it's an astonishing thing, could cause a vaccine for cancer, for example. Some of the AI stuff targeting different diseases, like sickle cell anemia, is amazing. And, of course, CRISPR.
But the other stuff is, a lot of it is charlatanism that's especially on the web right now, Instagram, there's all these solutions that, you know, you put a red light mask on, and it's going to solve every problem you've ever had, you know? And that's not the case.
And so, I try crazy stuff, and then I also was trying to find where the real science was.
COLLINS: And what was the weirdest thing you did?
SWISHER: Well--
COLLINS: What was the weirdest thing you did that you liked?
[21:50:00]
SWISHER: Well, I did ketamine. That was interesting. Because a lot of-- COLLINS: OK.
SWISHER: --a lot of tech bros thinks it's life extending. I don't think it is.
COLLINS: When did you do it, like in a safe space--
(CROSSTALK)
SWISHER: Safe space? No, I did it at a clinic. No, I just went to a party with Elon Musk, and we had a great time, you know.
COLLINS: This is all on camera, as part of the show.
SWISHER: Yes, yes. I did not go to a party with Elon Musk. Thank you. I don't think he'd invite me.
No, I did it in a hyperbaric chamber, which a lot of people are touting for all manner of things which you should only do if you have a wound or the bends, I think, and -- but people are doing it in clubs in New York, and thinking it's a great thing. There's these electric vests to exercise in. There's all manner of nonsense out there.
COLLINS: I mean, you did the hyperbaric chamber, you did sound pods. We have part of that, I think. And also with the red light mask that you mentioned.
SWISHER: Yes.
COLLINS: I actually like red light therapy. I think it's real.
SWISHER: You like it? OK.
COLLINS: But I don't know. But let's--
SWISHER: But why do you think it's real? You just made that up.
COLLINS: Well, let's watch your clip first.
SWISHER: OK.
COLLINS: And then I'll tell you why not.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SWISHER (on camera): Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is that?
SWISHER (on camera): This is a red light mask. See, look red lights, allegedly, will make you look like baby. They can go anywhere from just 50 bucks or less, to thousands of dollars.
I feel ridiculous. Anyway. It's weird.
SWISHER (voice-over): But forget this strange and somewhat scary mask. I'm going for the full body red light experience with my guide, Amy (ph).
SWISHER (on camera): This looks another scary coffin-like. What's with the coffin?
Whoa. Oh.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK then. We got to get my goggles on.
SWISHER (on camera): That's -- oh, wow. We would presume to be naked. But thankfully, we're not, at this moment.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, I mean, maybe, like, in your underpants or something.
SWISHER (on camera): Right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you comfy?
SWISHER (on camera): I feel like I'm in a, like, an air fryer. But sure, yes.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I mean, that looks like the tanning beds that I used to go to in high school.
SWISHER: Yes. Yes.
COLLINS: Which is so scary to even think about. But--
SWISHER: Yes. Not good for you either.
COLLINS: No, it definitely wasn't. It's the opposite of red light therapy.
SWISHER: Yes.
COLLINS: But I mean, what was your takeaway from doing that? That it's helpful or not--
SWISHER: Well, there's not a lot of proven science on it, and especially on -- certain things, some inflammation, certain, again, wounds, things like that. And NASA has proven it helps plants grow and wounds heal in space. But that's different from real scientific evidence.
I mean, I think people like it. I think it makes them feel better. There's some slight skin things to it. But it's the claims online that go crazy, that it's going to solve this. Or peptides is the latest thing.
COLLINS: Yes.
SWISHER: There's always the latest things, it's going to solve every problem.
COLLINS: Yes, what it was, the deal with peptides, when you looked into that, because I feel like that's--
SWISHER: Yes, I didn't even get to it--
COLLINS: --the number one thing on my Instagram.
SWISHER: --because every week there's another crazy thing. But there is very little scientific evidence around peptides. Now, I'm going to be yelled at by all manner of wellness influencers. But the fact of the matter is, there's some very simple things that you need to do, and a lot of it isn't all that nonsense.
COLLINS: You did talk to Bryan Johnson, right?
SWISHER: I did.
COLLINS: Who, I think is kind of become the face of this effort--
SWISHER: Yes.
COLLINS: --for a lot of people?
SWISHER: Well, the narcissistic tech bro thing part, yes
COLLINS: And what was your under -- what was your takeaway from--
SWISHER: He's -- I've known him for a very long time, when he was in the tech industry. And he had some really interesting stuff. He came to my conference, oh God, a decade ago, talking about brain science. And I think he's right about cognitive issues, and he was warning about the problems that AI and cognition would have it, which are absolutely correct today.
But he sort of got into it by perfecting himself. And he's a study of one. And while I think it's interesting, it doesn't -- it doesn't help anybody on this planet for Bryan Johnson to tell us his journey, because it's only him. And you need -- when you do these things, you have to do these bigger studies. And if you don't do the bigger studies, it's just Bryan Johnson's life.
And, in some ways, it's a little sad, he's spending his time measuring everything. And the other, I think, he's quite earnest about it. I think it kind of feels like it's filling an empty hole, in a lot of ways, with a lot of these people that whether they want to -- they want to change their bodies through steroids or HGH or NADs, there's all -- or testosterone, a lot of men are doing that, or even facial changes and things like that.
If you want to do it? It's fine. But it doesn't help the vast majority of people. And I want to talk about what helps the rest of us, essentially, that don't have unlimited funds to toy with your body in some fashion.
COLLINS: I mean, maybe the name of the series should be Kara Swisher Tries Ketamine.
SWISHER: No. No. It was interesting. I didn't like it. COLLINS: We're going to watch this--
(CROSSTALK)
SWISHER: Will you want to do it next with me?
COLLINS: No.
SWISHER: OK. You don't--
COLLINS: I'm going to pass.
SWISHER: You won't like it. You wouldn't like it.
COLLINS: Kara Swisher, thank you so much.
SWISHER: Thanks.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: And up next. America First. A new report about the White House ballroom that may leave some people pushing to stop the steel.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: President Trump, for years, has made one industry in particular central to his message to voters in places like Pennsylvania.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I saved our steel industry.
All of the steel workers. I saved our steel.
Pennsylvania is the state that gave us American independence, American freedom, and what else? American steel.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: But, get this, it appears his new White House ballroom will be built with foreign steel. The New York Times reporting that ArcelorMittal, a European country -- company, is donating the steel worth tens of millions of dollars.
Back in October, the President said this about the gift. This was just days before the White House cut tariffs on steel imports from Canada, a change that saved the company tens of millions on the steel it makes there.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: A steel company, a great steel company, a great man, actually, he said, Sir, I'd like to donate the steel for your ballroom. I said, Oh, that's nice, and I found out, How much is the steel. I called the contractor.
Sir, it's down for 37 million.
I said, This is a nice donation, right?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: The New York Times says, ArcelorMittal declined to comment.
A White House spokesperson telling the newspaper, quote, "Making the White House beautiful and giving it the glory it deserves at no cost to the taxpayer - something everyone should celebrate."
You decide that one.
[22:00:00]
And one last thing tonight that is out of this world. In the next hour, we're expecting a press conference, live from space, with the crew of Artemis II. They, of course, are making their way back to Earth after their historic lunar flyby. The four astronauts will be answering questions from reporters, and you can watch it right here, live on CNN.
Thanks for your time tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
