Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Calls His Statement On Americans' Finances "Perfect"; Colorado's Dem Governor To Free Election Denier From Prison; U.S. Officials Suspect Iran Behind Hack Of U.S. Gas Stations. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 15, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ERIC CHURCH, COUNTRY MUSIC STAR: So, I think that being able to share that message in that setting, which is one of the most beautiful places in the world, and something that was dear to me, is something that I'm very thankful that I got to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: A timeless message.
And, of course, congrats to all the grads.
A quick footnote for you. Eric Church recently sat down with Anderson for his podcast on grief, "All There Is." You can listen wherever you get your podcasts, or watch it at CNN.com/AllThereIs.
That's all for us. I hope you have a wonderful weekend.
The news continues with "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: President Trump was just given a chance to clarify that answer about Americans' finances. You'll have to listen to what he said for yourself to believe it.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, President Trump is back at the White House, and back to the reality in the United States of gas prices, which are now averaging $4.53 a gallon nationally.
If you thought that after a couple of days away during his trip to China, and when asked exactly what he meant when he answered that question, that he was going to rephrase or clarify what he said about Americans' financial situations when it comes to the impact from the Iran war? You would be wrong.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: That's right. That's a perfect statement. I'd make it again.
BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS HOST: So, you can imagine how many people stopped the soundbite at--
TRUMP: No. No.
BAIER: --I don't think about Americans' financial situations.
TRUMP: No, they play that out.
BAIER: So, what's your response to that framework?
TRUMP: It's very simple. When people hear me say it, everybody agrees, short-term pain, it's going to be short-term pain, but the pain is much less than people thought.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Trump says he said it, and he'd say it again. And that came after both the Vice President, JD Vance, and the House Speaker, Mike Johnson, spent the last couple of days saying things like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you agree with the President's position that Americans' financial situations should not be a consideration in that decision- making process?
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Well, I don't think the President said that. I think that's a misrepresentation of what the President said.
But of course, the President and I and the entire team, we care about the American people's financial situations.
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): I don't know the context in which he made that comment. But I can tell you, the President thinks about Americans' financial situations. I talk to him on average twice a day, sometimes three or four times a day, and we talk about it constantly.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The context and the question itself was pretty clear. But also, in the subsequent interview that the President did, while he was in Beijing, with Bret Baier. And in fact, during that interview, the President continued doubling down on this sentiment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: When you tell somebody you're going to have to pay a little more -- not that much more -- a little more for gasoline for a very short period of time because, we want to stop the threat of being blown to pieces by a lunatic, by a crazy person, and they are crazy -- using nuclear weapons -- everybody says that's fine.
And that question was a fake question, and they didn't put my full answer. I totally care.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: Of course, to people struggling to put food on the table, or who are grimacing when they go to fill up their tank. There was nothing fake about the question.
And as far as the President's answer. We've played the entire thing for you since he said it, as he was departing the White House earlier this week. But just for good measure, you can listen to the entire thing for yourself.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Mr. President, to what extent are Americans' financial situations motivating you to make a deal?
TRUMP: Not even a little bit. The only thing that matters, when I'm talking about Iran, they can't have a nuclear weapon. I don't think about Americans' financial situation. I don't think about anybody. I think about one thing. We cannot let Iran have a nuclear weapon. That's all. That's the only thing that motivates.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead source tonight is The New York Times White House correspondent, and our CNN Political Analyst, and also the Co-author of the new book, "Regime Change," Maggie Haberman.
And, Maggie, you know, you've covered the President his entire political career. He's typically known for having good political instincts when it comes to voters and their sensitivities. What did you make of him doubling down on that comment tonight?
MAGGIE HABERMAN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES, CO-AUTHOR, "REGIME CHANGE": Think that he is very adamant that he can sell this war that the American government is engaged in right now, and he is telling people that they should relax and trust him, and things should get better. This is not the first time in U.S. history that you have had a president say that, Kaitlan, to the public. However, for past presidents who have done that, it has not ended very well for them politically. Number one.
[21:05:00]
Number two, Americans are hurting, and gas prices are just what they are. As you said, the question was what it was. He said what it was. He has seemed far less attuned to voters' concerns lately, and has been publicly talking more about himself and about what he perceives as injuries to himself, and condemning coverage and insisting that it's not real. What is real is, again, the tape you just played.
And where gas prices are, could it change, as he keeps saying that it will? Because, gas prices are going to go down quickly, when the price of oil goes down because, this war ends, or whatever it's being called right now, ends? It might. I mean, look, it's a long -- it's a long way between now and November, which is generally the context in which the White House is looking at it, and his party is looking at it, but certainly not where it is today. And so far, this government doesn't have a great record of being especially honest about where things are with the public. Remember, this was supposed to be a four- to six-week timeframe. Look at -- look at where we are now.
COLLINS: You said he seems less attuned to voters' concerns. Why do you think that is?
HABERMAN: I think there's a variety of reasons, Kaitlan. But one is he's not on the ballot.
Number two, I think that his information ecosystem is much smaller. We've talked about this any number of times. He is hearing from dissenting voices less than he used to. He is getting more of a sort of positive feedback flow to what he wants to hear, depending on what he's reading or seeing, or what aides are sharing with him. The press crew that is covering him in the White House has changed, and that is in part by the White House's design.
And so, I think, for all of those reasons, I think that he is feeling like he is going to listen to what he believes. And also, he thinks, you know, and people can judge this however they want, he relied on his instincts to win the election in 2024. He did win. He won it decisively. And his party has been in power. However, at a certain point, you can only control what you can control, and gas prices are what they are, and people can feel that. Again, it may change.
COLLINS: Yes.
HABERMAN: But this administration has not set a consistent set of goals for what it wants to achieve, other than, Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. That could be very open-ended.
COLLINS: I mean, it's also remarkable that the Vice President said, you know, That wasn't exactly what the President said, is being misrepresented.
Speaker Mike Johnson saying, I don't know the context of that.
And then Trump comes out and says, No, I would -- I would repeat that same comment today.
HABERMAN: He did say that, but he also insisted that it was a fake question, and that they didn't -- they didn't play his full answer.
And it wasn't a fake question, and the answer was played. And so, he sometimes does say both sides of what could be a problem. But yes, ultimately he doubled down on it. And ultimately, if you are in the Republican Party and you are tethered to Donald Trump in the midterms, you don't really want to hear that quote in an ad, and you're very likely to.
COLLINS: Yes, in the same interview, the President was asked about what you just referenced, this timeline that he put on this war, four to six weeks initially.
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: Now, of course, it's in the 11th week.
He was asked how long he expects it to last, and this is what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I don't like putting pressure on all of the people -- I want to do the job right. If it takes an extra four weeks. But think of it, we're in Vietnam for 19 years. I'm here -- I'm doing this for two, two and a half months.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Do you think it's clear to the President himself how long this war might go on for?
HABERMAN: It's hard to discern clarity from what he's been saying publicly, Kaitlan. If he does have clarity behind the scenes, that would be a different story.
I don't think, generally, politicians like to compare their own actions to Vietnam, as you know, we're better than -- we're in a better situation than that, generally--
COLLINS: Yes.
HABERMAN: --because Vietnam was a calamity, and it was a calamity of lost lives and massive distrust in the government, and really hasn't recovered ever since in the U.S. in any meaningful way.
So, yes, it's true that this is relatively short in terms of wars that the public has faced.
But this is a president who -- if you wanted to talk about his immigration policies, Kaitlan, or tariffs, you could say correctly those are things he ran on. Those are things he said he was going to do. The public had no reason to expect otherwise. He actually has been more hawkish than his team on Iran, but he also has been very critical of overseas military involvement by the U.S., and particularly the history in the Middle East.
And so, this is just fundamentally different than what he said on the campaign trail.
COLLINS: Right--
HABERMAN: And, no -- it's not different that he said Iran can't have a nuclear weapon. That is true. He has said that for many, many, many decades. But, again, that is very open-ended, and what that could look like is a different issue.
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: Yes, I mean because, he said Iran can't have a nuclear weapon, but he also said no new wars-- HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: --and that he would bring Americans' costs down.
HABERMAN: Right.
COLLINS: I mean, and he was asked, in the interview, about a retired farmer from Pennsylvania who was saying that he's very disappointed about gas prices that -- how high they are.
And the President responded to that concern, saying we hit the highest stock market price ever, now it's higher with the war, it's higher than when -- it was when I went in.
I mean, do you think that he sees the difference between stock market highs, and people who say I can't afford to fill my car up right now?
HABERMAN: Generally speaking, the stock market had been something of a guiding light for him, as you know, certainly, in term one. I think it's a little less now. There are a lot of people who don't have 401(k)s, as you know, and it is very different than having gas prices.
He has had a remarkable ability to say things like that to the public because, the public, generally speaking, Kaitlan, despite his long years in politics at this point, has not -- many people have not viewed him as a politician or as a standard politician. They viewed him as a celebrity, or they viewed him as a phenomenon, they viewed him as a movement leader. All of those things have been true. He is a unique figure in our -- in our history, and certainly in the history of this country. But he's really testing whether he can continue doing that.
So, I don't know whether he can see the difference. But right now, more voters than before seem to be able to.
COLLINS: Maggie Haberman, as always, thank you for your excellent reporting.
HABERMAN: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And speaking of reporting, and what we're learning tonight. There is also new reporting about the Justice Department, as they have been grappling with the President's $10 billion lawsuit that he filed against the IRS, over the leak of his tax returns during his first term in office.
You know, the President has since acknowledged how strange it is that he is now suing the government that he technically controls.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: It's awfully strange to make a decision where I'm paying myself.
REPORTER: You're suing the IRS. Can you talk a little bit about what it's like to be on both sides of a lawsuit? TRUMP: It's very interesting.
I brought a lawsuit. Essentially, the lawsuit has been won. I guess I won a lot of money.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, a federal judge has been examining whether or not this lawsuit is constitutional.
But tonight, The New York Times is reporting that a new plan is apparently under discussion. It doesn't seem that they've made any firm decisions on this yet. But this plan that's under discussion is to have the establishment of a $1.7 billion fund to compensate the President's allies and others who were investigated by the Justice Department under President Biden, creating an ethical and political minefield for Republicans and the Justice Department's leadership.
Now, The Times adds that this unusual plan, which Democrats and former government officials have criticized as basically a vast political slush fund financed by taxpayers, is being fast-tracked. Though, The New York Times says it has yet to be finalized or approved, according to their sources.
My legal source tonight is the former Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Tom Dupree.
And Tom, this isn't a done deal, according to The Times. But have you ever heard of anything like this?
TOM DUPREE, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Gosh, no.
Look, the government has established these types of victim compensation funds before. It's done so for farmers who are discriminated against. It did so for victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
But what is apparently being contemplated is qualitatively different than anything we've seen before. For one thing, it doesn't arise out of any sort of judgment against the United States. For another thing, apparently the commission would be run by several people, handpicked by the President, to decide who gets the money, how much money they get, and there may not even be any transparency into who is getting this money and how much.
So, when you're talking about nearly $2 billion of taxpayer money, I would say, that's cause for concern.
COLLINS: Well, and I mean, and ABC says that on that board, the President would be able to remove people from the commission without cause. I mean, this raises so many legal questions, I would imagine.
DUPREE: It sure does. Look, I think describing it as an ethical minefield for the Justice Department understates it, if anything. It is extremely difficult to figure out how something like this could be structured in a lawful way. It also raises just, I think, the fundamental question about whether it's appropriate to be paying these apparently large sums of money to individuals who, for example, were convicted of assaulting police officers on January 6th. If that's the idea behind the fund? I think that really would raise even more concerns. Because, I think, especially in this economy, there are a lot of Americans who are struggling and, arguably, would be more deserving of a grant from this taxpayer fund than individuals who were convicted of assaulting law enforcement.
COLLINS: I mean, if the federal judge is looking into whether or not the President could sue agencies that he oversees, would that factor into this, you think?
[21:15:00]
DUPREE: I think it would factor into it. My understanding of what's going on here is, I think the Justice Department realizes that this is going to be a very difficult case to litigate, to say the least. For the reasons the President mentioned. He's basically suing himself. He's on both sides. That's the issue that concerned the federal judge.
So, I think the way that this litigation plays out is the Justice Department and President Trump may say, Look, let's just shelve this litigation and resolve it by creating this fund. So, we'll put the litigation off to the side, we won't have to worry about how that gets resolved. And at the same time, we'll create a taxpayer-funded treasury that would basically give out money to people that this commission decide are deserving.
COLLINS: Tom Dupree, thank you for breaking that down for us.
DUPREE: Thanks.
COLLINS: Coming up. The President is also getting his wish tonight in Colorado. That's because Tina Peters, the former county clerk who's in prison there for trying to help overturn the 2020 election, she was just granted clemency by the state's Democratic governor, Jared Polis. He's actually going to join me right after this to talk about his decision.
Also, on Air Force One, as the President was coming back from China, he erupted at a New York Times reporter, after his reporting talked about Iran, and the President accused the outlet of treason.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I actually think it's treason, when you write like, They're doing well militarily. And they have no navy, no air force, no anti- anything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:20:00] COLLINS: Tonight, President Trump is back at the White House.
And as he fielded questions from reporters, during the flight back from China, he was asked repeatedly about the war in Iran, and at one point erupted over coverage of the handling of it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID SANGER, WHITE HOUSE & NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES, CNN POLITICAL & NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST, AUTHOR, "NEW COLD WARS": What would the use be of repeating the bombing? You did it for 38 days.
TRUMP: Well, no. We did. We did.
SANGER: And you did not get the political changes in Iran.
TRUMP: No, I got -- I had a total military victory. But the fake news, guys like you, write incorrectly. You're a fake guy. And guys like you write about it incorrectly. We had a total military victory.
We've had a total victory, except by people like you that don't write the truth. You know? You should write -- I actually think it's sort of treasonous what you write. But you and The New York Times, and CNN, I would say, are the worst.
All right. Go ahead.
REPORTER: Sir how--
TRUMP: And you should know better, David. You know your -- you know better. Your editors tell you what to write and you write it. You should be ashamed of it.
REPORTER: Mr. President--
TRUMP: I actually think it's treason, when you write like, They're doing well militarily. And they have no navy, no air force, no anti- anything.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: That David, that the President was referencing there, and accusing of treason, is The New York Times White House and National Security Correspondent, David Sanger. And he joins me now after returning from that trip on Air Force One.
So, first off, David, thank you for joining us after a very long flight. And secondly, as all of our viewers know, you are an excellent reporter, which is why we often have you here on the show.
You've covered the President for a long time. Why do you think he answered your question about his strategy in Iran that way?
SANGER: Well, thanks, Kaitlan, for having me on. It was a bit of flying. It was, I think, about 17 hours from the time that we left the leadership compound right next to the Forbidden City and got back to Andrews Air Force Base.
To the President's statement. You played my question. My question to him was not whether or not we had achieved any military objectives. Obviously, the U.S. has hit 13,000 targets, as the Pentagon will often tell you. The question is, why did those not translate to the political changes we were trying to bring about?
And this has been a consistent theme of The Times' coverage, my coverage in particular, and certainly what we've all done here on CNN, which is to say, the President's been deeply frustrated by the fact that you can have this big a military campaign, and still the Iranians have not given up their nuclear program, not ceased enrichment of uranium, not given up their missiles, not brought about regime change. The goals, he laid out.
And so what he did was misstate what it was that we were writing. We've never said that the Iranians have won militarily. We've said that, despite the fact that they lost militarily, they have held on and not given in on the political objectives.
COLLINS: Which is obviously a worthy question. Because if the President still wants to achieve those goals. I mean, he himself has been frustrated with the Iranians' responses to the United States' attempt to negotiate here.
SANGER: That's right. Look, if he had achieved the military goal, the political goals that he set out, not just the military goals, then the Strait would be open and Iran's nuclear program would be being -- dismantled right now. And it's not. Maybe it will be, and maybe that's exactly how it will play out. But it certainly has not this far -- thus far.
To the treason statement. Look, reporting is not treason, right? And you've been on the receiving end of these probably more than I have, and we all know what this is about. It is an effort to intimidate news organizations into not doing the reporting.
But reporting is the fundamental First Amendment responsibility that we have to go about, and that's what the Founders were trying to protect when they wrote the First Amendment, and that's what we go to work every day to do, some days imperfectly. I would not argue for a moment that we get it all right.
[21:25:00]
But the President seems to conflate news he doesn't want to hear with treason, and that's not the case. Look, he himself ran for office, arguing that the United States made all the biggest mistakes that it could make in Afghanistan and Iraq, and he knew that from enterprising reporting that was appearing in The New York Times, on CNN, and elsewhere.
COLLINS: It's an excellent point, David, as is your reporting as well. And you're right, reporting is not treason.
Thank you, David Sanger, for joining us, and I hope you get some sleep.
SANGER: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: My next source tonight just granted clemency to an election denier and former elections clerk who is in prison for her role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election. The Democratic governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, is here to join us and explain his decision, right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:30:00]
COLLINS: Tonight, the last Trump ally who was still in prison for 2020 election-related crimes is now being granted clemency and could be released from custody in just over two weeks. But not by the President. Instead, Colorado's Democratic Governor Jared Polis says that election denier Tina Peters will get clemency after admitting that she, quote, "Made a mistake" and misled Colorado election officials.
Now, Peters, you may remember, is the former election clerk who is convicted of conspiring, with fellow election deniers, to breach her own county's election systems, in an attempt to prove President Trump's baseless claims of voter fraud in the 2020 election.
Now, the President, who launched a very intense pressure campaign on state officials to release her, reacted to this news tonight, posting, quote, "FREE TINA."
Now, Governor Polis is reducing Tina Peters' nine-year prison sentence in half to four-and-a-half years. He said she could be paroled, though, within a month after serving less than two years in prison.
Back in February, you may remember, we had Governor Polis, here on the show, to talk about this case.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: So, will you grant her clemency if she doesn't apologize?
GOV. JARED POLIS (D-CO): Well, those are -- those are all part of the conversation. We like to see -- what I like to see in a clemency application is somebody who takes responsibility, apologizes. We also look at the disparate sentence. We also look at age and health. Those are the kinds of things that I look at as part of the clemency process.
There's not a separate clemency process for this person. There's a number of them that I'm looking at. And like many governors, I firmly believe, of course, in the value of mercy and redemption. But that certainly also means taking responsibility.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And Governor Polis joins me again tonight. And thank you, sir, for being here.
A lot of people might look at this and say, Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers in a conservative-leaving county, no less. Why did you decide to commute her sentence?
POLIS: I have to start, Kaitlan, by correcting just one thing in the lead-in. She did not commit any crimes regarding the 2020 elections. She certified President Biden won. This was after the 2021. It was a small municipal election in the town. The results were counted, no ballots were compromised. But she went in and illegally copied -- tried to copy software before an update came. So, nothing to do with President Trump's election. Just wanted to make that clear.
Look, what the appeals court found, and what I agree, is that fundamentally she deserves time. And she committed four felonies. Those are going to stay on her record. We're continuing to fight the President's bogus attempt to pardon her in court.
But the truth of the matter is that her speech, meaning her conspiratorial beliefs and what she believes in, they're certainly an anathema to me and most of your viewers, and I strongly disagree with. But those are not the basis, and should not be the basis, for a longer sentence than somebody would normally get for this crime, and that's really what this sentence reduction is all about.
COLLINS: There's, I mean, there's been blowback from Democrats and Republicans for this.
Your Democratic A.G. said -- called it mind-boggling and wrong as a matter of basic justice.
The Mesa County Republican District Attorney who prosecuted her said it was misguided and misunderstood decision that undermines accountability and erodes confidence in the integrity system.
The Clerks Association in Colorado said that they're furious, disgusted, and deeply disappointed by the reckless and dangerous message this sends.
What message do you think it sends?
POLIS: Well, first of all, I commuted the sentences of nine people today. I pardoned 35. Tina Peters was not among those.
The Attorney General and the prosecuting attorney from Mesa County were part of the prosecution. And there's something about prosecutorial pride. Prosecutors are seldom, if ever, satisfied by the commutations I make, and sometimes they're quite mad.
What a commutation is, is effectively saying, We're going to look at the sentence as a whole. Was it different than other people that committed the same crime? There was, in fact, another public official in Colorado, convicted of four felonies, one was the exact same felony as Tina Peters, and she got zero time in prison. She got probation- only. Had Tina Peters gotten a year, or two years, or even three, I don't think anybody would have batted an eye. But the reason we're here is because I fundamentally agree with the appeals court that the fact that she engages in speech and has beliefs that are far from the mainstream, incorrect, should not in fact be a basis for harsher sentencing. And four-and-a-half years, instead of nine years, that's what we adjusted it to, is frankly a tough but fair and defensible sentence for the crimes that she committed.
COLLINS: I just want to follow up on what you said about this having nothing to do with the 2020 election. For people who didn't follow this closely.
[21:35:00]
Tina Peters did give Mike Lindell, who everyone knows as the My Pillow Guy, her badge, basically her -- someone else's security badge, so he could go in and access the Mesa County election system. And when this was happening, prosecutors said that she was fixated on voting problems after the 2020 election, and had questioned the accuracy of those, and--
POLIS: Well, Kaitlan, I just hate to interrupt you. This was related to the 2021 municipal election. In the 2020 election--
COLLINS: No, I understand. But did she give Mike Lindell--
POLIS: -she certified the results, Biden won.
COLLINS: Did Mike Lindell get access to the -- to the election system or not?
POLIS: Absolutely -- absolutely not. Absolutely not. She had two co- conspirators in the case. She illegally got one access to a room after 2021 -- none of these crimes were in 2020, none of them had to do with President Trump's election. If they did, this would be a very different story, and we wouldn't be where we are. This had to do with a minor municipal election and software, and the crime--
COLLINS: But it came after the President of the United States--
POLIS: --two co-conspirators. One got--
COLLINS: --tried to overturn the 2020 election, and she was obviously a massive ally of his. And Mike Lindell, I mean, didn't come out of nowhere. He was also chief among those leading the 2020 election. So, I just think saying that they're totally separated--
POLIS: Yes.
COLLINS: --is not how people view this.
POLIS: Yes, you're speaking to her beliefs. She is somebody who probably, you'd have to ask her, believes in something happening with the 2020 election. Her crimes were not related to that election. She was county clerk, she certified Biden won. Trump happened to win her county, it's a conservative county.
Her crimes were entirely related to the 2021 municipal election. After ballots were counted. Nothing was compromised. She had two co- conspirators. They did everything as bad as she did. One got six months. One got probation-only. And the unusual sentence for Tina, she had a poor defense. And, as the appeals court with three Democratic- appointed appeals justices found, she was ultimately punished for her beliefs and what she said, rather than what she did.
COLLINS: Yes, and the appeals court was still working its way out.
You noted in your letter explaining this, and her statement that she also put out, that she's taken responsibility for her crimes and made a commitment to follow the law going forward.
When you look at her website, it says that she's the victim of a politically-motivated prosecution. They just -- her Twitter account just reposted someone who urged the President to, quote, "INVADE COLORADO if you have to. Do whatever needs to be done to free political prisoner Tina Peters."
I understand what you're saying about free speech and what she's allowed to say. But does that sound like someone who respects the rule of law to you?
POLIS: She has very strange beliefs. She'll probably continue to have them.
We don't punish people in this country for having strange beliefs. If you believe the Earth's flat, you don't get, and you shouldn't get, in our nation or my state, a harsher sentence than somebody who believes that the Earth is round.
And that's what happened here because, of her speech and what she believes, which I vehemently disagree with, and I share the passion and the emotions that so many people feel, who are outraged by the words she says. But the place to resolve those differences is by debate, by discourse, by arguing with her, with by disputing her. Not for keeping her behind bars, simply because of what she believes or says.
COLLINS: Did the President and what he said repeatedly, publicly, have anything to do with your decision to commute her sentence?
POLIS: It certainly made it a lot harder. Absolutely.
President Trump tends to muck up everything he gets involved with. He does not understand this case. He thought -- he got her age wrong. He actually thought, like you did, Kaitlan, it had something to do with the 2020 election. It did not. Nothing to do with the 2020 election. She did her job, she certified Biden won. 2021 election was what it was. And yes, it absolutely made it harder to do. But it'll never -- you know, President Trump's never going to deter me from doing the right thing.
COLLINS: So he didn't have anything -- he didn't influence you to do this, you're saying?
POLIS: It made it harder. Absolutely. There's no question that the President's involvement made it harder.
Thousands of people, of course, have weighed in. People called my office.
Some incorrectly thought she didn't commit a crime, as the President did. Thought she should be pardoned. We're going to fight the President's illegal pardon in court.
Some, like me, thought she was guilty, should have had a slightly lower sentence.
Others wanted her to stay there for a long time and fundamentally misunderstood the crime, thought it had something to do with the 2020 election, or election conspiracy around Trump and Biden, when the crime had zero to do with that.
COLLINS: You don't think if -- had Trump not disputed the 2020 election, had Mike Lindell not become this famous figure on TV disputing the election results in 2020, that what happened in 2021, in Mesa County, would have happened?
POLIS: Well, to be clear, this was a clerk that certified the 2020 election result results. There was not an issue there. There were some issues around her competency--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Yes, but I'm just asking, if you don't think that what happened in 2020--
POLIS: This was a municipal election.
COLLINS: --you don't think that this would have happened?
You just think that those are totally separate, that this would have still occurred even if the President, if that had never happened in 2020, with a major election dispute and pressure on the Vice President, and on state election officials from Georgia to Colorado to wherever on that, you don't think that this would have happened?
[21:40:00]
POLIS: You'd have to have her on to talk about her motivation. Do I think that she was egged on or encouraged in her illegal acts, by people like Mike Lindell, perhaps even the President of the United States? It's certainly a conjecture, but it's certainly possible. I don't know how she came to hold her beliefs.
I certainly believe that there are incorrect, dangerous beliefs that are held in certain circles in our country. Ultimately, it's a matter of free speech until you cross the line and violate the law, which she did, and that's why she committed the crime, and she should do the time with a sentence that's tough and fair. And that's why her sentence has been adjusted to four-and-a-half years, which is a very severe sentence for what she did when, again, another public official in Colorado got probation-only for one of the exact same felonies and three other felonies.
COLLINS: Governor Jared Polis, thank you for joining us tonight.
POLIS: Thank you.
COLLINS: Also, here with us is the Colorado Secretary of State, Jena Griswold.
Secretary, you heard what the Governor said there, explaining his decision, why he thinks this was the right call. What's your response to what you just heard from him?
JENA GRISWOLD, (D) COLORADO SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, overall, I think this is the wrong decision, and it's a gross injustice to our elections, our democracy, and election officials across this country.
And frankly, Tina Peters' actions has everything to do with the 2020 election. The Governor is correct that she facilitated the compromising of voting equipment during 2021. But make no mistake, the intent of her work was to try to prove Trump's big lie.
And Kaitlan, just to clarify. Tina Peters did not let Mike Lindell into the voting equipment. There was someone else. But she did take the images of the voting equipment. Those were taken to Mike Lindell's Cyber Symposium, where they were supposedly going to prove once and for all how the election really was for Trump. Of course, it's a bunch of conspiracies.
So, I think, overall, Tina Peters committed a crime. The judicial process should have been given the time to work out her sentencing. There was an active resentencing happening right now. And overall, this is -- this grant of clemency is the wrong message to send in a time when our democracy is in crisis.
COLLINS: In her statement, Tina Peters said, following this commutation, I misled the Secretary of State when allowing a person to gain access to county voting equipment. That was wrong. Going forward, I will make sure that my actions always follow the law.
You are the Secretary of State -- you were the Secretary of State, when this happened. Do you believe her?
GRISWOLD: Absolutely not. This is someone who really basks in the celebrity of MAGA conspiracy-fueled craziness, and used her actions to fuel lies and further disinformation about our elections. And those lies, those conspiracies, have been used to attack elections and threaten election officials. I do not think that Tina Peters has shown remorse.
I do believe in the judicial process. And as the Governor said, the Court of Appeals did cite an issue with her sentencing and sent it back to the district court to re-sentence. Whatever that district court would have decided would have been fine. But I don't think that she should get special treatment. She has caused a lot of danger and damage in Colorado.
But more than just that, this sends a message to Trump's followers that if they break the law, well, they might get off just fine. This sends a message to Donald Trump that if he retaliates hard enough, he'll be able to get a state to do his bidding. And this tells election officials that however hard we work, some people may just be above the law if they attack American democracy. That's a dangerous, dangerous message to send the country right now.
COLLINS: Colorado Secretary of State, Jena Griswold, thank you for joining us tonight.
GRISWOLD: Thank you.
COLLINS: Coming up. Republican Congressman Mike Lawler will join me next, to talk about what happened, after he was confronted by the son of Republican Senator Rand Paul.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): And I think that's (bleep) disgusting.
The conversation shortly thereafter ended. He gave me the middle finger and then tripped on his way out the door.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, U.S. officials suspect Iran is responsible for a series of cybersecurity breaches at gas stations in multiple states.
Sources say the hackers got into online systems that monitor the level of fuel in storage tanks serving gas stations, allowing them, in some cases, to tinker with display readings on the tanks. The intrusions don't appear to have caused any physical damage or harm. But security experts are concerned that, in theory, hackers could make gas leaks go undetected, for example.
Since the Iran war started, in late February, Tehran-linked hackers have disrupted U.S. water and energy systems, and have caused shipping delays at a major medical device maker, and they also leaked the private emails, former -- emails, before he was the FBI Director, of Kash Patel.
Joining me tonight is Republican Congressman of New York, Mike Lawler, who sits and serves on the Foreign Affairs and Financial Services Committees.
Congressman, what do you make of what Iran is doing with these hacks? What message do you think -- with these hacks, what message do you think they're trying to send? [21:50:00]
LAWLER: Well, there's no question the Iranian regime has been engaged in cyberattacks for years. They are very skilled at it. And this is certainly one of their lines of defense, if you will, during this conflict. But it does raise obvious concerns when they are able to hack into these systems. As you pointed out, there was not physical damage, but could lead to greater problems down the road.
So, I think it's good, obviously, that it was detected. But more needs to be done to secure these systems, among others and be--
COLLINS: Yes.
LAWLER: --two, three, four, five steps ahead of the Iranian regime.
COLLINS: And earlier tonight, as the President was coming back from China, he was asked about his question that he doesn't think about Americans' financial situations,, when it comes to making decisions on the Iran war. He said that he'd say that statement again.
Does that make it harder for Republicans who are on the ballot this fall that definitely are concerned with Americans' financial situations?
LAWLER: Well, it is my top priority and number one focus, the issue of affordability. Obviously, we want to see gas prices come down as swiftly as possible.
Prior to this conflict, we were below $3 for the first time in five years, which was a significant move in the right direction. Obviously, the short-term volatility in the oil markets as a result of the war and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has created hardship. And we want to address that. It's part of the reason why we are looking at things like a suspension of the gas tax, why we are looking at getting permitting reform done, so that we can continue to increase domestic production of energy.
One of the things that I think was a positive out of the trip to China was the fact that China is openly talking about purchasing U.S. oil and gas. We have cut off a significant supply to them from both Venezuela and Iran. China purchases 90 percent of Iran's petroleum.
COLLINS: Yes.
LAWLER: So, they are dealing with significant consequence from this conflict. Hopefully, they will play a positive role in addressing some of the outstanding issues, including the removal of the enriched uranium and the opening of the Strait of Hormuz.
COLLINS: And as we wait to see, obviously what happens, now that the President is back.
I want to ask you about something that happened in Washington this week. The outlet NOTUS says their reporter witnessed this, they were with you, where Senator Rand Paul's 33-year-old son hurled antisemitic insults and comments at you while you two were at a restaurant bar in Washington. And he, according to NOTUS, told you that Jews would be to blame if Congressman Thomas Massie loses his primary and specifically referred to, Your people.
Can you just tell me what happened from your perspective.
LAWLER: Well, as a New Yorker would understand, there's very few places open after 10 o'clock at night in D.C. for food. And so, one of them is the Tune Inn bar. And I went there to get food with a friend of mine. And Reese Gorman, a reporter from NOTUS had reached out to meet up as well.
And at one point, while I was eating, Rand Paul's son interjected himself into our conversation, and specifically said that, if Thomas Massie loses next week, it'll be because of Your people.
And I said, Who are my people?
And he screamed out, Jews.
And so, I said to him, I said, Do you think I'm Jewish?
And he said, Yes.
And I said, Well, I'm Irish-Italian Catholic.
And he said, Wait, you're not Jewish?
I said, No.
And he said, Oh my God, I'm so sorry for accusing you of that.
COLLINS: Yes.
LAWLER: Which is a pretty remarkable statement in and of itself.
But then, I said to him, Look, even if I was Jewish, what is the problem?
And he proceeded to go on a 10-minute diatribe against Paul Singer, against Jews broadly, against Israel. He talked about the fact that we're in Iran to seize land for the gays and the Jews, and I asked him what the gays have to do with this. And then he went into a diatribe about how he hates gays, hates Jews, and doesn't care if they die, at which point I told him the conversation was over and it was time for him to leave. And he didn't understand why, and I said Because you just made it clear you hate Jews.
And then he screamed out, I didn't say that, don't put words in my mouth.
And I said, You literally just said it.
And then he said, I'm drunk, I don't know what I said, and then he proceeded to pay his bill, trip over the bar stool, and leave.
[21:55:00]
But Kaitlan, I think it speaks to a much bigger problem that we're seeing in America, that we're seeing in our politics. It's why Josh Gottheimer, a Democrat from New Jersey, and I, put forth a resolution, condemning people like Hasan Piker on the left, and Candace Owens on the right.
The antisemitic vitriol, the Blame Jews at all costs, the Try to tie Israel into everything. I mean, Thomas Massie today said that Israel is trying to buy an election. The fact is, the people that are spending money on his opponent are American citizens. They have a right, like everybody else, to participate in our democracy, to support candidates that support the issues and the ideals and values that they believe in. Apparently, according to Thomas, and people like Rand Paul's son, Jewish Americans should not be afforded that right.
COLLINS: Yes, well, obviously, what his son said is reprehensible.
Congressman Mike Lawler, thank you for joining us to share that.
LAWLER: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: If you missed any of the show this week, it is available on demand to our subscribers on the CNN app. You can also check out the podcast wherever you get your podcasts. And follow me on Instagram and Twitter @kaitlancollins, where I am always posting and reposting the latest reporting throughout the day.
Thanks for joining us.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
