Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Says He Delayed Major Strikes On Iran; DOJ Creates $1.8 Billion Fund Designed To Compensate Trump Allies; GOP Rep. Massie Faces Trump-Backed Candidate In KY Primary. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 18, 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]
JEFFREY TOOBIN, AUTHOR, "THE RUN OF HIS LIFE: THE PEOPLE V. O.J. SIMPSON," FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, and he knew he was on tape saying it. I mean, he had worked with this aspiring screenwriter on--
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: Of course, it's L.A.--
TOOBIN: It was of course in L.A. -- you know, so much of this case was L.A. And she was trying to figure out how cops talk and what cops were like.
COOPER: Right. He's on tape.
TOOBIN: He's on tape. And he pleaded guilty to a crime. He's the only person in the O.J. Simpson case who was convicted of a crime.
COOPER: Jeff Toobin, thank you.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. It's an unprecedented settlement, taxpayer money and the President's allies. What the President said he knew about the Justice Department's new billion dollar fund.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Tonight, President Trump says he has planned and called off new attacks on Iran, a plan that our sources say came about after he grew frustrated with the state of negotiations with Iran.
Senior military advisers had given the President a list of options, that Trump says were going to be carried out tomorrow. But today, he publicly announced that major allies in the Middle East had urged him to hold off, and that he will because, quote, "In their opinion, as Great Leaders and Allies, a Deal will be made."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We were getting ready to do a very major attack tomorrow. I've put it off for a little while, hopefully maybe forever, but possibly for a little while because, we've had very big discussions with Iran, and we'll see what they amount to. I was asked by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and some others, if we could put it off for two or three days, a short period of time because, they think that they are getting very close to making a deal.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: As you listen to the President there, I should note that we are now in week 12 of the war that he initially said would last about four to six weeks, and this would be at least the eighth time since he announced that ceasefire in early April that the President has threatened Iran and not followed through.
You might recall when he said, If there's no deal, then the shooting starts bigger and better and stronger. Or, Any Iranian who fires at us will be, quote, in all-caps, BLOWN TO HELL. Also, No more Mr. Nice guy. And then also, when the President said the clock was ticking.
Earlier today, after the President called off these strikes that he says were planned for tomorrow, my colleague, Kristen Holmes, asked the President about all the times that we've heard a peace deal was close.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Other countries have done this before. They have asked you to change course in order to dangle. They dangled a peace deal in front of you, saying one was coming. Nothing has come into fruition. You mentioned this one's different.
TRUMP: Well, a lot's come into fruition. We've--
HOLMES: Well there's--
TRUMP: --taken a country that was going to have a nuclear weapon, and we've virtually destroyed its military. They have no navy. They have no air force. They've been -- every-- they've been virtually destroyed militarily. That's a lot. That's a big -- we could leave right now, would take them 25 years to rebuild. And the last thing they're thinking about, I think, is nuclear. Now they have to put it down in writing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, the longer the war goes on, the higher we've seen gas prices keep climbing, and a resumption of fighting could potentially drive energy prices even higher than they are tonight.
And during the 2024 campaign, as you heard us talk about last week, the President promised that he would get gas to under $2 a gallon with his policies.
But as we come on the air tonight, there is movement on a Trump campaign promise to tell you about. It's just not about gas prices. It's this one.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: In 2016, I declared I am your voice.
And now I say to you, again tonight, I am your warrior.
(CHEERING)
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: I am your justice.
(CHEERING)
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: And I took a lot of heat for this one, but I only mean it in the proper way. For those who have been wronged and betrayed, of which there are many people out there that have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Well, that retribution has apparently arrived, and ethics attorneys are saying tonight it's quite astonishing.
The Justice Department has confirmed it is going to create a $1.776 billion fund to pay people who claim they were unfairly targeted by the Biden administration. That number, 1776 is intentional, and the move is unprecedented, giving the President's administration funds to pay his own supporters with taxpayer money from a government agency that he controls.
[21:05:00]
Even though this fund emerged as part of a deal in exchange for the President and his sons dropping their lawsuit against the IRS, something that was also unprecedented, the President professed ignorance earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Well, it's been very well received, I have to tell you. I know very little about it. I wasn't involved in -- in the whole creation of it, and -- and the negotiation. But this is reimbursing people that were horribly treated, horribly treated. It's anti-weaponization. They've been weaponized. They've been, in some cases, imprisoned wrongly. They paid legal fees that they didn't have. They've gone bankrupt. Their lives have been destroyed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: You heard the President there, saying that he knows very little about this deal. But we know a lot because, you can actually read through the settlement yourself because it's posted online. What we know from reading through it is that the President is going to have the power to fire anyone.
His acting Attorney General, who, of course, is Todd Blanche, who was the President's former personal attorney before he got into government when the President won the election. He will be the person who picks the people that are on the board that is going to hand out that 1.8- nearly-billion dollars.
Under the terms of the agreement, again, that you yourself can read, five people selected by the Attorney General will oversee the compensation fund. One of them will be selected in consultation with congressional leadership.
The Justice Department says this money is going to come from an account that is used for settling lawsuits. And, as you heard from the President earlier, it was notable that he didn't answer when he was asked if the money would go to people that he has pardoned, including, of course, virtually everyone who was convicted on January 6th, including those who were convicted of attacking police officers on that day.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you believe that people who committed violence against Capitol Hill police officers on January 6th should be eligible for compensation from this DOJ fund? And are you or your family members going to be seeking--
TRUMP: Yes.
REPORTER: --compensation from that fund?
TRUMP: It will all be dependent on a committee. A committee is being set up of very talented people, very highly respected people. I think it's a committee of five.
And again, I didn't do this deal. It was told to me yesterday. They said they're doing something. I do believe there has to be compensation for people that were destroyed. You have families absolutely destroyed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Again, the committee that the President is talking about there, that's going to be making these decisions, will be picked by the Attorney General.
The New York Times also says tonight that, as far as to that question, there, the second part of that, in terms of the President receiving compensation, or his family. They say, the Justice Department says the President, his sons, and his family business will get an apology, but they will not be paid out of this fund. I should note, the announcement of the $1.8 billion fund that the President's team will be able to dole out, as they see fit, comes the same day that we heard from the Vice President, JD Vance, who was on the road in Missouri today, with a message on the need to be better stewards of taxpayer money.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: When somebody steals $1.4 billion from the Medicaid program, that is theft from you, and that's theft from people who deserve to be able to go see a doctor. When people steal billions of dollars from the Medicare program, that is theft from you, and it's also theft from the people who use the Medicare program to pay their bills.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My lead source tonight is the senior Democratic senator from Colorado, who is also running for governor in that state. There's a primary next month. We'll talk about that race to come.
But Senator Michael Bennet, thank you for joining us here on THE SOURCE.
When you read through this settlement agreement, the details of how this fund is going to work. The Justice Department calls it the Anti- Weaponization Fund. What would you call it?
SEN. MICHAEL BENNET (D-CO): I would call it one more day in the worst presidency in American history.
When you think about the way that he is using the Justice Department to not just defend himself but enrich himself.
When you think about the money that he is making on crypto while he's sitting there in the White House. JD Vance is attacking other people for $1.4 billion in Medicaid fraud, while the President sits in the White House with $2 billion or $3 billion or $4 billion of crypto.
When he takes this country into a war with Iran that wasn't approved by the United States Congress, and where every single rationale that he has given for that war has turned out to be completely without any merit.
It's one more day in the worst presidency in American history, I think.
COLLINS: Some people might be listening to this, and how this is structured, in terms of -- I mean, this is taxpayer money. The acting Attorney General is going to be the person who picks who's on this five-person commission that decides how this money is paid out. And they're going to ask if this is legal.
Do you believe that it's legal?
[21:10:00] BENNET: Oh, I absolutely don't believe it is legal.
And I worked at the Justice Department. I worked for the Deputy Attorney General of the United States. I've been briefly a federal prosecutor. And this is shameful, what he is doing with the Justice Department. Donald Trump has hung his picture outside the Justice Department as if we're living in some fascist state somewhere, where the great leader is able to put his name -- his face on the outside of government buildings.
And now, he's turned the work of the Justice Department to basically fund his allies and lawbreakers on January 6th that attacked the Capitol of the United States, that attacked Capitol police officers in full view of the American people. And President Trump is not only saying there's nothing to see here. He's saying, they should be compensated by the taxpayers of the United States, who, by the way, can't really afford to do it, Kaitlan because, of what he's done in Iran is costing people $4.5 at the pump to pay for gas for a war that he started.
COLLINS: I mean, and of course, the question was whether or not anyone who committed a crime on January 6th, specifically those who went after cops and beat cops and attacked them on that day, whether or not they could get money out of this fund and end up being compensated.
BENNET: Right.
COLLINS: And obviously we've seen how the President has sympathized with them.
I want everyone to remember what you said after January 6th.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENNET: There's a tendency around this place, I think, to always believe that we're the first people to confront something when that's seldom the case, and to underappreciate what the effect of our actions will be. We need to deeply appreciate, in this moment, our obligation to the Constitution, our obligation to the democracy, our obligation to the republic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Do you believe people who were convicted of crimes that day and have since been pardoned, I mean, do you think they actually are going to get paid taxpayer money now, potentially?
BENNET: I think that's what's going to happen, and that's part of the grift that Donald Trump is running.
But far more important than that is the way he is undermining our institutions, and he is putting, in some sense, out of reach, he's trying to, a memory of the United States of America, when we were committed to the rule of law, when we were committed to our democracy, when we were committed to our Constitution. I believe very strongly that he will not succeed in what he's trying to do, but this is a tyrant's playbook that he's running.
And, again, it's not a small thing for the President of the United States to hang his picture off the outside of the leading agency that's meant to administer justice in this country. It is not a small thing. It's never happened before, for a president to create a fund that's $1.8 billion, a slush fund of taxpayer money, to pay off his cronies.
And we cannot allow this, that's the point I was trying to make on the floor that day, we cannot allow this to become the norm in America.
I think we've learned that as a result of Donald Trump's two presidencies that we may not be as immune as we thought we were from the undermining of our institutions. I think we now understand that there is nobody riding to our rescue, that the American people themselves are going to have to rise up against this lawlessness, and I believe they will.
COLLINS: I think technically it was Pam Bondi who hung up the Trump poster, just for clarity's sake, but obviously knowing it would be something that the President would like.
But in terms of -- you talked about people not letting this happen or stopping the President. I mean, who is going to stop him from doing this because, it doesn't -- I mean, the judge here basically said this matter was out of her hands. It doesn't really seem like -- I mean, what's your answer to that? Can Congress stop this fund?
BENNET: Well, my answer is that Congress has to do everything we can to make sure that we're doing the oversight that's required, that the -- that Democrats and Republicans acknowledge the insanity of what he's doing.
We have, you know, Kaitlan, recently been putting measures on the floor to point out that the President has violated the War Powers Act, and that is beginning, slowly, to get Republican votes.
[21:15:00]
And I think Republicans probably are at home right now, trying to explain why their constituents are having to pay $4.5 at the Trump -- at the pump, for Trump's lawless war. And over time, I hope they will be broke -- this cult of personality that exists among the Republicans in the Senate will be broken. We'll see what happens.
And in the meantime, Democrats are going to have to continue to assert our authority, our responsibility at the -- in the Senate. We've got to win the House back in this election. That would be a major step forward to putting a guardrail in front of this president.
And ultimately, I think it's going to be the American people who time and time again in American history, when they've faced reactionary moments like this one, have always, always, ridden to the rescue, and overcome this reactionary moment and replaced it with a long progressive era, and one that's committed to the rule of law. And that's what we have to do. I mean, that is what our kids and grandkids are demanding of us right now.
COLLINS: Well--
BENNET: This can't be normalized. Our kids and grandkids can't believe that Donald Trump is a normal president, or the lawlessness that he's pursuing somehow is permitted under the Constitution of the United States. It is affront to our Constitution, to our republic.
COLLINS: You know one--
BENNET: And it has to end.
COLLINS: One of the--
BENNET: And we have to end it.
COLLINS: One of the people who theoretically, I guess, could be eligible for this is someone that we've been talking about on the show, is Tina Peters. She's that former county clerk in your home state of Colorado.
I know you disagree with the Governor's decision, Jared Polis', to commute her sentence.
We had him on the show on Friday night and asked him why he decided to do this, and here is what he argued in part to us.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. JARED POLIS (D-CO): Well, to be clear, this was a clerk that certified the 2020 election 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?
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.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: What did you make of your governor's argument that the 2020 election had nothing to do with the actions and the crimes that were committed by Tina Peters?
BENNET: I don't think it makes any sense, and I think it was a terrible decision to commute the sentence of Tina Peters, and the Governor knows I believe that. I mean, she is a stone-cold election denier. She's never said anything other than that.
She took one of Lindell's colleagues into the -- into the backroom of the Mesa County Clerk's office, and they took out with them equipment from the -- the voting equipment there, and she was convicted by a jury of her peers in a very conservative part of this state for, I think it was, four felonies, and convicted to nine years as a result of that.
And there is absolutely no way that her sentence should have been commuted, and I think that was a terrible mistake, a terrible decision.
COLLINS: Some people in your state want to censure him. Do you support that?
BENNET: Well, I've heard that discussion in the legislature, and I think I'm going to leave that up to them.
The Governor did call me today because, if there's a change in the -- in who's the senator, the next governor is going to pick that person, and he let me know that he wasn't interested in being considered for that job, and I -- and I think the Tina Peters decision, I think, was disqualifying, and I think -- I think he knows that. Although I also think he's a sensible person who never wants to be in the U.S. Senate.
COLLINS: So, you wouldn't have -- because of this, you would not appoint -- have appointed him, should you -- should you win and be your state's next governor?
BENNET: I viewed it -- I viewed the decision that he made with respect to Tina Peters as disqualifying, and I think he knows that.
COLLINS: Senator Michael Bennet, always appreciate your time, and thank you for joining us tonight.
BENNET: Thanks so much for having me.
COLLINS: Up next. Speaking of people who work at the Justice Department. D.C.'s top prosecutor did not know anything about the new billion dollar fund. Her reaction as she was asked about it live on camera today.
Plus, as the President is holding off on his plan to attack Iran that he says was supposed to happen tomorrow. His Defense Secretary was out on the campaign trail today, making the case against Republican Congressman Thomas Massie.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) PETE HEGSETH, DEFENSE SECRETARY: I have to say up front, for the lawyers, that I'm here in my personal capacity, as a private citizen, a fellow American, and a fellow combat veteran.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, as the Justice Department is moving ahead with creating that nearly $1.8 billion fund designed for the President's allies, who claim that they were targets of unfair political prosecutions by the Justice Department. It seems that not everybody at the DOJ had advanced notice of this.
Here's how Jeanine Pirro, the top prosecutor in Washington, D.C., found out about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Given the weaponization announcement today, I just want to see if you at all, the any -- taxpayer money--
JEANINE PIRRO, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: (Whispers) What weaponization?
REPORTER: The weaponization announcement from -- from the Anti- Weaponization Fund. Do you think that taxpayer money is going to other people who rioted in the city?
PIRRO: I don't know anything about this.
[21:25:00]
REPORTER: This is the -- it's the settlement money through the Trump IRS settlement that they--
PIRRO: Yes, I'm not involved in that. You always ask these out of the -- out of the -- out-of-my-lane questions.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My legal and political sources tonight are:
Tom Dupree, the former Deputy Assistant Attorney General.
And Jeff Flake, the former Republican senator of Arizona, who also served as the U.S. Ambassador to Turkey under President Biden.
And so, it's great to have you both here.
And Tom, I genuinely believe that Jeanine Pirro did not know. I mean, I think sometimes politicians or people say, Oh, I don't know about that, and you're not so sure if they're telling the truth. She seemed genuinely caught off guard. But Tom, as somebody who worked at the Justice Department, when you look at this and you go through all of the parameters of this, what do you make of this, and do you think it's legal?
TOM DUPREE, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, I have serious concerns.
For one thing, the Judgment Fund is really used for what its name is, to pay judgments that are entered against the United States. That involves cases where a judge or a jury has said the United States is liable, and the United States then pays the money out of the Judgment Fund.
This is an atypical, I would say, unprecedented use of the Judgment Fund, in that it's not being used to compensate people who actually hold judgments against the United States. Rather, it's a way, as the Attorney General explained, to basically make whole, people that they think were wrongfully treated during the Biden administration.
But yes, I have concerns, both. About the purpose of this, using taxpayer money, a lot of taxpayer money to pay people who may not be deserving of getting these -- this amount of money. And number two, I also have concern about the procedures. Is there going to be any guardrail? Is there going to be transparency? Are we going to know who is getting paid money out of this fund? These are all questions that I hope will be answered in the days ahead.
COLLINS: Ambassador, what's your view of this new fund?
JEFF FLAKE, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO TURKEY UNDER PRES. BIDEN, FORMER U.S. SENATOR (R-AZ): Well, just when you think you've heard it all, I mean something like this comes along.
This is unbelievable, it really is, to have the President of the country in a position where he can direct, and he's shown that he does like to do that. He directed the former A.G. to prosecute his enemies. And so, yes, that's -- it's unbelievable.
I just hope that you know, and Michael Bennet, you had just on, who's, you know, you were asking him who should step into the breach here? It should be Republican senators and congressmen.
Republicans, we've always believed in limited government, and with a huge skepticism in any centralized power, particularly in the executive. But to be completely quiet and to let this go through isn't conservative at all, I can tell you.
So, I hope that Republicans, as well as Democrats, will condemn this and ensure that it doesn't move forward.
COLLINS: Ambassador, why do you think that is? That your former colleagues in the Senate, who are Republicans, aren't saying more about this? I'm sure they would not -- I mean, it's always so easy to say what if someone else had done this.
FLAKE: You -- yes. COLLINS: But if President Biden had done this, or President Obama, I think you could rightfully see why people in the other party would say--
FLAKE: Yes.
COLLINS: --that's crazy.
FLAKE: Oh, certainly. I think the reason they haven't, you saw it on Saturday, Bill Cassidy. The President still has huge influence in primaries. And until those filing deadlines are all gone and those primaries happen, then you're going to see people remain quiet.
But I hope that you'll see a great migration after that, of Republicans, to recapture territory that we once knew. Limited government, economic freedom, skepticism of centralized power. So, I do think it will happen, but not quite yet.
COLLINS: Tom Dupree, when you look at this, we heard from the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, about something else the President has made clear is still something he's fixated on, which is the 2020 election itself.
He did an interview, yesterday, and I want you to listen to what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: There's a ton of evidence that the election was rigged.
We have multiple investigations going on in Arizona, in Georgia, in Fulton County, Georgia, and with -- that's exactly what we're looking at.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX BUSINESS ANCHOR: There will be, at some point, a definitive answer to whether or not the 2020 election was stolen?
BLANCHE: I don't -- I'm not going to promise there's going to be a definitive answer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I mean, Tom, I think the definitive answer is it was not stolen, and Brian Kemp and the hand recounts they've done in Georgia would attest to that. But I wonder what you make of what you heard from the person running the Justice Department.
DUPREE: Well, look, I mean, I think we're going to be litigating the 2020 election for years, if not decades to come. I think that people who are looking into it, at least in some cases, they are not going to be satisfied unless and until they actually find evidence, so far, which we haven't seen, but until they find evidence that supports their claim that it's been rigged.
[21:30:00] But look, I kind of stand where former Attorney General Barr was, when he had the DOJ team, again, in the prior Trump administration look into this and did not find any evidence of fraud, at least fraud in significant enough amounts that it would change the outcome of the election.
We've had lots of people looking into this. We've had people ranging from Mike -- Rudy Giuliani to Mike Lindell to others. No one has been able to find actual evidence showing that there was sufficient fraud to change the outcome of the election.
But it doesn't look like that's going to necessarily stop people from continuing to raise questions and continuing to plow this ground, looking backward, when ideally Republicans should be looking forward.
COLLINS: Yes, Bill Barr told us once in an interview that it was like playing Whac-A-Mole with all the different conspiracies that popped up.
Tom Dupree, thank you for your legal expertise, as always.
Ambassador Flake, stick around because, I want to talk to you about these Republican primaries. Because, we have more coming up tomorrow night, here, just 24 hours from now. That comes after the President successfully ousted one of his political foes in the Republican Party. There are questions about who could be next tonight.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Just give me somebody with a warm body to beat Massie. And I got somebody with a warm body but a big, beautiful brain and a great patriot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:35:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Thomas Massie is a disaster for our party.
A complete and total disaster as a congressman and, frankly, as a human being.
He's a nutjob.
There's something wrong with him.
His name is Thomas Massie. He's from Kentucky. I hope you're going to put him out of business tomorrow.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: In 24 hours from now, President Trump's repeated attacks, as you heard there, against Republican Congressman Thomas Massie, will be put to the test because, Kentucky voters are going to the polls to decide whether or not the seven-term Congressman stays or goes.
Massie has clashed with the White House over budgets, U.S. support for Israel, but mainly the Epstein files.
And the President has thrown his support behind Massie's challenger in this race, Ed Gallrein, a former and Navy -- a farmer and a former Navy SEAL.
And in a remarkable scene that happened today, in those moments before the post that I showed you earlier, where the President was saying he's holding off on new attacks on Iran that he says were going to happen tomorrow. His Defense Secretary, Pete Hegseth, was out on the campaign trail in Kentucky.
Now, under federal law, the Defense Secretary is strictly prohibited from using his official authority to back a political candidate, something that Secretary Hegseth acknowledged as he got on stage.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: I have to say up front, for the lawyers, that I'm here in my personal capacity, as a private citizen, a fellow American, and a fellow combat veteran.
Ed Gallrein's record speaks for itself.
Thomas Massie's record speaks for itself too. Too much grandstanding, too few great votes, years of acting like being difficult is the same thing as being courageous.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I want to bring in my political sources.
Harry Enten is CNN's Chief Data Analyst.
Bill Kristol is the editor-at-large at The Bulwark.
And Ambassador Jeff Flake is back here with us.
And Harry, when you look at this. I mean, this comes after Ambassador Flake was mentioning this earlier, Bill Cassidy in Louisiana lost his primary. He, of course, he famously voted to convict President Trump in his second impeachment. Thomas Massie now is going up against Gallrein here. What do you make of this race? And what does Cassidy's loss, could that mean anything for Massie?
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Yes, look, what is the overarching theme here? And that is, Donald Trump may have problems with the center of the electorate in American politics. But among Republicans, he is still king. He is still very, very popular.
You mess with Trump, you go into the grinder. I mean, you can see that in his overall approval rating with Republicans, right? It's somewhere 82 percent, 83 percent on average. That is higher at this point in a second term than either Barack Obama was with Democrats back in 2014 and certainly way higher than George W. Bush was, at this point, with Republicans back in 2006. I'll note grinder, by the way, go into the grinder, that's a quote from "Good Burger," I like to -- I love that movie.
But what is -- you know, what's so important here is what happened in Louisiana, will that necessarily hold in Kentucky? Maybe. Maybe not.
But Bill Cassidy's performance on Saturday night. I went back to all the spreadsheets that I possibly could, looking at every single primary that an incumbent senator had since after, just after World War II, back in 1946. Bill Cassidy's 25 percent was the weakest performance of any incumbent senator in a primary.
Again, I don't think even if Thomas Massie loses tomorrow, he'll do that poorly. But that shows you, along with Trump's popularity within the Republican ranks, what type of wave that Thomas Massie has to fight against to win tomorrow.
COLLINS: Bill Cassidy's performance was the worst since World War II?
ENTEN: For any incumbent senator of either party.
COLLINS: I mean, Bill Kristol, when you look at that number and what happened with Cassidy. We'll see what happens with Thomas Massie tomorrow night. What if you're Lauren Boebert? The President is now threatening to withdraw his endorsement of her because she was campaigning with Thomas Massie. She's obviously been a huge supporter of Trump's in Congress. What do you make of how this dynamic is playing out?
BILL KRISTOL, DIRECTOR, DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, THE BULWARK, HOST, "CONVERSATIONS WITH BILL KRISTOL": I mean, it does take some courage sometimes to be a politician, a good politician, or maybe a good anything.
[21:40:00]
Jeff Flake showed that, incidentally. And almost no Republicans are showing it today, and I don't expect many more to show it after the primary deadline, either. When you've been bowing and scraping for six years, and then getting terrified because, people get beat. And they do get beat. Liz Cheney got beat, and others got beat.
But you know, if there's some safety in numbers, and one reason it's so easy to pick off Cassidy, and maybe Massie, that looks like a pretty close race, is that there aren't enough other people say, Wait a second, this is a party. It's not a cult. He's not the king. He's the President. We are elected officials too. We've taken an oath to the Constitution. We're trying to do the right thing.
One point that's not gotten enough coverage in the Massie thing, I think, Kaitlan, is this. What was the issue at which he broke? What was the issue that most infuriated Trump that Massie went south on? Incidentally, Boebert too. Epstein. Epstein. It really shows what Trump cares about.
COLLINS: Well, and also, I mean, looking at tomorrow, if Massie is not successful. That would mean Marjorie Taylor Greene's out of Congress, Thomas Massie. I mean, now he's going after Lauren Boebert, who also had voted for that discharge petition.
Ambassador Flake, in terms of the grand scheme of this. And when you hear Harry's numbers about Senator Cassidy on Saturday, and what that meant. Listen to what Lindsey Graham had to say about Cassidy's loss.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): What's the headline? Trump's strong. Those who try to destroy Trump politically, stand in the way of his agenda, are going to lose.
Bill Cassidy has lost because he tried to destroy Trump. Massie is going to lose because he's trying to destroy the agenda. You can disagree with President Trump, but if you try to destroy him, you're going to lose because, this is the party of Donald Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: What do you make of that assessment?
FLAKE: I can't argue with that assessment. It is his party right now. 83 percent approval among Republicans?
But the decision that members of Congress have to make, and individual senators, is, you know, do you -- you're going to have to face the voters, but you also have to face your kids, and your grandkids, and others, your friends.
And, in my case, there's no way I could have won a primary unless I said, I'm going to bend the knee, and I'm going to, you know -- all those things that I said that I opposed, I now support them. Those things that I said I couldn't condone, I now condone them. And that's what -- that's a position people are put in.
And so, this is very much the party of Donald Trump. It won't always be. And the midterms will come, and when you're out of a primary, which we have to remember is a subset of a subset of a subset of voters, then the voters act quite differently.
COLLINS: Ambassador Flake, can I ask you, what you made of Secretary Hegseth campaigning? I mean, I -- I mean, it's hard to think of other defense secretaries who've taken that step.
FLAKE: We're setting precedents that I -- I'm just horrified by this. A sitting Secretary of State -- I'm sorry, of Defense, while we're in a war, going out and going after one individual member, it just, it's unbelievable. So, yes, I don't know what to say, other than I hope that this is, you know, one and done, and we don't see this again of the Secretary of Defense.
COLLINS: Bill Kristol, what did you make of that? KRISTOL: Well, I mean, they've broken so many norms, this is just another one, of course.
And look at the way he's running the actual Defense Department, the incredible politicization -- attempted politicization of the military, the senior ranks, firing generals who aren't -- ahead of time, just to make sure that even if they're not -- even if they've been totally loyal and appropriate in their behavior, if there are suspicions about them, they've had other connections, they're gone, and kind of a useful lesson for the others. I think it's terrible.
And I do, you know, if you -- if you worry about authoritarianism, this is the kind of thing you worry about. The Secretary of Defense, the person who controls the military, coming in and targeting members of Congress. And the intimidation effect, then, will other members of Congress stand up to Hegseth? Will they do oversight? Will they have -- will they be tough at hearings?
What -- again, this is the degree to which the intimidation spills over from the one case to the many cases in Congress. And then, of course, outside Congress too, as we've also seen in the private sector. That's really what's dangerous here.
COLLINS: Harry, to Ambassador Flake's point about the subset of voters in a primary. And then once they get through this, yes, obviously it does help them in the primary. I mean, you can see that with your own numbers. But what happens after that?
ENTEN: Yes, I mean, these are just two totally different galaxies, right? And you can see that in the numbers. Go back, historically speaking, the difference between how Republicans -- Trump's own party view him and what the Independents and the general electorate. There's never been a wider gap, and indeed you could see that.
The New York Times poll came out today, right? It was a sub 40 percent approval rating for Donald Trump. Well, it's not the only poll which Trump has been sub 40 percent this month. You have it in the CNN poll, Ipsos, CBS, all 35 percent to 37 percent.
[21:45:00]
There's this whole idea, we've heard about for years, Oh, Trump has a floor of 40 percent.
Well, it looks like this floor at this point was built by the worst carpenters I've ever seen because, he has fallen right through that floor, and there is no floor in sight.
COLLINS: Harry Enten. And Ambassador Jeff Flake. And Bill Kristol. It's great to have all of you here tonight.
And I should note, as we are watching to see what happens in Thomas Massie's race, and others, tomorrow night. We're going to have special coverage here on CNN, tracking all those crucial primaries. There's also ones in Georgia and other key states. Be sure to watch our election results all night here, tomorrow night, on CNN, and also on the CNN app.
Up next for us here tonight, though, on THE SOURCE. We have new details tonight on that deadly shooting that happened earlier at the biggest mosque in San Diego. Three people were killed. And we're getting new details about what happened before.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:50:00]
COLLINS: Breaking tonight. Three people were killed in a shooting at San Diego's biggest mosque today. And two teen suspects were found dead in a car near the mosque, who appeared to have died, according to law enforcement, from self-inflicted gunshot wounds.
Authorities right now are investigating the shooting as a hate crime. And tonight, police departments across several major cities in the United States are actually increasing their presence at mosques, and other places of worship, out of an abundance of caution.
Tonight, my source is CNN's Senior Investigative Correspondent, Kyung Lah, who is on the ground for us in San Diego.
And Kyung, obviously we've been getting updates from officials there at the scene. What have you been hearing from them?
KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: Well, what police are trying to share is exactly how all of this unfolded. They're saying that it started with an early tip-off from a mother, a mother who called police because she said that her son was missing, that he was with a companion, dressed in camo, and that she was concerned about her son and what he might do.
Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHIEF SCOTT WAHL, SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT: We received a call of a runaway juvenile. After speaking with the mom, mom began to piece together bits and pieces of information over an extended period of time. The information that she was gathering and conveying to us began to elevate the threat level that we were perceiving with this information. She believed her son was suicidal, and she began to share information that several of her weapons were missing, her vehicle was missing, in addition to her son.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LAH: And there wasn't a specific threat to a place like the mosque or to a school, Kaitlan. But they were getting that early tip-off, so it did get them to engage with his mother very early.
Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And I heard them talk about investigating it as a hate crime, talking about a note that was left, but not saying what was written on it. Any indications about the motive?
LAH: Now that's what they're really looking for. What specifically is the motive that would get two young people, one of them in high school, to take this sort of an action?
And at this point, they're just settling on this as a hate crime. The reason why they're coming to that is because, the mother produced a suicide note that she was -- left by the son. It had some type of racial pride writings, although the Police Chief didn't get very specific, and they also talked about some sort of hate speech on one of the weapons. So that together, they are saying that it does appear to be a hate crime.
But a specific motive, and why this mosque, those are still questions that are outstanding.
COLLINS: What do we know, Kyung, about the victims?
LAH: You know that -- what we do know, Kaitlan, is that these are three men. They are associated with the mosque. From what we have heard, we haven't been able to confirm their identities with families. So, I hope you'll forgive a little bit of my vagueness here.
But one of the people, who multiple people have told us, was beloved by this community, is a security guard. And having covered a lot of these sort of incidents as of late in the United States, these religious institutions, whether we're talking about a Jewish school, or a mosque, or any sort of religious institution, they've had to engage security guards. And so, this was a security guard who the kids looked up to, a big lovable man.
And I want you to listen to the father whose young son goes to the school, and what he had to say about him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I truly know in my heart, from knowing that man, that he was sacrificing his life, and took that bullet, knowing that I rather take it than the kids, and that is what makes me emotional.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
LAH: And what he says is he doesn't know, Kaitlan, what would have happened if that guard had not been there.
Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Yes, it's just devastating to think about. And, of course, our thoughts go out to the families, especially the security guard as well.
Kyung Lah, keep us updated on what you're learning. Thank you for that report tonight from San Diego.
LAH: You bet. COLLINS: And I should note, as we continue to follow that investigation, we're also tracking a verdict that was reached today by a jury after that $150 billion lawsuit Elon Musk brought against OpenAI. What the jury found in just after 90 minutes.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, Elon Musk says he is going to file an appeal, after a jury rejected that $150 billion lawsuit that he filed against OpenAI and Sam Altman.
After deliberating for just 90 minutes today, the jury found that Elon Musk had waited too long to file his lawsuit, where he claimed that OpenAI and its leaders stole a charity, that's a quote from him, and unjustly enriched themselves when they shifted the non-profit company to include a for-profit division.
Now, Elon had helped co-found and fund OpenAI, giving $38 million in its early years.
But OpenAI's attorneys argued that the company's mission itself hasn't changed.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WILLIAM SAVITT, OPENAI ATTORNEY: The finding of the jury confirms that what this lawsuit was, was a hypocritical attempt to sabotage a competitor.
And the facts are that OpenAI is a not-for-profit, mission-driven organization that has been and will continue to be faithful to that mission.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[22:00:00]
COLLINS: Now, Elon Musk responded on X, writing in part that, The judge & jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality. He says, There is no question to anyone following the case in detail that Altman & Brockman did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity. The only question is WHEN they did it.
We'll keep you updated on that appeal and everything that happens with that case.
Thanks so much for joining us here tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT" starts now.
