Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump's $1.8 Billion Anti-Weaponization Fund Stalled Amid GOP Pushback; Troops Invited To WH UFC Fight Must Meet Weight Requirements; Situation Room Meeting Ends With No Decision Announced On Iran. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired May 29, 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]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --Shrey Parikh, it's really an honor to talk to you. It was just incredible to watch, and I know it's the result of a long, I mean, years and years of hard work and studying. So, congratulations.
SHREY PARIKH, 2026 SCRIPPS NATIONAL SPELLING BEE CHAMPION: Thank you. Thank you so much.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: That is so cool.
Well, that's it for us. Hope you have a great weekend. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now. I'll see you Monday.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. President Trump has been hit with three major setbacks in court. The latest, ordering him to actually address the claims that he committed fraud, creating that $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
We have new reporting as we come on the air tonight. As sources say that President Trump's proposed $1.8 billion so-called Anti- Weaponization Fund is currently stalled.
The White House has been facing intense backlash from Senate Republicans over that fund, which for this administration is a pretty unusual level of pushback, not just in public, but also, we're told, in private. Some people, on Capitol Hill, are even urging the White House to scrap the fund altogether. Now, it remains to be seen if the President will actually agree to do so. That's a big if, given how much he clearly has wanted this to happen.
Despite the President initially saying that he wasn't very involved in this, he has been involved in it. And I'm told that the President feels, right now, that he has an iron grip on his party, especially after those primaries we saw, where he ousted several of his political foes.
And he's been publicly defending the fund ever since it was announced.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: 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.
I do believe there has to be compensation for people that were destroyed. You have families, absolutely destroyed. And it's all going to be determined by a committee of four or five people that are respected and very brilliant at what they do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Well, that committee has yet to be formed.
And the political reality of this fund in Washington is now colliding with legal challenges today, with orders coming from multiple judges in different parts of the country tonight.
From Virginia, an order to halt any work on the administration's nearly $1.8 billion fund to compensate people who claim they were wrongly targeted by the government. That judge said the administration cannot take any further action pursuant to the creation or operation of this fund, at least until there's a court hearing. That means, no one can get paid, no claims that are submitted can be considered, including those who rioted at the Capitol on January 6th, people that the administration has made clear are eligible to at least apply for this fund.
But not only is the settlement in legal trouble tonight. The President's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, which is what led to all of this and the creation of this fund, that is also under new scrutiny tonight.
In Florida, a judge is demanding answers about whether or not the court was deceived about what was happening.
That's a ruling that comes after a motion from dozens of former federal judges, arguing, this judge to take a look at whether or not the case was essentially a vessel, just to get the out-of-court settlement by the President and his own Justice Department. They argue that the settlement is, quote, "A product of collusion and is itself a fraud on the Court."
The judge is now threatening to reopen that case. She wants responses to those allegations that I just laid out for you from the President and from his sons.
It was just last week that we saw the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, up on Capitol Hill, trying to persuade senators and explain this unusual arrangement.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL: So what we've done with this fund -- and by the way, it is true that this is unusual. That is true. But it is not unprecedented. And it was done to address something that had never happened again either, so there is an unprecedented nature of what we did yesterday in response to years and years of weaponization.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: In Washington, there is also a third ruling today that the President is not happy with, albeit a very different one, after a judge has declared that the President's name has two weeks to come off of the Kennedy Center.
Of course, right now, there's a UFC cage being built on the South Lawn of the White House.
[21:05:00]
But apparently when it comes to the Kennedy Center tonight, the President is signaling that he's actually ready to tap out. In a surprise move, the President signaled that rather than fight the judge over this ruling, that he can't put his name on the Kennedy Center, and that he can't close it without the consideration of Congress, instead of fighting the judge on that, he's ceding control and acknowledging that it is up to Congress.
I'll quote from his post in response to the judge's ruling. He said, "Unless I am free to do what I do better than anyone else, bring this Institution back, physically, financially, and artistically, I have no interest in continuing what could only be a hopeless journey into 'NEVER NEVER LAND.'"
Now, that's a pretty sudden change after months of the President very much enjoying calling it the Trump-Kennedy Center.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: Some people refer to it as the Trump-Kennedy Center, but we're not prepared to do that quite yet. Maybe in a week or so.
At the Trump-Kennedy Center -- oh, excuse me, at the Kennedy Center.
(LAUGHTER)
TRUMP: Yes. Pardon me, I have -- such a terrible mistake, Marco -- at the Kennedy Center.
The premiere at the Trump-Kennedy Center, you know, be very exciting. It's the Trump-Kennedy Center.
We're going to do a great job with the Trump-Kennedy Center.
They sue me because the Trump-Kennedy Center, I'm fixing it. It's in horrible shape, actually dangerous shape.
I get sued because I'm fixing up the Trump-Kennedy Center.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My legal sources are here to break down all of these rulings and what they mean for the President.
We've got Elliot Williams, who is a former Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Leg. Affairs at the Justice Department.
Also, retired U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York, Shira Scheindlin, who is one of the 35 judges, I should note, who signed on to that motion, urging the judge to take another look at Trump's IRS case.
And, Judge, I mean, when you look at this tonight, and what has happened here. Tell us first, why you signed off on this brief, and then what's your reaction to the judge signaling that they are considering -- she's considered reopening this case.
SHIRA SCHEINDLIN, FORMER UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: I signed on to this brief because, I believe in protecting the integrity of the judicial system, and I think that this judge didn't get honest and fair information.
She was kind of tricked into signing a dismissal without getting notice that there was a settlement in the offing. She even said, And I haven't been told about any settlement, there's no settlement that I know of. And they didn't correct her. So, that's really not the way to be candid with the tribunal, we call it, candid with the court. And that's what a lawyer has to do.
So, I think when we filed that brief, and we pointed out to her that the judicial system's integrity was at stake, and that she had been used. Because, you have to have a case to have a settlement, and then you have a settlement, and that's how he then sets up this fund, and he then gives himself immunity where he never is going to get audited and never pay back taxes. It was all used by filing a case in court.
And I think she felt used, so she said, I'm going to investigate this. She hasn't reopened the case yet. It was dismissed with prejudice. So, so far it's not reopened. But she is investigating, and she set a schedule for briefs.
COLLINS: I mean, Elliot, when you hear that, for us non-legal folks, how rare is it for a judge to threaten to reopen a case?
ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, FMR. DOJ DEPUTY ASST. ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS: It's remarkably rare. I think -- Judge Scheindlin there, can probably tell us the number of times in her career she did. It's exceptionally rare.
The other thing I would note, Kaitlan, is that in the judge's order, she talked using language of misconduct on the court or misleading the court, and that's the kind of language judges use when they're thinking about sanctions for someone's law license.
To be clear, anytime an attorney goes into court and swears an oath, they have an obligation to be candid and truthful with the court. And if they do not, they run the risk of being referred to the bar association, having their license suspended, or whatever else. I'm not saying the judge is necessarily going to do that, but she's certainly opening the door to it and flirting with it.
And so, even before we get to any questions of who this settlement is going to, or whatever else, the attorneys who appeared in this case ought to be thinking about, have they been candid and truthful, and might there be repercussions for them, personally, for the things they said and did in court.
SCHEINDLIN: Well, I would add in her order, the only rule that she referred to is called Rule 11, which is where you grant--
WILLIAMS: Yes.
SCHEINDLIN: --you grant sanctions for filing a frivolous litigation. And she said that, If this is a frivolous litigation, then sanctions are warranted.
COLLINS: so, what could that end up looking like?
SCHEINDLIN: Well, OK, so just what Elliot said. One of the sanctions could be referring the attorneys for discipline by the bar association, and that would be a very serious sanction.
[21:10:00]
There could be monetary sanctions.
And of course, there could be dismissal on the merits, and that would mean there was never a case, and there can't be a settlement, and therefore there can't be a fund, and therefore there can't be immunity. So, it's like a little daisy chain. You have to look at each step, and they're linked to one another.
COLLINS: So because there was no ultimate settlement, they just dropped it, but they created the fund, that you're saying that there's no direct tie to those, like typically there isn't a settlement.
SCHEINDLIN: Well, you settle a case. And the issue here is, was there ever a real case or controversy? And a case or controversy means that there are two parties who are adverse to each other.
And what we presented was to say they were never adverse. He was on both sides of this, which he admitted. He made a statement at one point, saying, I'm talking to myself, aren't I? I'm settling with myself. He knew that. COLLINS: Yes.
SCHEINDLIN: So, if there's no case, then it can't be settled, and then you can't use the fund. Because this fund does exist prior to this, but the money can only be spent if you're settling a case against the government.
COLLINS: Right.
And so, I mean, Elliot, when you look at that. This has created so much bigger a problem than I think the administration ever expected, which is our reporting tonight that it stalled. Because, one, the court says you can't do anything with this. But two, I mean, putting the commission together, none of that has really gone anywhere since this happened in terms of actually making a movement.
WILLIAMS: Right.
COLLINS: Because they have faced such intense political blowback, not just the legal blowback on this.
WILLIAMS: Right. Yes, we've seen this play out several times since January of last year, where something might be either of interest to the President or even interest -- that his supporters may want, but that has no legal basis whatsoever.
I would even add even further to what the Judge said. This fund is for the benefit of people who were not even parties to the original lawsuit. So, in addition to all the things that Your Honor had said a moment ago, about there not being a case or controversy there, where two parties are actually adverse to each other, this is a fund for people who aren't even parties to that suit.
So, there are all kinds of just basic legal questions, and again, I'm not even touching the question of the merits of weaponization or any of that business. Just how you have a legally operative fund that can be fairly and legally apportioned to people. They're just basic legal questions to it that haven't been answered, and that no court can credibly say was properly and lawfully done.
COLLINS: Yes.
WILLIAMS: So, before you even get to any of these basic political questions, there's just simple legal stuff to have to be sorted out.
COLLINS: Can both of you just tell us in one word, in six months, do you think this fund will -- this will still be a thing, or do you think it'll be gone?
SCHEINDLIN: My answer is no. I think it'll be gone.
WILLIAMS: I'll give you two words, Kaitlan. Absolutely not.
COLLINS: Elliot. Judge. Great to have you both. We'll see if those predictions bear out.
WILLIAMS: Thank you.
COLLINS: There's also more breaking news that has been happening in Washington. I know, it's a lot to keep up with. But this comes to Congress' investigation into the Justice Department's handling of the Epstein files.
The former Attorney General, Pam Bondi, was on Capitol Hill today, just days after making her cancer diagnosis public. She appeared for a long-sought interview before the House Oversight Committee about what the Justice Department did or didn't do with those files on her watch.
The top Democrat on the panel came out of that roughly four-hour interview, unsatisfied, saying that the former Attorney General was now pointing the blame at her former deputy, who is now the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): She said, and I quote, Acting A.G. Blanche was managing the entire investigation, end quote.
And what she's saying here, in her words and remarks, is that it was Todd Blanche, the current acting A.G., that was leading the Epstein investigation. And quite frankly, all of the mistakes that we saw, the redactions, not protecting survivors, she continues to push that back onto the acting A.G., Todd Blanche, who, by the way, was Donald Trump's former personal lawyer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, Bondi responded to that tonight, and said in all-caps that it is NOT TRUE.
My source tonight is the Democratic Congressman Maxwell Frost of Florida, who is one of the House Oversight Committee members who was questioning Pam Bondi today.
So, thank you, sir, for being here.
Pam Bondi says it's not true. What do you say?
REP. MAXWELL FROST (D-FL): She's lying. I mean, she's -- we got one of three responses the entire interview, no matter what we asked. Either she would say, Not to my recollection, or I don't know. Number two, she'd put it on Todd Blanche and said, You'd have to speak with him about it, he was in charge of the whole thing. Or number three, anything relating to Donald Trump, she would say that she would essentially refuse to talk about it.
And actually, there were many times within this interview that we would ask her a question about Donald Trump, or ask her a question about anything, and the Department of Justice lawyers that were sitting right next to her would lean over and tell her not to answer the question.
And so, people know, usually in these kind of interviews or depositions, the people who sit next to the person are personal counsel, there to help them. But the Department of Justice lawyers were there to look out for the President and the Department of Justice.
COLLINS: What was Pam Bondi's reaction? I mean, did she have any discernible reaction, when those attorneys were telling her not to answer the question?
[21:15:00]
FROST: She would just follow what they were saying.
And in fact, one of the most alarming things is at the beginning of our questions, we were asking about conversations with Donald Trump. Because one of the most blaring things that we need to know is, Were you directed in any kind of way to essentially conduct a cover-up of the Epstein files?
We even asked directly, There are reports that there was an effort in the Department of Justice to name-search Donald Trump and figure out how many times and how often he was mentioned in the Epstein files.
So, we simply asked, you know, Madam Attorney General, was that an effort that was done?
And she said, I am not answering any questions about conversations I've had with Donald Trump.
We then replied, We're not asking about a conversation with Donald Trump. We're asking you if you ever did an effort to figure out if he was in the files. And she said the same thing over and over and over again.
And when we pushed her on it, the attorneys from the Department of Justice would come in and say, She's not going to talk about Donald Trump, she's not going to talk about anything relating to Donald Trump. Which is a huge part of the puzzle here, this is part of the reason why this whole thing is just another part of the cover-up. She refused to talk about Donald Trump--
COLLINS: Did you--
FROST: --and on issues where she didn't want to talk about it, she would put it on Todd Blanche.
COLLINS: Did you ask about that famous Elon Musk tweet, which I think is actually from almost a year ago, where he said that Trump was in the Epstein files?
FROST: Yes, we did ask about that, and--
COLLINS: Before we knew.
FROST: We did ask about that. We brought up the tweet, and we asked a very broad question, Was this discussed at the Department of Justice? Did Donald Trump talk to you about this? And she refused to answer it time and time again, until finally we asked for, like, the fifth or sixth time, and then she said, Well, you know, of course, we talked about it. It was a big deal. But she refused to talk about specifics. It was, anything relating to the President, she just would not touch. And really, that was at the direction of the Department of Justice lawyers that were sitting right next to her.
But what I find really interesting is, we asked her about the transfer of Ghislaine Maxwell to a minimum security prison, in which she said she didn't know anything about it, she had nothing to do with it. We even asked, Who should we talk to? She said, Got to talk to the Bureau of Prisons or talk with Todd Blanche.
So, I mean, people will see, when the transcript comes out, like, her saying that we're lying about this is just incorrect. There was so many times, where she either said, I don't know, I won't answer, or talk with Todd Blanche. Those were the three responses to every single question we asked.
COLLINS: Well, and obviously the Bureau of Prisons reports to the Attorney General.
But on Ghislaine Maxwell, did she say anything about whether or not Ghislaine Maxwell, she believes, will get a pardon, or anything like that?
FROST: We asked her if she thought she should get a pardon, she said no. We said, OK, we agree with that.
We asked her about any discussions she had with anyone in the administration or the President about the transfer, about what's going to happen with Ghislaine Maxwell, and she would refuse to answer the questions.
So, it's just on some of the most important questions we had, about intent, about what she was told to do, and more importantly, what she was told not to do, she just flat-out refused to answer those questions.
And I have to point out that the reason why she could do this, essentially, is because James Comer, the Chair of the Committee, allowed this to be a transcribed interview that was not videoed.
And so, people have to know that you got to see a video of Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, and the depositions we had with them.
But for this interview, with the person who was the Attorney General of the United States of America, during this complete botched release of the Epstein files, was not put on video, was transcribed, and it's a transcription that's going to go to the Department of Justice, so they can review it before it's made public. And so, I just have to say that the Chair of the Committee is now part of the cover-up.
And something they've been doing, Kaitlan, is they know that, now we want to subpoena Todd Blanche because, Pam Bondi essentially told us to subpoena him, to talk with him about more stuff. But what they're doing is they are refusing to hold any hearings in the Oversight Committee because, they know that we have enough Republicans who would join us on making a -- issuing a subpoena to Todd Blanche.
So, we haven't had a hearing in, I believe, two months now. All they're doing when we meet as a committee is what they call round tables, which are off the record and where you can't make a motion to make a subpoena. So, Chair Comer is 100 percent a part of the cover-up now.
COLLINS: Well, and they say that the transcript will come out. We will obviously be reading it closely when it does.
Congressman Maxwell Frost, thank you for joining us tonight.
FROST: Thank you.
COLLINS: And thanks to my legal panel as well.
Up next. I'm going to take you inside what is underway at the White House right now for that upcoming UFC fight, as we have new reporting on apparent restrictions from the Pentagon for which troops are allowed to attend. And according to CNN's reporting, a Defense official described it in two words: no fattys.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, we're learning more about who exactly has made the invite list for President Trump's made-for-TV UFC event at the White House next month.
The Pentagon is now recruiting uniformed troops to attend, but not all of them qualify. In the words of one Defense official, summing up the policy to CNN, they said, quote, "No fattys."
Memos reviewed by CNN show that the tickets will only be given to service members who meet a certain waist-to-height ratio. A source to the Pentagon said that senior leaders, quote, want attendees to "Look good" on camera during the event, and the source added, "Basically, no fat soldiers."
[21:25:00]
With construction underway on the White House South Lawn to build the massive cage to set up for this event on June 14th, here's a look inside how the event came to be.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS (on camera): That massive structure that is dwarfing the White House behind me isn't part of President Trump's large scale renovation of Washington that's been underway now for months, but is instead only temporary, and is what UFC has actually dubbed The Claw. It's being erected on the South Lawn of the White House ahead of the UFC fight that is scheduled to be held here on June 14th on the South Lawn, which happens to be President Trump's birthday, and is part of the events leading up to the celebration of America's 250th birthday.
COLLINS (voice-over): It's an idea that UFC President, Dana White, says President Trump suggested to him last summer.
DANA WHITE, UFC CEO: We're literally at a fight, and I can't remember if it was New Jersey or Miami, and he looks at me in the middle of the fight and says, You know what, we should do a fight at the White House. And I'm like, Yes, we should do a fight at the White House.
COLLINS (voice-over): That fight, a first in the nation's history to ever be hosted on the White House South Lawn.
TRUMP: All people invited. Our country is invited to this. It's free.
COLLINS (voice-over): The renderings for the event, UFC Freedom 250, showcase a massive display, including a fighting cage known as the Octagon, just outside the President's bedroom window. A huge red, white, and blue lighting structure, dubbed The Claw, towers overhead. And there will be massive TV screens and seating for a watch party on The Ellipse that can accommodate approximately 85,000 fans.
TRUMP: And a 100,000 people in the back, where they're putting up eight or 10 very big screens.
COLLINS (voice-over): There will be a press conference at the Lincoln Memorial, and weigh-ins will take place at The Ellipse the day before.
TRUMP: UFC is going to be here. Dana White, the great Dana White, he's building a -- literally a stadium, a 5,000-seat arena right outside the front door of the White House.
COLLINS (voice-over): The administration is calling the mixed martial arts event a showcase of American greatness.
TRUMP: This will be the greatest show on earth.
COLLINS (voice-over): But critics argue, it's out of touch, with California Governor Gavin Newsom sarcastically writing, Thank god they are focused on the priorities of all Americans.
Asked about who is paying for all of it, the White House responded to those questions on social media with three letters. Quote, "UFC."
There is one thing that the UFC's CEO, Dana White, is worried about: the weather.
WHITE: I hate outdoors. Outdoors is just way too unpredictable. If it rains, we're going. If it snows, we're going. The only thing that will stop us is lightning.
COLLINS (voice-over): Dana White is a longtime friend of the President's, speaking at the last three Republican National Conventions, while praising his early support for the UFC.
WHITE: Donald was the first guy that recognized the potential that we saw in the UFC and encouraged us to build our business.
COLLINS (voice-over): Now, White will be by Trump's side when the South Lawn is filled with fans.
A White House official told CNN that a third of the tickets are reserved for military members and their family, a third for White House staff and their family, and a third for VIPs.
TRUMP: I have never seen anybody want anything so much as people want those tickets. It's a one of a kind.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Certainly one of a kind.
My political sources are here.
Jamal Simmons worked in the Biden White House.
Scott Jennings served under President George W. Bush, and is inexplicably joining us from a baseball stadium tonight.
Jamal, I'm going to start with you, since you're in studio.
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO PRES. BIDEN, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR TO VP HARRIS: Yes.
COLLINS: What is your take on the Pentagon putting out these restrictions for ticket recipients here?
SIMMONS: Well, first of all, let me start here. When you win the White House, you get to have whatever event you want to have at the White House. I know there are some people who'd think this is probably not the greatest event for the President to have. But it's in line with his base, it's in line with his brand. So, just as a communications professional, I understand why they did it.
Now, more military members should have a chance to participate in this. It shouldn't be whether or not you're -- you meet a -- I understand some people aren't being flown in. They have tickets, but they've got to get themselves there. If I were the White House, I would get military members to this event, that they really want to show their commitment to it, and not just let it be for the people who are Washington-based or people who can afford to get to the White House.
COLLINS: Yes.
I mean, Scott, do you think that there should be height and weight restrictions on which members of the military can come?
SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER TO MITCH MCCONNELL, HOST, "THE SCOTT JENNINGS RADIO SHOW" ON SRN: Look, I didn't know much about this until we decided to do this conversation. I asked the White House point-blank, Is this true? And I was told, quote, Fake news from The Washington Post.
So, without being in the middle of it, I can only tell you what I've been told by the White House, is that there are no restrictions. They are inviting members of the military. They're excited to have members of the military there.
And as for these Democrats who are criticizing this, why do they have to be such fun-vacuums? This is cool. Teddy Roosevelt had boxing matches at the White House. Donald Trump is the modern Teddy Roosevelt.
[21:30:00]
And I agree with Jamal, when you win the White House, you get to do things at the White House. This is very in line with the President's brand. And it's cool, which I guess is why Democrats hate it.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, Jamal says -- is a Democrat, and he says that it's fine with having it.
But there is literally a memo that said, ticket recipients are required to meet the Department of War waist-to-height ratio standard of less than 0.55, as well as all service specific physical fitness test requirements.
That means troops would have to have a maximum 37-inch waist for the average man and a 35-inch waist for the average woman. I mean, there's -- there's a memo on it.
JENNINGS: Well, look, I know the military has standards on physical fitness. Beyond that, I don't know what to say about it, other than the White House says they're happy to have military members come to this awesome event at the White House. And it sounds to me like it's nitpicky and will find a way to criticize something that otherwise was kind of a communication stroke of genius.
So, look, I'm not in the middle of who they're inviting or how they're inviting it, but I think it's pretty awesome they're bringing members of the military in.
SIMMONS: Kaitlan, I got to say, that point does make it sound like they're trying to use members of the military as props, they're using them as backdrop for the President's political priorities.
That part, I would -- I would -- I would fix that. They need to let people come in the military because, we're honoring them for their service, not for their looks.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, the other part of this is, this is part of the celebration in the lead up to America 250, Jamal. And obviously, on this front, in terms of what this looks like, is huge celebrations that they're planning for America 250, a big concert that's supposed to take place. Several of the artists, though, who were announced to perform are now pulling out of this. And just a few of them -- Morris Day wrote on Facebook, It's A No For Me.
We've got Bret Michaels citing a similar issue, saying that, unfortunately, What was presented to us as a celebration of our country has evolved into something much more divisive than what I agreed to be a part of.
Others have said, Young MC, I have informed my agents that I will not be performing. They were not told about any political involvement in this event.
I mean, you could see on and on, there are multiple artists here who say, I thought this was going to be just a patriotic celebration, and now fear that it is becoming political.
SIMMONS: Yes, well, one of the artists that he had booked was Milli Vanilli, who were notorious for being a fake Grammy recording band. So, it's a -- it's a problem for an administration that I think people look at and say, What's real inside this administration, they're even booking fake musical acts to come and perform.
The President for the 250th anniversary should be finding ways to bring us together, but we are finding he's doing things like wanting to produce a $250 bill with his face on it. Those aren't things that unite the country around something that we should all be cheering for. Instead, it's sort of sticking his finger in the eye of people who disagree with him at a time when he should be bringing us together.
COLLINS: We did hear from Vanilla Ice, Scott, who said this on TikTok about the event.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANILLA ICE, RAPPER: Honored to do this concert with everybody. We're going to bring back the 90s. Put your dancing shoes on.
We don't take anything too serious, man. We're going to bring the 90s. That's how it works. Go Ninja, Go Ninja, Go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Scott, what do you make of that?
JENNINGS: Well, I think we should all stop, collaborate, and listen to Vanilla Ice. He's excited about this, and we should all be excited about this.
Now, when you're Republican, and you start dealing with Hollywood and the entertainment industry, it gets very dicey because, anytime they come into contact with Republicans, all their peers and all the people out in Hollywood and that industry come down on them hard. That's obviously what's happened here.
I personally would love to hear a lot of military bands. I'd love to hear patriotic marches and that kind of music.
So, chasing these acts sometimes is a little bit of a risky business for Republicans.
I don't know why they're pulling out. This has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with America's 250th anniversary.
The only people making it divisive are the Democrats, who seem to be criticizing every single thing Trump wants to do is celebrate the country's birthday. They're fun-haters. They're fun-vacuums. They don't love America as much as Donald Trump. They're still sourpusses that he's the president while this awesome celebration is going on. That's what I think is happening.
COLLINS: I mean, Jamal is a Democrat. He just said he's fine with the UFC event.
SIMMONS: Kaitlan, I will say this. Whatever happens, Democrats are way more likely to have fun than Republicans.
COLLINS: Oh boy.
SIMMONS: I think we'll see--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: We'll have that debate another time.
JENNINGS: Fine--
(CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: Jamal Simmons.
Scott Jennings, we'll let you get back to your baseball game.
JENNINGS: --good show.
COLLINS: Thank you both for being here tonight.
Up next for us here on THE SOURCE. The President spent two hours in the Situation Room today, on a serious note, after saying that he would make a final determination on whether to proceed with an Iran deal. What happened after that? I'm going to get insight from his former National Security Advisor.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: The President spent nearly two hours inside the Situation Room with his team today. But as of tonight, he has yet to announce any final determination about where the war with Iran goes from here.
The President has continued to weigh a temporary deal that has been presented to him. It would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, extend the ceasefire, and kick off 60 days of talks with the Iranians about the fate of their nuclear program.
The Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and Vice President, JD Vance, were among the officials who joined the President inside the Situation Room today.
And the President laid out his conditions before that meeting, posting on Truth Social that, quote, "Iran must agree that they will never have a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb. The Hormuz Strait must be immediately open, no tolls, for unrestricted shipping traffic, in both directions." He also calls for all mines to be removed and for Iran's enriched uranium to be removed by the United States.
[21:40:00]
My next guest served as the President's National Security Advisor in his first term, and was the Ambassador to the United Nations under President George W. Bush. Ambassador John Bolton is here.
And Ambassador, what do you think the President is either pushing for or concerned about that he has not publicly made up his mind on this decision yet? Maybe he's done so privately, but he hasn't told us publicly where he's going to go here.
JOHN BOLTON, FORMER TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO UNITED NATIONS: Right. I can imagine the President saying to this group of advisers, I'm not loving our options here.
I think he clearly wants a deal to try and get out of this situation, declare victory, open the Strait to get oil out into international markets, lower the price of gasoline at the pump, alleviate some of the economic concern in this country, thinking of the November election.
But on the other hand, he knows if he makes a big -- bad deal. He's already been criticized by several Republican members of the Senate. Even though we don't know the terms of the deal, he's very worried he's going to look like he's given away the store.
So, I think when you add to the fact, honestly, none of us really know what this Memorandum of Understanding says, or who's agreed to it, particularly in the case of Iran, whether they have anybody who can make a final decision.
So, I think it's a very unsettling situation, and it entirely benefits Iran, every day that goes by, from the ceasefire we're in now, to this proposed 60-day extension of the ceasefire, it removes further and further from any likelihood that we will again resume the use of military force. That's victory for the regime in Iran.
COLLINS: So, you would be against taking the 60-day extension?
BOLTON: I was against the ceasefire. This regime understands only when it's being pounded on. And now, as that pressure is relieved -- if you think it's been tough to negotiate this 11- or 12-point Memorandum of Understanding, wait till we get to the negotiations over the nuclear program. The President likes to say that our adversaries in negotiations are sometimes tap, tap, tapping us along. Well, he's being tapped, tapped, tapped along by the Iranians right now.
COLLINS: But if this deal, this temporary deal, reopens the Strait of Hormuz, do you believe that's a good thing?
BOLTON: No because, I think necessarily it opens the channels of international commerce for Iran to sell its oil.
I think the right thing to do, just looking at the issue of the Strait, keep the blockade against the shipment of Iranian oil and open up the Arab side of the Gulf, get the Gulf Arab oil out into international commerce. Let that bring the price, internationally, of oil, down.
I think we can do it. I think we've got the military capacity to do it. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this week, we've escorted at least two tankers out, one of them a Greek tanker of 2 million barrels of oil capacity. I'm not saying it's without risk or danger, and it would require, in all likelihood, the use of military force.
But that's how to keep the squeeze on Iran, but relieve the extortionate pressure they're putting on now, on the international economy, get the Arab oil flowing.
COLLINS: And the White House has said the President is focused on this from a national security lens, a statesman lens. He keeps getting asked, though, about the obvious domestic politics of this, which Republicans are keenly aware of here at home.
This is what he said about whether or not the midterms have an impact on his decision-making.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They thought they were going to out-weight me, you know.
We'll out-weight him. He's got the midterms.
I don't care about the midterms.
You know, the next election, whether it's a midterm or not. So, you have a very short window for doing some -- anything having to do with war. But I don't view that window. I view it, I have to do what's right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: As someone who was his National Security Advisor, has been in the Situation Room, what do you make of those comments?
BOLTON: I will guarantee, he's focused on the midterm elections. I think he's very worried about it. He's in a situation where he doesn't know what to do. He would like to have some declaration of victory, some evidence that he's -- he can say, I've achieved all our objectives, and now we can allow the Strait of Hormuz to open to alleviate economic pressure in this country.
But he looks at the record of the Obama administration, he fears being compared to it, he's very close to cutting an Obama kind of deal, and he knows that's bad news for him too.
COLLINS: Do you think the deal will look like the Obama era nuclear deal?
BOLTON: Well, again, we don't have a document we can really--
COLLINS: I mean, he says it won't.
BOLTON: --we can really analyze. But there's a lot of talk about setting up a huge investment fund in Iran to be funded with frozen Iranian assets.
[21:45:00]
I think the frozen Iranian assets, in a perfect world, yes, we would use in Iran. But not with this regime. If you unfreeze those assets, as appears to be, as is discussed in the press, an element of this -- of this agreement, you would simply strengthen the hand of the religious fanatics running the Revolutionary Guard, completely contrary to our interest. It would put them back in power, allow them to rebuild their nuclear program, rebuild their terrorist organizations, rebuild their ballistic missile capability, and rebuild their ability to repress their own people. What's the point of that?
COLLINS: Ambassador John Bolton, we will see what the President decides here next. Thank you for joining us tonight.
BOLTON: Thanks for having me.
COLLINS: Up next here. It has been a consequential week in Washington. I'll take you behind the scenes, right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:50:00]
COLLINS: This week, Washington and the world watched for a breakthrough on negotiations with Iran, as the President notched another victory in his revenge campaign.
Here's what else we saw behind the scenes at the White House this week.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: They want very much to make a deal. So far, they haven't gotten there.
Either that, or we'll have to just finish the job.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Monday, May 25.
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: Today here at Arlington, a very special place, we honor those who fell so that our Republic might stand. This Memorial Day, we salute them, we exalt them, and we thank them for all that we have and for all that they gave.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Tuesday, May 26.
COLLINS: If you're wondering what on earth is happening on the South Lawn behind me right now. That is not construction of President Trump's new ballroom. That is actually the construction ahead of the UFC fight that is scheduled to take place here on June 14th. It's part of the events that are leading up to America's 250th birthday on July 4th. That will be held though on Flag Day here at the White House, which is also the weekend of President Trump's birthday.
Still top of mind, when the President and his Cabinet are all gathered around the table, for tomorrow's Cabinet meeting, will be Iran.
The President has said he is in no hurry to make a deal. Though Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, has said we could see one potentially within days.
Bye, Fern (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bye.
COLLINS: Great job.
The final polls have just closed in the State of Texas.
CNN can now project that the Texas Attorney General, Ken Paxton, will defeat the incumbent Republican Senator John Cornyn. It's a huge win for President Trump, who upended this race in recent days, by endorsing Paxton, and declaring that Cornyn who has served in the Senate for 24 years was not loyal enough to him.
MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI, (D) NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK STATE: Hey, Kaitlan, how's it going?
COLLINS: I'm good.
MAMDANI: Only about the Knicks, right?
COLLINS: Yes, exactly.
MAMDANI: Yes, cool, cool, cool.
COLLINS: You know, your first year as mayor, and this happens.
MAMDANI: I can take zero credit.
COLLINS: They actually have not been to the finals since you were 7- years-old.
Did you ever think that you would see a Knicks finals run during your first year as mayor?
MAMDANI: You know, I prayed for it, I hoped for it.
We're excited. It's truly an incredible time to be a New Yorker.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Wednesday, May 27.
TRUMP: They're negotiating on fumes. We'll see what happens. Maybe we have to go back and finish it. Maybe we don't.
They thought they were going to out-weight me, you know.
We'll out-weight him. He's got the midterms.
I don't care about the midterms. Look what happened last night. That was the prelude to the midterms.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Thursday, May 28.
COLLINS: There is this tentative deal that seems to be coming out of the diplomatic negotiations that we know have been underway between the United States and Iran, and the various mediators here.
SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: Good afternoon.
If you really want to get a question, you could call me Dr. Bessent.
(LAUGHTER)
BESSENT: Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I have two questions for you, but just to follow on what you said about the $250--
BESSENT: Well, you could call me Doctor, so. Only get one.
COLLINS: Well--
(LAUGHTER)
COLLINS: I'll shoot for two.
You said that it's up to Congress, if the President's face is on a $250 bill. But it is actually The Washington Post that's reporting two political appointees from the Treasury Department who have asked agencies to be ready to do that.
BESSENT: What it says is that Treasury is following the law and that we've created the bill, and that it's up to Congress.
We prepare for everything if it gets passed.
COLLINS: Politically, do you think it's a good idea, though, when people are struggling to afford gas and groceries?
BESSENT: I don't think that there's anything untoward about having the person who is President of the United States, on the 250th anniversary bill.
COLLINS: The $1.8 billion fund. Is it accurate that the general counsel of the Treasury Department resigned over that?
BESSENT: Kaitlan, I will not be taking any other questions, meaning I will not be taking any other questions. So.
Thank you, all.
COLLINS: Tonight. The United States and Iran just reached a tentative deal. But will President Trump sign off?
Even if it's a temporary framework, would you welcome that?
[21:55:00]
REP. DAN GOLDMAN (D-NY): We are in a much worse situation right now than we were before the war started.
It was a wag-the-dog expedition for Donald Trump, who wanted to distract from the Epstein files.
This is a terrible deal because, it was a terrible decision by the President.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Coming up next for us here on THE SOURCE. We just got new photos of the aftermath of that massive rocket explosion in Florida, and what this setback means for the President's mission to the Moon.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, this is what's left of the launchpad, where an uncrewed Blue Origin rocket exploded into a massive fireball during a routine ground test last night. By comparison, just to see that, here's what it looked like before. Now, just one tower is still standing on what is the company's only orbital launchpad.
[22:00:00]
That explosion that happened at Cape Canaveral marks a major setback, not only for the company, but also for NASA's mission to put humans back on the Moon. That's because Blue Origin was planning to use that rocket to launch landers to the Moon, under NASA's Artemis program, and they were awarded a massive contract just this week.
The founder, Jeff Bezos, called it a very rough day for the company, but he added this: We'll rebuild whatever needs rebuilding and get back to flying. It's worth it.
Thanks for joining us tonight. "CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
