Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
New Polls Show A Race Reset With 99 Days Until Election; Trump: I'll Win Minnesota If Democrats "Don't Cheat"; Biden Arrives In Texas For Major Supreme Court Reform Speech; FBI Still Trying To Figure Out Motive In Trump Shooting; U.S. Supreme Court's Compromise, Negotiations On Idaho Abortion Ban; How Getting $12,000 A Year Changed People's Lives. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired July 29, 2024 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: -- power lines, pretty smart.
[16:00:01]
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Yeah, smart move. At one point, the balloon was hovering just 10 feet above homes. Neighbors then helped guide the balloon from the ground to an open street.
Notably, three weeks ago, a balloon from the same company landed just a couple of miles away, but in the same neighborhood pretty cool story. I do want to apologize to our viewers. It's National Chicken Wing Day.
KEILAR: Yeah.
SANCHEZ: And we are not celebrating even though we saw National Hot Dog Day only a few days ago.
KEILAR: But we wanted to acknowledge it.
SANCHEZ: We did want to acknowledge that.
KEILAR: Yeah.
THE LEAD WITH JAKE TAPPER starts now.
(MUSIC)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: A lot can happen in 99 days.
THE LEAD starts right now.
The 2024 presidential race is now under the 100-day mark. The full throated political attacks are almost non-stop, as Donald Trump lays the groundwork to accuse Democrats of cheating, just as he falsely accused them in 2016 and 2020.
Plus, a new investigation into the assassination attempt on Donald Trump, this time by a bipartisan House task force. Trump himself has agreed to sit for an FBI victim interview. Plus, President Biden just minutes away from proposing seismic and unlikely to happen changes to the U.S. Supreme Court. But before the president made anything official, House Speaker Mike Johnson already called the plan dead on arrival.
(MUSIC)
TAPPER: Welcome to THE LEAD.
I'm Jake Tapper. We start in the 2024 lead where we find a new competitive era in the 2024 presidential race.
Polls show Donald Trump still has an edge and is in a better place than he was in 2016. And by some metrics, 2020 still the race in the key battleground states as tightened between Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, which is not where we were just over a week ago.
Before President Joe Biden dropped out of the race, you might remember back then, all of eight or nine days ago, battleground states were slipping out of Biden's reach. Democrats are sounding the alarm that even second and third tier purplish blue states good fall to Trump, including New Hampshire and New Mexico, Virginia, and even Minnesota.
That internal Democratic polling document we told you about two weeks ago at the Republican convention had Biden with only a 0.4 percentage point advantage in Minnesota, 0.4, Minnesota. Now, according to a Fox News poll, shows Harris up by six percentage points in Minnesota.
Nonetheless, Donald Trump, who is in St. Cloud, Minnesota, Saturday night, told his supporters this falsehood.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If they don't cheat, we win this state easily. Okay? They cheat. They have no shame. They cheat.
Do you understand that you crooked people? They're the most crooked. They cheat. They cheated in the last election and they're going to cheat in this election, but we're going to get them.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Donald Trump, of course, lost the election, fair and square in 2020.
And for the record, the state of Minnesota has not voted for a Republican for president since I was 3-years-old, since Richard Nixon in 1972. And yes that even includes when Ronald Reagan won landslide Electoral College victories. Do we have -- we have those 1980 and '84 maps handy?
Look at that. That's the 1980. Let's all see that sea of red. And then on top at the top in the middle there, that's little Minnesota. That's blue. One of the very few states in 1980 that did not vote for Reagan. In 1984, Minnesota besides D.C. literally the only Democratic holdout
in the Reagan landslide of 1984. Trump himself lost to Hillary Clinton in Minnesota by 1.6 percentage points in 2016, the year he won. And he lost to President Biden there in 2020 by seven percentage points.
And yet, Trump, who has also never won the popular vote and lost the electoral vote in 2020, is out there saying that if he loses Minnesota, it's because of cheating. It's not true. And more importantly, we have seen this movie before. We know that lies about election fraud are not harmless. When Trump falsely claimed repeatedly that the 2020 election was rigged, his fervent supporters believed him.
And this is what those lies wrought.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CROWD: Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!
(INAUDIBLE)
(SCREAMING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Trump supporters so enraged by those election lies that they believed they took matters into their own hands. They were willing to violate laws. There were willing to violate the U.S. Constitution by attacking the U.S. Capitol on January 6, one of the most shameful days in this nation's history.
They were attempting to stop the certification of an election that President Joe Biden won fairly. Three of Trump's supporters died that day of apparent medical emergencies.
[16:05:05]
One Trump supporter was fatally shot by police as she approached the floor of the House of Representatives along with a violent mob.
A U.S. Capitol police officer, Brian Sicknick, later died of his injuries withstood on that day and then four other officers who defended that Capitol that day -- who defended the Capitol that day, and were traumatized, took their own lives. And it all began with this lie that the election was stolen.
You know who didn't believe Trump's lies as it turns out? Trump's 2020 campaign manager, Trump's White House counsel, Trump's attorney general.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL BARR, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL: I told the president in no uncertain terms that I did not see evidence of fraud and that would have affected the outcome of the election and frankly, a year-and-a- half later, I haven't seen anything to change my mind on that. (END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: You know who else didn't believe these lies about the election being stolen? Trump's daughter, Ivanka.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: how did that affect your perspective about the election when Attorney General Barr made that statement?
IVANKA TRUMP, DAUGHTER OF FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP: It affected my perspective. I respected Attorney General Barr. So I accepted what he said, was saying.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: People in Trump's orbit then knew the truth that widespread election fraud was simply not a thing. And here we are again in 2024, with just 99 days to go until the election, listening to Donald Trump's stick with these same fabricated claims that he can only lose Minnesota if Democrats cheat? No.
But, look, Donald Trump may very well win the election. He may well lose the election, but these lies, they literally have a body count.
All of this is playing out as Trump and Harris are out there making their case to voters. And as CNN's Kayla Tausche reports, they're trying out new attack lines.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAYLA TAUSCHE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): With 99 days until Election Day, both parties racing to sharpen their attacks.
TRUMP: The most incompetent, unpopular, and far-left vice president in American history, probably the most far left person in American history.
SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The American people are never going to elect a wacky out-of-touch San Francisco liberal like Kamala Harris.
KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You may have noticed, Donald Trump has been resorting to some wild lies about my record. And some of what he and his running mate are saying, well, it's just plain weird.
TAUSCHE: Weird and extreme, the Harris campaign now says as it warns voters on Trump's record on abortion rights.
HARRIS: One in three women of reproductive age in America lives in a state with a Trump abortion ban.
TAUSCHE: For Harris, a critical stretch ahead, set to clinch the official nomination and soon to name her running mate, contenders auditioning on the stump and across the airwaves.
GOV. JB PRITZKER (D), ILLINOIIS: I think we've seen over the last -- well, decades that who you pick as your vice president doesn't determine whether you're going to win a state or not.
GOV. TIM WALZ (D), MINNESOTA: That is weird behavior and I -- I don't think you call it anything else. It's simply what we're observing.
GOV. JOSH SHAPIRO (D), PENNSYLVANIA: He's not just afraid to debate her because he knows she's going to kick his (EXPLETIVE DELETED) in the debate.
TAUSCHE: Trump says he'll head back to Pennsylvania as the battleground travel heats up. Harris making a renewed push in Georgia with a Tuesday visit, and both campaigns holding dueling events in Nevada.
Recent polls show the race tightening with Harris beginning to close the gap with Trump, as her favorability rises and the race enters a high drama home stretch.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TAUSCHE (on camera): The Harris campaign also says that the vice president is heading into this homestretch with $200 million that she raised just in week after Joe Biden withdrew from the race.
Jake, we're also learning from sources that the Harris campaign plans to beef up its fundraising staff to try to capitalize on that momentum and build an infrastructure that is more inherit his image than Biden's -- Jake.
TAPPER: All right. Kayla Tausche at the White House, thanks so much.
My panel joins me now to discuss. I want to play this other moment from former President Trump on Saturday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They say, oh, he's not for democracy. I took a bullet for democracy. He didn't.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: I think talking about the assassination attempt is going to be something he frequently talks about.
MO ELLEITHEE, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yeah. And I think we'll hear a lot more about it and it was a terrible thing for our democracy and any type of political violence is terrible for our democracy. But when Paul Pelosi was savagely beaten in his house by someone who is targeting Nancy Pelosi because she was standing up for democracy, Donald Trump mocked them.
[16:10:04]
When John McCain, who was literally shot down, defending democracy, Donald Trump mocked him.
Donald Trump has a long history of mocking people who are standing up and fighting for democracy.
And frankly, Donald Trump is the only candidate in this race who incited an insurrection against those who were trying to uphold democracy. So we'll see how it holds. But yeah, I think he's going to talk about it a lot.
TAPPER: Jonah, it's been -- it's been I think its fair to say, objectively, it's been a rocky start for J.D. Vance --
JONAH GOLDBERG, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah.
TAPPER: -- as a running mate, even if -- even those who love him might acknowledge that. He's faced backlash for the childless -- childless cat ladies comment, his abortion stance, pretty -- previous criticisms of Trump faced criticism.
Here's "The Wall Street Journal" editorial board: Donald Trump's choice of 39-year-old J.D. Vance as his running mate was supposed to present the GOP ticket as moderate and looking to the future. Instead, the campaign has found itself playing defense against Mr. Vance's censorious views -- did I pronounce that correctly?
GOLDBERG: Close enough.
TAPPER: Close enough, about women who don't have children.
What do you make of it all? I mean, it seemed as though it was a real pickup born from the campaign, feeling very confident the Biden was going to be easily defeated. Do you think that Trump would pick J.D. Vance given today's givens?
GOLDBERG: I don't get that vibe. I can put that out there.
Yeah. Look, I think it was a confidence pick. Lots of people said is Trump doubling down and all that. I think the problem is there were a lot of people in MAGA world who thought because they like Trump from the beginning, and the people who didn't like me were proven wrong and Trump won and all that, that meant they actually had a really great grasp of politics. And it turns out they don't have a great grasp of politics either.
And the truth of it is, is that, you know, Vance leans into the understanding that Trumpism -- the point of Trumpism is the -- is the insults, right? It's like you can't just be for good policy. You have to make sure that the left -- that you're drinking the left's tears, right? Liberal tears are delicious kind of thing.
So his whole thing about -- the context of the childless cat lady is about a child tax credit.
TAPPER: Right.
GOLDBERG: Child tax credit is wildly popular. TAPPER: Right.
GOLDBERG: But he has managed to frame it in a way to make it unpopular. And that's because he doesn't have -- it -- he doesn't have the freedom that a cult of personality that Trump has to sort of just be able to speak freely about these things because no one holds Trump accountable the way they hold normal politicians, when normal politicians try to imitate Trump. They're unpopular.
And so, he barely survived the election in 2022 in Ohio because he was doing Trump imitation stuff. Everyone else imitate Trump, in Arizona, in Georgia, and elsewhere. They all bought it precisely because people don't like that schtick from anybody other than Trump and so the double-down, I think it was a strategic error.
TAPPER: What do you think about what Jonah just said, the idea that the child -- I mean, you can say, we reward families, I embraced families, being a father has made my life so much better and richer, instead of let me judge everyone who has made different decisions or had different experiences.
MARC LOTTER, CHIEF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER, AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE: Well, I mean, that comment was from years ago before he became the candidate that, you know, that he is today. And I think that's where it will be framed. I think that's the easiest --
TAPPER: He's defending it today though. I mean, he's not --
LOTTER: Well, right. But I don't think that's how you have to defend. We are pro-family and Kamala Harris doesn't believe parents should be able to choose where their kids go to school, and things like that. We want to extend the child tax credit. It's good for families.
So, I think that's where this gets to. You have to get over these hurdles -- these hurdles. I mean, obviously, I went through it as well when I was with the vice president, every vice presidential nominee is going to have their record thrown at them all at the same time and you're dodging and weaving on a bunch of them, and a few days, we'll do the same thing to Kamala's VP pick.
TAPPER: Let's talk about, Annie, some of Harris's previous comments and statements facing criticism today. She tweeted in June 2020 after the George Floyd protests in Minnesota, if you're able to chip in now to the Minnesota freedom fund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota, there's also things such as her -- she in the primary in 2019, she pledge to ban fracking, which is obviously not popular in Pennsylvania.
How much do you think she's -- she's going to actually try to etch-a- sketch it in the immortal words of, who was it, Eric Fehrnstrom for the Mitt Romney. Yeah.
ANNIE LINSKEY, REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: Well, it's already -- it's already shaking.
TAPPER: Yeah. LINSKEY: Etch a sketch is already shaking. You saw her come out over the weekend to say that her position on fracking has changed. She supports fracking. This is something that's critical if she's going to do well in Pennsylvania, you know, part of the blue wall, and, you know, was the key to success for the path that the Biden -- that Biden was hoping for.
But I think that, you know, you're already seeing Republicans paint her as far left as they can and her challenge is going to be to get herself to the center as quickly as humanly possible. And I think that you're going to see that.
[16:15:01]
She's going to be unveiling a sort of first hundred days policy papers in -- you know, we're expecting that in coming days and then going into the convention because that -- Democratic convention is really where you're going to have four days of infomercials for Kamala Harris and she's going to be able to reintroduce herself to the public and move away from some of those policies I think are more problematic.
And she can also look to, you know, she has a record before she ran for president in 2020, so she can lean on that more conserved conservative stances that she took and try to block out some of the, you know, further left comments that were made in 2020. But Republicans are going to work very hard to keep that 2020 Kamala Harris at people's -- in people's warfront.
ELLEITHEE: I -- like I remember back in 2020 when she was running for president people --
TAPPER: She didn't make it to 2020.
ELLEITHEE: 2019.
(CROSSTALK)
ELLEITHEE: The number of people that were saying, gosh, is she too far to the center to win a Democratic, right?
TAPPER: And that's why she kind of ride to the left, right?
ELLEITHEE: That people looked at her and said, given her strong record as a prosecutor and a whole host of other issues, was she too far to the center? So I don't know how complicated this pivot will be for her because I think that's kind of where she is.
LOTTER: There's a lot of tape, a lot of tape.
TAPPER: We'll see. We'll see.
Stay with me, we have much more to discuss later in the show. There are several new developments as investigators uncover more about the gunman who tried to kill Donald Trump, the alias he used online, weapons and explosives purchased before the attempted assassination.
Plus, the new investigation launched into the security failures,
Plus, Air Force One is wheels down in Austin, Texas, for the big speech at the LBJ Library. The glaring double standard in Biden's new proposal as he gets ready to call on term limits for U.S. Supreme Court justices after 54 years in public office.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:20:40]
TAPPER: And we're back with our law and justice lead and new developments into the investigation into the assassination attempt on former President Trump. Text messages among law enforcement suggests that some officers flagged the shooters presence at the rally more than 90 minutes before he fired eight shots at Trump.
CNN's Josh Campbell is taking a closer look.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: What happened --
JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): To understand what happened at Butler, Pennsylvania, the FBI said today, investigators have conducted over 450 interviews as they work to identify a motive, the famed FBI profilers, assessing the 20-year-old shooter was a loner.
KEVIN ROJEK, FBI SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE: We have learned the subject was highly intelligent, attended college and maintain steady employment. His primary social, social circle appears to be limited to his immediate family.
CAMPBELL: He was also a loner online, using an alias to make 25 firearm-related purchases last year and six purchases of chemicals and explosive materials this year, the FBI said, none of which raised suspicion with his parents.
ROJEK: The shooter had the long interest in science and things like this and had been doing experiments.
CAMPBELL: An examination of the gunman's laptop did provide some clues.
ROJEK: Searches related to power plants, mass shooting events, information on improvised explosive devices.
CAMPBELL: And in one stunning Google search, just days before the shooting, he typed --
CHRISTOPHER WRAY, FBI DIRECTOR: Quote, how far away was Oswald from Kennedy.
CAMPBELL: On the day of that Internet search, the FBI said the shooter registered to attend the Trump rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, apparently conducting reconnaissance days before the event, including using a drone to survey the venue, and bringing at least one explosive device to the rally, which investigators found in his car.
While the specific motive of the gunman who was shot and killed by a Secret Service counter-sniper remains a mystery, new details are also surfacing about the apparent failure by law enforcement to prevent the attack.
ROJEK: Shortly after approximately 5:00 p.m., we assessed the shooter was identified by law enforcement as a suspicious person, a local officer took a photo of the subject and send it to other SWAT operators on scene, as well as local command personnel.
CAMPBELL: But what happened next according to local officers who spoke with ABC News, portrays a security effort plagued by dysfunction.
GREGORY NICHOL, BEAVER COUNTY SWAT TEAM: Sent those pictures out to that group and advised him of what I noticed and what I'd seen.
I assume that there would be somebody coming out to, you know, speak with this individual or, you know, find out what's going on.
CAMPBELL: An officer did finally hoisted onto the roof of the building to confront the shooter, but dropped to the ground after the gunman pointed his AR-15 rifle at the officer.
Seconds later, the shooter opened fire on the former president. The Secret Service now facing serious questions, not just from the public and congress, but also from local officers who were on the scene the day of the attack.
JASON WOODS, BEAVER COUNTY SWAT TEAM: We are supposed to get a face- to-face briefing with the Secret Service snipers whenever they arrived, and that never happened. So I think that that was probably a pivotal point where I started thinking things were wrong because that never happened. And we had no communication with the Secret Service.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CAMPBELL (on camera): And Jake, we're learning that former President Trump will sit down with the FBI for a victim interview. These are standard, likely won't have much investigative value, but its notable in that Donald Trump has continued to slam the FBI for not coming out quickly to acknowledge that what he's suffered from was a gunshot wound. The FBI has since said that whether it was an entire bullet, whether it was a fragment of a bullet, there's now no question their mind that that was a round of ammunition, Jake.
TAPPER: All right. Josh Campbell, thanks so much for the latest on the investigation.
What happens inside the U.S. Supreme Court chambers often remains a secret. CNN has some new exclusive reporting revealing what happened behind the scenes on a key ruling on one of the most controversial issues of our time and what the justices, which justices flipped. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [16:28:58]
TAPPER: In our law and justice lead, as we wait to hear President Biden lay out a call for major changes to the U.S. Supreme Court that will not happen, CNN has new exclusive reporting on how things shifted inside the court around a ruling involving abortion.
Our own Joan Biskupic broke that story and joins us now.
Joan, help us understand what was happening around this decision involving abortion in the state of Idaho.
JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Sure. You remember that, you know, we're two years away from when the Supreme Court completely rolled back constitutional abortion rights in the Dobbs case. And after that, several states started enacting bans. Idaho was one of them.
And in January this year, it looked like the Supreme Court was poised to further encroach on abortion access because what it did was it allowed Idaho to enforce this ban with an exception only to prevent the death of the pregnant woman over objections from the Biden administration that that would conflict with federal law that protects women in emergency situations for their health, like pregnancy complications, that aren't for -- to prevent death, but to prevent health.
[16:30:03]
And I found that when the justices let the Idaho law go fully into effect, it was actually a six to three vote. They never released their recorded vote of 6-3 with all the Republican-appointed conservatives saying they wanted the ban to take full effect and the three Democratically-appointed liberals opposing it.
TAPPER: Uh-huh. And what happened or what changed? Because that wasn't the ultimate decision.
BISKUPIC: No, in fact, that conservative super majority started to splinter apart around the time of oral arguments in April. Justice Amy Coney Barrett became more concerned about what was happening on the ground. Women in Idaho were being air lifted from hospitals out of date because of pregnancy complications where the physicians in Idaho didn't think that they could perform any kind of emergency abortion without being criminally liable here.
So she began to have concerns about that, and also some factual discrepancies in the record.
Remember Jake, when the justices allowed that Idaho ban to take effect. They let Idaho skip over appellate courts and just go right to the Supreme Court with its case. Justice Barrett has concerns, Chief Justice John Roberts and Brett Kavanaugh begin to have similar concerns and want to completely dismiss the case.
But the other three conservatives in that block, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch say, no, we don't want to dismiss this case. We want to rule for Idaho here and reject the Biden administration. That gave the liberals on the court unusual leverage, as you know, there are only three liberals. They usually have like zero leverage.
TAPPER: No, yeah.
BISKUPIC: Yes. And they said, okay, we will join -- two of them, Justices Sotomayor and Elena Kagan said, we will join your decision to dismiss this case, but only if you lift that January order that let the Idaho law to take full effect because at first, those justices in the middle of the conservatives, they said. No, we want to keep that ban in place, but through negotiations with the liberals, they then reached this -- reach this compromise over objections from Samuel Alito on the far right, and newest justice, Ketanji Brown Jackson, who said, we don't want to dismiss this.
We should have some clarity. But the truth is, Jake, if they had actually decided the merits, the Biden administration would probably have lost it outright.
TAPPER: Yeah, and just to -- just to remind people at home, between a perfectly a successful delivery of a child and a trouble pregnancy where the woman dies. There's a lot of stuff that could happen. Women can get paralyzed. Women could do serious neurological damage. Are you seeing all of these doctors in Idaho are like we can't do anything to save the health of the mother, only her life.
BISKUPIC: That's exactly right. You think of organ failure.
TAPPER: Right.
BISKUPIC: You think of her reproductive health and that's what Justice Barrett was concerned about during oral arguments that a woman who again in these cases, sadly, the fetus probably wasn't going to live anyway, but the danger would have been as you as you just said, to the woman who was suffering the complications and perhaps to her future reproductive health.
TAPPER: And is that what changed it for Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the idea that on the ground events like this were actually happening?
BISKUPIC: Yes. And she couldn't get clarity as to whether physicians -- what physicians actually could do. At one point during oral arguments, she said to the Idaho lawyer defending the ban, it sounds like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth that she didn't say that phrase, but she said she was shocked at how he couldn't give clarity to when could a woman in that kind of distress that you just described get any kind of help.
But the truth is that Idaho officials were saying really never unless it was to prevent outright death.
TAPPER: Joan Biskupic, thank you so much for that reporting behind the scenes. We've never get to really hear what's going on behind the scenes. Thank you so much. Right now, President Biden is in Austin, Texas. He's headed to the LBJ presidential library to mark 60 years since the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And he's going to call for a mate a number of major reforms to the U.S. Supreme Court. We're standing by to hear that speech.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:39:17]
TAPPER: Any minute now, President Biden is expected to speak in Austin, Texas, at the Lyndon Baines Johnson presidential library, there, he is expected to lay out significant reforms. He's calling for, for to the U.S. Supreme Court.
My panel is back with me.
So let us talk about what exactly he is proposing. He is proposing an 18 year term limits for justices as opposed to a lifetime, a constitutional amendment that would prohibit presidential immunity. The way that it was granted, I guess, to President Trump, constitutional amendment I want to tick a rather long time to become constitutional moments and then a code of conduct for the justice.
So, first of all, it has been pointed out, this is a guy who has served in Congress since 1973 at a 54-year political career, proposing 18-year term limits.
[16:40:01]
LINSKEY: Yes. Somebody who just turned limited himself, I might add, so now, perhaps feels that he can do it for others.
Look, I think the president also part of his history that I think is the most important here is the time that he was the chair of the judiciary committee and ranking member. And in talking to some of his top staff, they say that he has been an institutionalist and for him to move to this position was a really significant change that occurred as he was in the White House.
It was a kind of a slow, slow shift and his staff says, yeah, it was absolutely after the Supreme Court decision, you know, broadening the idea you for presidents.
TAPPER: What can I ask but connect this probe a little I know you cover the White House?
LINSKEY: Yes, absolutely.
TAPPER: So he had a working group of study of reforms or whatever in 2021 and they filed the report and it went like on a shelf somewhere. Nobody paid any attention to it. This was announced during this three week plus period between the debate where he gave this bad performance and his announcement two Sundays ago, he's dropping out when the progressives were the only ones really backing him, AOC, Bernie Sanders, et cetera.
Then, all of a sudden he said an and it seemed like a promise he made to progressives who were backing him because I hadn't really heard him talk at length about anything along these lines other than maybe a code of conduct.
LINSKEY: That's correct. He had not talked about this in any great length at all, and it was a moment where his top policy staff was furiously working with progressives and coming up with a number of ideas. This one though, however, I know in talking to his staff, is something that came out of sort of a longer conversation. You want to take them at their word.
I don't know that they sort of have earned that -- at least for me, but you know, that's -- that's what they've been saying about this proposal.
TAPPER: Let me play -- let me play devils advocate and say it actually would not be a bad idea if there was a code of ethics and conduct for the U.S. Supreme Court. Does anyone disagree?
LOTTER: No, I would also like one for the for presidents and the first families.
GOLDBERG: And Congress, Congress.
LOTTER: And Congress, yeah.
GOLDBERG: A good one.
TAPPER: Yeah, yeah.
ELLEITHEE: Congress has an ethics committee, right? It's lot a lot of people say, well, should they be investigated themselves? But they at least have some sort of structure in place. The courts don't.
And that I think or at least the Supreme Court, right? And the lower courts do, right? Lower courts and the Supreme Court is really like the one body, the governmental body that doesn't have anything holding them countable and I think that's sort of what this is getting at, at a time when public trust in the institution is eroding across the board, right?
These are measures I would think -- you know, the code of conduct, 100 percent is something that I think people could get behind. The term limits like you could argue that members of Congress have an ultimate term limit, which is the voters. The voters get to decide.
TAPPER: But they don't really have term limit.
ELLEITHEE: But there's no -- right. They don't have a term limit, but voters can hold them accountable at any time. I've voted them out of office. The president has a term limit and can be voted out of office.
There's nothing holding the Supreme Court accountable. And so, I think that's sort of what he's trying to get at. TAPPER: What do you think?
GOLDBERG: Yes. So I think you can make arguments. All three of these proposals in some form. The term limit one has huge constitutional problems, I think.
I agree with you that the Supreme Court is in bad odor these days. One of the reasons has been in bad odor is because Democrats have been demonizing and delegitimizing it, for a long time, ever since the liberal stop controlling the court.
ELLEITHEE: It's not like conservatives are patented on the back though when --
GOLDBERG: That's all fine, yeah, but that gets to my larger point, which is that this is so -- if you want to do any of these changes, the onetime you wouldn't introduce them is with 99 days left for a presidential election.
It is pure politics. It's firing up conservatives. It's firing up progressives. No, Congress isn't going to take this stuff up anytime soon and people are going to walk into positions that are going to make it harder if you want to actually do judicial reform because of this.
LOTTER: And it's also political malpractice. I mean, from a strictly from a campaign standpoint. So you've just ignored democracy and removed your presidential nominee and replaced them for political reasons, ignoring about 14.5 million votes. And now they were voting for her to now, you're going to say, oh, wait a minute, let's go up another co-equal branch of government.
Let's go after them and reform them when it's very easy to say who's the threat to democracy? You just ignored 14 million voters and now you're targeting the Supreme Court.
Very easy case for Republicans to make at a time they really want to be making the case of threat to democracy against us.
LINSKEY: Yeah, I mean, I think from the perspective of the Democrats and people pushing this, I mean, you know, you're talking about, you don't know what paid speeches these justice serves are giving.
You don't know --
TAPPER: Free vacations.
LINSKEY: Free vacations, conflicts of interests. I mean, I think the more general American people have learned about some of these conflicts, is it kind of feels like, oh my gosh, how is it possible that a justice could be getting this much money or could be taking a case when they have this comp -- this very clear conflict of interest or their spouses.
[16:45:02] And I think a lot of people just think it exists already. That, oh, of course, this is not something there are supposed to do and are just learning now like, oh wow, they didn't have this codes.
TAPPER: It seems weird to me, like, I can't do a public event without CNN's board clearing it. You know what I mean?
LINSKEY: Right.
TAPPER: Like we have a whole standards board know that group does this, know that group does that. It's fine. I don't even like doing them.
But my point is like I have to get that cleared. You'd think Supreme Court justices would have that.
LINSKEY: Yeah. And it's -- I mean, so I some of these policies do feel a little bit more common sense than necessarily an attack on the court. But, of course --
GOLDBERG: There is another -- you said there were no term limits for the justices. There is one. Congress can impeach people who really violate these things.
LOTTER: OK.
GOLDBERG: And just pure nerdery that phrase co-equal branch of government is Nixonian propaganda. It does not supported by the Constitution or the Federalist Papers. Congress is the supreme branch of government.
LOTTER: I will say, though --
TAPPER: Yeah.
LOTTER: -- we're talking about this earlier, if they were to pass this, guess who gets to rule on this? Chief Justice Roberts.
TAPPER: It's amazing stuff.
All right, thanks one and all. We'll bring you back when -- when -- after Biden speaks, and we will bring you the president's comments when they begin.
Plus, an unthinkable gift for homeless people in one major American city, $12,000, no strings attached. See the impact on homelessness for that kind of money.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:50:45]
TAPPER: We're back with our series here on THE LEAD that we call "Homeless in America", where we examine issues affecting some of those vulnerable people across the United States, a community whose numbers are only growing to record highs.
Today, we're taking a look at the impact of a Denver, Colorado program that gave homeless people free money, $12,000 a year to use as they saw fit, to see what the result would be.
And as CNN's Meena Duerson reports, the money, of course, changed peoples' lives and it did so for the better. But this program may go away.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOLENE JACHETTA, DENVER BASIC INCOME PARTICIPANT: This is like where we had our tents. So, a tent here and a tent right here.
MEENA DUERSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And how long were you living on?
JACHETTA: Close to five months.
DUERSON: Uh-huh.
JACHETTA: It was hard. It was really hard.
DUERSON (voice-over): The last time Jolene Jachetta was in this field, she was pregnant and homeless.
Does any part of you think about the time when few would have to be back here again?
JACHETTA: I worry about that a lot, you know? You know, I don't want to lose what I have. I don't ever want to come back here. I really don't.
But it does weigh heavy in the back of my mind.
DUERSON: For years, she and her family couldn't afford stable housing until in 2022, she was given $12,000, no strings attached.
Do you remember what it was like when you got your first payment?
JACHETTA: So exciting in the relief is really nice to watch your children feel to grow. This is his home.
You want some cheese? Okay.
DUERSON: The money came from the Denver Basic Income Project. The program led by entrepreneur Mark Donovan.
MARK DONOVAN, FOUNDER, DENVER BASIC INCOME PROJECT: Gwen (ph), it's Mark.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi. How are you?
DONOVAN: Hey, I'm great. How are you doing?
DUERSON: To study the impact of giving cash to people experiencing homelessness? DONOVAN: We're seeing people accelerating into housing, into
employment feeling financially stable, having improved family relationships.
We have affordable housing crisis, and this is a really quick efficient, and powerful way to provide relief.
DUERSON: Roughly 800 participants were divided into three groups.
For 12 months, one group was given a $1,000 a month. The second, which Jachetta was part of, got a lump sum of $6,500, followed by $500 a month.
And the third group got just $50 a month.
After a year, almost half the participants across all groups had found housing and reported a host of positive ripple effects. And researchers found the project likely saved the city over half $1 million by reducing costs like ambulance rides, ER visits, jail time, and shelter stays.
Did it change how you felt about yourselves?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sure am. I'm more confident, more -- and just feels good to have money on your pocket and be able to pay for your stuff, and have a sense of normality in your life and everybody should be able to feel that way.
DUERSON: Justin Zeros and Dea Brancusi (ph) say they bounced from shelters to friends' couches before finding the project.
The money helped them find housing, clothing, food, a car, and work.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was diagnosed with breast cancer and anyone would deal with it. Oh my gosh, breast cancer, you know you think you're going to die right away.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you're on the streets, you want (ph) to survive that.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's a place we would never want to go back to, as being homeless.
DUERSON: Funding for the project is slated to run out this fall, though Donovan and his team are confident they'll secure enough from donors and the city to keep it going.
DONOVA: And we need the approximately $8 million to run a third year, and we're going to be asking city council.
DUERSON: But a backlash is brewing over basic income. There were 150 programs have launched in the U.S. since 2017, showing consistently positive outcomes. Lawmakers in ten states have banned or tried to ban the idea the push is backed by a conservative think tank tied to Project 2025, which claims the programs discourage work and will trap people in dependency. One criticism that's been levied is that if you give people free money, they won't have the incentive have to work.
DONOVAN: We've seen it reduce the barriers to getting to employment, whether that means fixing a car or having childcare, or being able to not have to take the first job that presents and be able to get a better job that creates a better state -- more stable long-term situation. We think of guaranteed income as preventative medicine for the economy.
[16:55:01]
And you know that when you deal with something upfront and it cost a tiny fraction of the downstream costs of not doing that.
DUERSON: What happens to you guys if the program ends?
JACHETTA: Yeah, there's a little bit of concern because it's like an abrupt end. I don't want to use that as a crutch writing thing. I want to the able to take care of my own finances and not need this support.
DUERSON: Has having this money changed how you feel about the future?
JACHETTA: It's provided a future for me and for my family.
DUERSON: Meena Duerson, CNN, Denver, Colorado.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TAPPER: And our thanks to CNN's Meena Duerson for that report.
We are standing by for this big speech from President Biden in Texas. He's expected to call for several new reforms for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Also ahead on THE LEAD, New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham as Democratic governors lineup to support Kamala Harris in the 2024 race. Some of them hoping to be her running mate.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.
This hour, results of a presidential election called into question.
