Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

DOJ Reportedly Told Trump In May That His Name Is In The Epstein Files; House Committee Subpoenas Epstein Associate Ghislaine Maxwell To Sit For Deposition; Pentagon Watchdog Has Evidence Hegseth's Signal Messages Included Classified Information; Trump Unveils Plans To Scale Back A.I. Regulation; A.I. Advancements Prompts Security, Environmental Concerns; DNI Gabbard Declassifies 2020 Report That Targets Obama Admin; Where The Next Flood Catastrophe Could Strike. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired July 23, 2025 - 17:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:00:10]

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right, thanks to all of us for joining -- all of you for joining us today. Thanks to my panel as well. Thank you guys very much for being here.

And of course, if you miss any of today's show, you can always catch up listening to The Arenas podcast. You can scan the QR code that you see there on your screen, follow wherever you get your podcasts. You also follow us on X and Instagram at TheArenaCNN. Jake Tapper is standing by for The Lead.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Wait, hold on. I'm trying to get the QR code to --

HUNT: Oh, we can put it back for you there.

TAPPER: OK, there it is, to get the pocket. OK, got it. All right, Kasie --

HUNT: Thank you.

TAPPER: -- we'll see you back in the arena tomorrow.

HUNT: See you tomorrow.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN Breaking News.

TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. We have so much breaking news today in our Politics Lead, we are standing by to hear from President Trump. He's set to give remarks any moment on a summit about AI or artificial intelligence. The question, of course, will he sidebar in any one of the many stories breaking right now.

First of all, the Wall Street Journal reporting that U.S. attorney General Pam Bondi told President Trump back in May that his name appears multiple times in the Epstein file. She characterized it as unverified hearsay about Trump. And hundreds of other names are in those files as well.

Just days ago, Trump was directly asked whether Bondi had told him his name was in the Epstein files.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She told you at all that your name appeared in the files.

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: He's given us just a very quick briefing. And in terms of the credibility of the different things that they've seen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Not really a denial there. According to the Wall Street Journal report, she briefed him that his name was in the files in May. We should note, just to remind you, it was on June 5th that Elon Musk, in the midst of his breakup with President Trump, posted on X that Trump is in the Epstein files, which is the real reason they have not been made public, according to Elon Musk in a tweet that he has now since deleted.

Also breaking right now, relatedly, a judge in Florida has rejected the Trump administration's request to unseal pertinent parts of the grand jury testimony in the investigations into Epstein and his partner, Ghislaine Maxwell.

This as Republican House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer this afternoon announced that he has subpoenaed Ghislaine Maxwell for a deposition on August 11 this while House Republican leaders truncated congressional business at least partly to avoid a vote to dodge a vote forcing the release of the Epstein files.

The president, clearly exasperated by this issue last night at a House Republican reception, gave his troops these marching orders.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Remember this, Obama cheated on the election. And we have it cold, hard blue, and it's getting even more so because the stuff that's coming in is not even believable. So, and you should mention that every time they give you a question that's not appropriate, just say, oh, by the way, Obama cheated on the election. You'll watch the camera turn off instantly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Operation change the subject seems right now focused on, as you heard from the president there, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's report making all sorts of assertions about President Obama's activities in 2016. Gabbard was deployed to the White House press briefing earlier today

to offer details of allegedly, quote, treasonous behavior by Obama and aides in allegedly manipulating intelligence to support theory that Russia sought to swing the 2016 election in favor of Trump.

This report from Gabbard, we should note, goes against a 2020 bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee assessment, including an endorsement from then Senator, now Secretary of State Marco Rubio, that Russia did attempt to interfere in the election.

Obama, in response to this Gabbard report and President Trump's attacks, issued a rare statement denying all of this as bizarre and ridiculous allegations and in his view, a weak attempt at distraction.

And we should note there are two conservative journalists who have been critical of Obama in the past who today poured some cold water on Gabbard's report. Eli Lake of the Free Press, who I regularly read, says, quote, as someone who was an early critic of the Russiagate narrative, I can report that Gabbard did not get the goods. And he quotes Andrew McCarthy of the National Review, who told late, quote, there is nothing new in what, quote, Gabbard is hyping as a bombshell.

So back to the Epstein story. Let's bring in CNN senior justice correspondent Evan Perez and CNN's Jeff Zeleny at the White House. So, Jeff, this Wall Street Journal story saying that Pam Bondi, the attorney general, told Trump in May that his name appeared in the Epstein files multiple times as hearsay with hundreds of other names.

We should note, and this is not proof that Trump did anything illegal or untoward, but this can't be welcome news for the Trump administration.

[17:05:00]

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Jake, it's not welcome news in the sense of it keeps the questions alive about the Epstein files, of the Epstein documents here. The White House, though, not surprised by this. And a White House official is putting it this way. We're not disputing that his name is in the files. We are disputing the president did anything wrong. And that is still the unanswered question here. That is why there is so much juice here into this overall topic.

There still are unanswered questions about what the president may or may not have done, what his relationship exactly was, what he knew about his long relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, et cetera. So the reason this is not welcome news by the White House is they've been trying to change the subject, as you just pointed out, all day long.

And this, of course, returns it back to the original point here, the Epstein file. So the president is going to be speaking, as you said, coming up at this hour, a speech that's expected to be on artificial intelligence. Who knows if this will come up or not?

But again, it just sort of shines a light on the fact that for all of the attempts to change the subject and deflect, even through familiar channels of retribution, that still has not worked because there are unanswered questions that the Trump base and many of his officials have been fueling for years now.

TAPPER: Evan Perez, let me ask you. So the Trump administration had asked this judge in Florida to unseal pertinent parts of the grand jury testimony for the Epstein case and also Ghislaine Maxwell case. It was unlikely that were going to learn much new, if anything, from it, but the judge rejected that. So what now?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is a judge in Florida, Jake. So there are still two pending requests in the Southern District of New York. This is where Epstein was charged in 2019 before he committed suicide, also where Ghislaine Maxwell was charged and where she was convicted and is now serving 20 years.

This is a request that went to a Florida judge who oversaw federal grand juries in 2005 and 2007. Now, you'll remember that this investigation sort of went -- got put on the shelf when the -- when Alex Acosta, the U.S. attorney down there, agreed to let Epstein essentially plead to a sweetheart deal with the state prosecutor down there in Palm Beach County. So, these documents were always -- it was always a long shot that they were going to be able to get these.

But these two pending requests in New York, you know, there's still a chance that the Justice Department might be able to get what it wants there. Keep in mind, the judge in Florida said, look, under our rules that govern us over, you know, 11th Circuit, we cannot release this. We can't also send it to New York, but New York can release their documents.

TAPPER: Yes. I mean, the rules are pretty clear that it's only in the rarest of circumstances.

PEREZ: You point out the right thing, which is that this is, we're talking about a fraction of the number of documents.

TAPPER: Oh, yes.

PEREZ: Pam Bondi still is sitting on the vast majority of documents.

TAPPER: Yes. There's a lot of stuff that they could release right this moment. It's also a ton of stuff in the Treasury Department of all the financial records. Follow the money, as they say. Jeff Zeleny, Evan Perez, thanks so much.

On Capitol Hill, the pressure from House Republicans on their leadership over the Epstein files is not letting up. Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer announced that he is going to subpoena Ghislaine Maxwell for a deposition on August 11th. And a subcommittee of the Oversight Committee could vote soon on a subpoena for the Justice Department to release the Epstein files.

Let's get right to CNN's chief congressional correspondent, Manu Raju. Manu, Trump wants everyone to stop talking about Epstein. But the truth is some of the loudest voices, actually, the loudest voices are coming from his own party. MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. In the MAGA

wing of his own party, which has been demanding these Epstein files for years and now believe that the Trump administration simply has not given up enough information signing on to an effort, a legislative effort, to call for the release of these Epstein files.

And also movement now in a key House subcommittee that is now considering whether to subpoena for the release of all of these Epstein files.

Now, I am told by the Republicans on the committee, they believe that this effort actually pushed by Democrats will ultimately succeed. Right now in the committee, it's still considering the measures console some Republican amendments will ultimately see how this plays out. But I'll require with all the Democrats and one Republican member voting to approve a call for a subpoena to release all of the Epstein files.

I caught up with one of those Republican members, Congresswoman Nancy Mace of South Carolina, who indicated me to me that she's ready to support a motion calling for a subpoena for the Epstein files.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: You'll be supporting the motion for sure.

REP. NANCY MACE (R-SC): Yes. And I'm going to amend the motion to protect the identity of the victims.

RAJU: What do you think of the speaker adjourning the House early to avoid this whole fight of Epstein?

MACE: This fight's coming no matter. I mean, this is here, and I made it part of my life's mission to protect women and kids.

[17:10:05]

And I think that, you know, I'm ready to take this vote. I think we should take this vote and move forward, move this country forward. And the victims deserve justice and people deserve transparency is what they want.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: And this issue over the Epstein matter has really infiltrated all aspects of the House. Various committees now considering various measures. Democrats seizing an opening here. You know, even though they had really not pushed this issue at all during the Biden years, they now see this divide within the GOP and trying to tie this to any measure that they possibly can, which is why in this subcommittee right now there are Republicans are trying to figure out exactly how to proceed, whether to align themselves with the Democratic effort calling for a subpoena for all the Epstein files or whether try to change the language in any way to make the terms a bit more favorable to them. That is still playing out at the moment, Jake, but no question about

it, Trump wants to move on. But as you heard that from Congressman Nancy Mace and other Republicans, they're not ready to move on quite yet.

TAPPER: All right, Manu Raju, thanks so much. Much more in the Epstein space we're going to see if the president touches any of this when he speaks soon at this AI summit here in DC. We're also getting new information about that Signal scandal involving the secretary of defense from back in March when a journalist was added to a group chat about war plans. Sources tell CNN that a Pentagon watchdog has been given evidence that messages from Hegseth, the secretary of defense, were from a classified document. We'll have more on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:20]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, the Pentagon's Inspector General has received evidence that the military plans that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth shared to Signal group chats earlier this year were taken directly from a document that was marked classified at the time.

This is according to two people familiar with the ongoing review. The Pentagon is again denying that anything classified was in the chat. You'll recall Hegseth repeatedly denied that notion.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEC. PETE HEGSETH, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: There were no names, targets, locations, units, routes, sources, methods, no classified information.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Don't forget that a journalist had been mistakenly added to that group chat. That's how all of this was brought to light in the first place. This story was from first reported by the Washington Post. CNN has confirmed it. Joining us now to discuss along with other topics, Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York.

So, Congressman, according to these sources, Hegseth not only put information about U.S. military attack plans in an unsecured Signal chat, one that a journalist was on, but it does appear that he was not being honest when he said that nothing in the Signal chat was classified. What's your reaction to the story? Can you trust him in his current role as Defense Secretary?

REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): In order to fully weigh in, I would want to read the actual Inspector General's report. Obviously what it appears right now is you have a leak out of the Inspector General's office as to what is contained in the report. So I would want to see that.

But as I said when this happened, classified or sensitive material cannot and should not be shared in a Signal chat, and all proper protocols must be taken to ensure that does not happen. When you look at obviously the success of that mission and mission since, including the strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, I think it is very clear that operational security was largely adhered to.

But moreover, the success of the mission and the execution by our military was flawless. So, you know, obviously in order to give a more fulsome comment, I'd want to actually read the report.

TAPPER: You're about to go home to your state of New York where many of the crimes committed by Jeffrey Epstein took place. What are you going to tell your constituents if they ask you why you're not one of the House Republicans publicly pushing for the Justice Department to release all the files that they already have?

LAWLER: Well, first of all, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I haven't peddled in this nonsense for over six years, as some of my colleagues on both the right and the left have. And you know, frankly, this is quintessential Washington politics. Putting forth procedural motions or trying to attach amendments to bills that have nothing to do with this is nothing more than trying to play political games.

My view is very simple. Jeffrey Epstein was a pedophile. He was a human trafficker. The world is better off with him dead. And Ghislaine Maxwell, who helped facilitate his human trafficking and sex trade, was convicted, prosecuted by the Biden DOJ. And from my vantage point, if in fact somebody committed a crime, if in fact somebody acted in furtherance of this crime spree by Jeffrey Epstein, they should be prosecuted.

Does anybody really believe that the Biden DOJ, which indicted and tried to prosecute President Trump, would not have tried to do so if they had evidence that he somehow was involved in Jeffrey Epstein's crimes? I mean, let's all be honest here.

And the fact is, many of my colleagues who are now demanding the release of these files said exactly nothing for four, five, six years and in fact dismissed it all as conspiracy. And frankly, many in the media who are now demanding that this be released dismissed it all as conspiracy theories.

So, I think this is more typical Washington politics. I believe anybody who committed a crime should be held capacity accountable, period. And if somebody worked in furtherance of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes, they should have the book thrown at them. Nobody is disputing that or saying otherwise.

But let's stop trying to make this into some big scandal when in fact, you do not want to release information that, for instance, would put victims in jeopardy or put on display child sex porn.

[17:20:05]

I mean, this is -- we have to be judicious about what we're doing here. The courts should weigh in with respect to the release of the grand jury information. And we should take this step by step instead of trying to make this a political football. TAPPER: I want to move on, but I do want to just say I'm going to send

you a book, a great book by Julie Brown called "Perversion of Justice" about the case. And I think one of the things, forget Trump, forget Clinton, forget the politics of it.

There are hundreds of young girls who did not get justice because only two people were ever held accountable. And I think there are questions about if there are other people who should be.

LAWLER: And my view is anyone who was involved in abusing these children, these women --

TAPPER: Yes.

LAWLER: -- they should be prosecuted and held accountable, period. They should have been prosecuted prior today.

TAPPER: I think there are just questions about why they weren't. But let's move on. You had been mulling a run for governor of New York. Today, I was surprised to read that you're instead going to seek reelection for your competitive House seats. The last time New York elected a Republican governor was in 2002. That was Governor George Pataki's third term.

It is likely that your colleague, Republican Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, is now going to run. But in your Twitter post today, you said you were bowing out despite the fact that, quote, I fundamentally believe I am best positioned to take on Kathy Hochul. If you're the best position to take on Kathy Hochul, and I'm not disagreeing with you, why aren't you running?

LAWLER: Well, look, this is a decision that I weighed over six months. There were a lot of factors that weighed into it. Chief among them is that I actually like what I'm doing. I love the job that I'm currently in, serving as chair of the Middle East and North Africa Subcommittee, being able to fight for and deliver one of my biggest promises, to lift the cap on salt in the most recent tax bill, the biggest tax cut in the whole bill.

And so there's a lot of work ahead. I weighed this very heavily over these six months. I fundamentally believe having won three times in two to one Democratic districts in the state assembly and Congress, that I can bring the coalition together. But there's a lot of things that go into it.

And ultimately, as I looked at the landscape, as I looked at my House seat, ultimately, I made the decision that it was best for me to stay in the House. This is something that you know, with a three-year-old and an eight-month-old at home, not always easy to just be crisscrossing the state.

So this was a well thought out decision. And ultimately it was my decision. It was not one that I was pressured into or made lightly. It was one that I am fully content with.

TAPPER: All right. Republican Congressman Mike Lawler of New York. I know you need to catch a flight. Thanks so much.

LAWLER: Thanks, Jake.

TAPPER: We are also digging into the new Russia report, declassified today by the director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard. The biggest question many people are asking about it why now? Let's pose that question to someone who once briefed the president on intelligence matters. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:27:25]

TAPPER: President Trump is speaking now at an AI summit here in D.C. where he's expected to also sign some executive orders concerning artificial intelligence. He's also talking right now about tariffs. Let's dip in and take a listen.

TRUMP: It's really been opened up for business for three of the six months. The first couple of months, we got ourselves all set, done a great job with our military, as you know. You saw that two weeks ago when you saw the way those incredible B2s flew into Iran and took out an entire nuclear potential deadly force.

But I want to thank some of the incredible people that I see before me, including White House AI czar David Sachs. He's been great for organizing this very important summit and especially for putting it in D.C. where it's a little bit easier. I don't know if it's easy for you, but it's a hell of a lot easier for me. Along with his colleagues at the all in podcast, which is very good. I did that podcast a year and a half ago, and I said, this is something.

It was pretty new, pretty raw. Everybody I knew saw that podcast. I said, well, he's got something pretty good. Who is that guy? He's a smart guy. By the way, I think if I ever get in, which at the time people were saying I had a shot. Not as good a shot as it turned out. We won in numbers that nobody believes. We won every swing state. We won by millions and millions of votes. Winning the popular vote. We won with the districts, as they would call them, 2,750 to 505. And that's why the map is almost completely red, except for a couple of little blue areas on each side of it.

But it was a great experience, frankly, for me, and hopefully it's a great experience and been a great experience for our country, because they're saying we had the greatest six months that a president has ever had. The opening six months.

And I'm not even sure maybe six months. I'm not sure it's the opening, but let's call it the opening six months. It sounds a little bit nicer. I want to also say hello and thank to Chamath and his wonderful wife, Nat. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you very much.

TAPPER: OK, so President Trump is doing some introductory remarks here. He is set to unveil his administration's plan to remove what he calls bureaucratic red tape around the creation of artificial intelligence. [17:30:00]

With this new policy change, a lot of people around the world are still reckoning with the benefits and serious concerns that artificial intelligence could have on your everyday life, such as, is A.I. going to ultimately take your job? Can you even trust what A.I. is telling you? CNN's Tom Foreman explains.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): In exploration, transportation, military applications, medical advancements, information technology, and so much more, the White House says it is aiming for the U.S. to dominate all other nations.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And that includes being the world's number one superpower in artificial intelligence.

FOREMAN (voice-over): Over the past few years, as A.I. has taken center stage in private companies, the public sector has embraced it too.

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: We're using it everywhere that we can and we hope to drive it into the health care system in this country at every level.

FOREMAN (voice-over): But deep problems remain. For example, while the Food and Drug Administration says its new A.I. tool, ELSA could dramatically cut the human workload and speed up approval for new medical devices and drugs.

JEREMY WALSH, FDA CHIEF A.I. OFFICER: We have over 50 percent utilization across this agency.

FOREMAN (voice-over): A half dozen current and former FDA employees told CNN anonymously, ELSA is also routinely making mistakes, creating false information and forcing humans to double check its work.

ELON MUSH, TESLA CEO: It really is remarkable to see the advancement of artificial intelligence, how quickly it is evolving.

FOREMAN (voice-over): When Elon Musk's X rolled out its latest A.I. chatbot, Grok, users found it spewing anti-Semitic and hateful language, a tendency researchers have seen in other large language A.I. systems.

ASHIQUE KHUDABUKHSH, ASST. PROFESSOR, ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: Time and time again, it would say something deeply problematic like certain groups should be exterminated, certain groups should be euthanized.

FOREMAN (voice-over): The potential for exported A.I. technology to be exploited by foreign military powers worries security advocates. The enormous amount of energy needed to power the exploding A.I. industry is an environmental concern. And while a study by Goldman Sachs this year found A.I. could raise global GDP and create work for humans, it could also expose 300 million full time jobs to automation. All that is making even A.I. think twice about its future.

NADINE, HUMANOID ROBOT: It has the potential to transform industries, improve quality of life and solve complex global challenges. However, it's crucial to ensure that A.I. is developed and used ethically and responsibly.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOREMAN (on camera): That is the kind of boilerplate language you're hearing over and over and over again. People keep saying, as the White House is saying, let's charge headlong into this, we want to lead the world in this. But when people start saying, what are you going to do about all the truckers who get put out of work? What are you going to do about all the people in law firms and in doctor's offices who get put out of work? What constraints are you willing to put on this? There are virtually no answers, Jake. Not on the Hill, not in the White House, not anywhere, as people try to embrace this more and more.

TAPPER: And what about the hallucinations --

FOREMAN: The hallucinations, this is -- this is something that I'm surprised has not been fixed since you and I first started talking about ChatGPT a few years ago. I asked ChatGPT just the other day. I said, hey, you know, name the three books I've written. I've only written one. It named three books that I did not write that do not exist. And it missed the one that I did write.

TAPPER: Yes.

FOREMAN: That's simple. And it's getting it wrong. So if it's making medical decisions --

TAPPER: That's the thing.

FOREMAN: -- job decisions.

TAPPER: That's the thing is we hear about the A.I. being used with medical technology, but we also hear that they are making up medical studies.

FOREMAN: This can be a great thing. There's a lot of evidence it is not great yet.

TAPPER: All right, Tom Foreman, thanks so much.

We have some breaking news just in. The House subcommittee has just voted to subpoena the U.S. Justice Department in an effort to get more information released on Jeffrey Epstein and his many crimes. We'll have more ahead on that.

[17:34:09]

Plus, the report declassified and publicly released today by the Director of National Intelligence on efforts to investigate Russia's interference in the 2016 election. Why is this report coming out now? How credible is it? We'll talk about it next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Some breaking news from the U.S. Supreme Court, a win for President Trump. Let's get right to CNN's fantastic Supreme Court reporter, Joan Biskupic. Joan, what is the ruling? What's the news?

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN SENIOR SUPREME COURT ANALYST: Sure, Jake. This is yet another decision by the Supreme Court, the conservative majority that endorses Donald Trump's effort to restructure the federal government and undercut the power of independent agencies. In this case, it involves the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The court has let him -- let President Trump fire three Biden appointees whose terms had not run and who had been confirmed by the Senate.

What the justices said is that for now at least, President Trump has that power. And he likened it -- the majority likened it to a decision that it had made earlier in the spring that affected the National Labor Relations Board, another agency that was supposed to be independent. Dissenting justices said piece by piece, the Supreme Court is allowing Donald Trump to take apart the independence of independent agencies. Jake?

TAPPER: All right. Joan Biskupic, thanks so much.

Also in our Law and Justice Lead today, in the effort of full transparency, they say, today the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, is declassifying yet another report on the 2016 election, this one from the House Intelligence Committee's majority staff. This report is dated September 18th, 2020, when Democrats held the majority. They say in this declassified report, quote, President Putin ordered conventional and cyber influence operations and that, quote, Putin's principal motivations in these operations were to undermine faith in the U.S. Democratic process.

[17:40:05]

OK, no controversy there. But the report goes on to say the intelligence community assessment led by the Director of the CIA, quote, ignored or selectively quoted reliable intelligence reports that challenged and in some cases undermined judgments that Putin sought to elect Trump. DNI Gabbard showed up at today's White House briefing. There she went on to conclude that orders to rush reports came from the highest levels of government during the Obama years.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TULSI GABBARD, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: President Obama directed an intelligence community assessment to be created to further this contrived false narrative that ultimately led to a years long coup to try to undermine President Trump's presidency.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: That is not what the word coup means. I want to bring in Beth Sanner. She served as Deputy Director of National Intelligence during President Trump's first term. Also with the CNN's John Miller, who worked at the FBI under Bush and at the Office of Director of National Intelligence under Obama. Beth, we note all of the intelligence reports. Everyone notes that Russia did attempt to interfere in the 2016 election by hacking and influencing campaigns.

No report, none indicates that Russia manipulated any actual vote totals, which is important. Before your job as the number two under the Director of National Intelligence, you were director of the President's Daily Brief. What do you think this is all about?

BETH SANNER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: I was going to ask you that because you're the political guy.

TAPPER: Yes.

SANNER: And I'm the intel girl, but you know, I don't understand exactly what I'm reading. When I read the report that said there was no effort to really change votes and even if they tried, it wasn't going to work, I'm like, yes, that's exactly what the intelligence community said. So what -- what Gabbard is saying --

TAPPER: Obama himself said that out loud after the election.

SANNER: Right. There's no disagreement about that.

TAPPER: Yes.

SANNER: So -- so why is this happening, right? Why are we dredging -- why are we dredging this up? It's a rhetorical thing and I think our vote -- our viewers probably understand that there is nothing to see in these reports. This isn't about this report. This is about, you know, look over here, guys.

TAPPER: Yes. John, we should acknowledge that there -- there were problems in the Russiagate investigation. There were those text messages between Page and Strzok. There was dishonest work to justify a warrant spying on Trump advisor Carter Page. That was inappropriate. Not to mention Hillary Clinton's campaign did pay for and hide their role in the creation of the Steele dossier. All of that is true, legitimate reason for people to complain. But none of that changes the intelligence community's conclusion that Russia did launch an influence and hacking campaign to interfere in the 2016 election?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: No. And I mean, all of that is -- is true and stipulated, but I think what happened today is obviously there are reasons where the White House would want to distract from other things at that point. "The Wall Street Journal" was already on the phone saying, we're going with a story that Trump's name appears in several times in the Epstein files at the FBI and so on.

But let's get down to business with this, which is this report, which was by the House Intelligence Committee, says that there were 15 reports on Russian interference with the election in 2016. It cites exactly three out of the 15 as potentially problematic for analytic issues and focuses one that was called the Intelligence Community assessment, a CIA driven product that was done as a rush and not necessarily coordinated with the rest of the intelligence community sufficiently, according to these findings.

But they are -- they are looking at analytic conclusions and talking about, well, it's from a single source and there were other information from other sources and that it was said to be with high confidence, but it probably should have been with media -- medium confidence. These are the kind of quibbles that we go through in analysis, which is more of an art than a science all the time. And there is a giant body of work from the Mueller report, which is extraordinarily extensive to the Senate version of this, which goes for thousands of pages that come to the same conclusion.

So it seems to be a bit of a stretch to be standing up in the White House today calling for charges of treason and conspiracy and the jailing of former presidents and CIA directors over some analytic disagreements. It seemed to be a little bit of a smoke bomb.

TAPPER: Yes. Not to mention, I mean, President Obama gets the same Supreme Court offered immunity that President Trump gets, no small part thanks to President Trump. Let's talk about this accusation, Beth, that it was rushed. The Obama administration had a relatively small window here after the 2016 election before his -- Trump's inauguration in 2017. It was widely reported that they wanted the intelligence on Russian interference campaigns shared with the American public before Trump came to office. Is it possible that some facts, as -- as Tulsi Gabbard is suggesting, could have been ignored or selectively quoted, as this declassified House report suggests?

[17:45:25]

SANNER: Sure. That's what -- that's how this works, right? The intelligence community makes an assessment at a point in time with the information that they have, and everyone should understand that the world moves on. And this is why the sissy report that John talked about, that's literally like a thousand pages.

TAPPER: She means the Senate Intelligence Committee.

SANNER: Yes, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence --

TAPPER: Yes.

SANNER: -- later, after all the dust was settled, put together five volumes.

TAPPER: Right.

SANNER: And it reinforced everything that the intelligence community said. And in fact, when the intelligence community said that -- that Putin aspired to help Trump, the -- the sissy report said, actually, no, they didn't aspire. They actually did.

TAPPER: They did it.

SANNER: They actually did. So -- so, yes, this is why retrospectives are not bad and people shouldn't be afraid of them. But what I don't appreciate is that these are cherry-picked examples that they are quibbling angels dancing on the head of a pin when we have volumes of reporting, you're always going to find one report that's different. OK, whatever.

TAPPER: Yes.

SANNER: The big message here for Americans, Russia tried to interfere in our election processes with the point of undermining our confidence in our democracy. And by bringing this up again, the Trump administration is doing the work of our adversary, Russia.

TAPPER: All right, Beth Sanner, John Miller, thanks to both of you.

Coming up, the urgent warning from one -- for one community that could be theoretically next in the path of a major flood. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:51:15]

TAPPER: And we're back with our Earth Matters Series. Nearly three weeks after the deadly and devastating floods in central Texas, a CNN analysis finds that other vulnerable communities are at serious risk for a similar disaster because of the new normal of extreme weather. One such place is Helen, Georgia, at the headwaters of the Chattahoochee River. CNN chief climate correspondent, Bill Weir, went there to find out why it's potentially one storm away from complete catastrophe.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): On a hot day in the mountains of North Georgia, few places are more inviting than the Chattahoochee River. And tubing the hooch on days like this makes it easy to forget that the same waterway providing so much joy can take life and property in a flash. And when the Chattahoochee turned deadly 16 years back, it changed both Georgia and Laura Belanger, one of the top hydrologists in the South.

LAURA BELANGER, SENIOR SERVICE HYDROLOGISTS, NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ATLANTA: So I am in the position I'm in today because of the September 2009 floods. I was young in my career at the time and there were 10 fatalities in the state of Georgia. That left a lasting impression on me and wanting to kind of see how we could do better with our hydro services and getting those warnings out. That's what helped be a catalyst for those flash flood warnings to be included in wireless emergency alerts.

WEIR: Today in the tourist town of Helen, Georgia, those wireless alerts or weather radios are the only sources of flash flood warning because in a place like this, sirens might confuse people to run for low ground from a tornado instead of high ground from the flash flood. It's been a long time since the water topped that 10-foot marker. It hit 12 feet back in '67. And while there have been some swift water rescues in recent weeks, most people don't remember really high water. That's the thing that struck me in Texas there. It was -- it reminded me more of covering a tsunami in Japan where children were swept away while they debated what to do because no one could imagine the worst.

BELANGER: Yes.

WEIR: And when you're watching tubers here, you can't imagine that water turning deadly.

BELANGER: It's hard to get, especially with how shallow it is at the moment, it is hard to digest what a big amount of water coming through here would look like and how it's inundated.

WEIR (voice-over): And she is especially worried about Enchanted Valley just over the hills. The folks living in these permanent trailers sit smack dab on the Hiawassee River next to one of the flashiest river gauges in the nation.

BELANGER: And so those are the places that keep me up at night. Regardless of the amount of readiness or preparation, the fact that there are people and property that close to the river, that's what the concern is. The biggest question we get is when we see a hundred-year floodplain and maybe the water level has risen to this point and someone says, oh, thank goodness we don't have to deal with this for 99 more years and -- and it happens. The reality is what that means is that there's a one in 100 chance of occurrence in a given year of that happening again.

WEIR: Right. But that math is changing, right?

BELANGER: But that math changes over time as you see flooding occur more frequently.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: So, Bill, you've given us this snapshot of this one town, Helen, Georgia. But this is just one of many communities in the U.S. that face this risk, right?

WEIR: Exactly. This is a part of this project. The CNN climate team also partnered with First Street Foundation, a nonprofit that maps flood risks in ways that FEMA doesn't. And we looked at the combination of factors that led to the tragedy in Texas, which is the flashiness, the topography that funnels water, the vulnerability over time to people's complacency, the tourists who get there as well. And we found examples from Santa Barbara, California, to the Catskills of New York City. There's one in North Carolina that's especially flashy, Nogales, Arizona, down by the border. So all different kinds of watersheds are vulnerable. But knowledge is power. And the more people know about the watersheds that they're next to, the better.

[17:55:19]

TAPPER: All right, Bill Weir, in Helen, Georgia, thank you so much.

Just an avalanche of news just in the last few hours, CNN sources have now confirmed to CNN that Attorney General Pam Bondi did brief President Trump in May that he is among the many names mentioned in the Epstein files, which is not to say he did anything wrong, but his name is in there. A House subcommittee just voted to subpoena the Justice Department over all of this. And the House Oversight Committee subpoenaed Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein's former partner, for a deposition on August 11th. It is a lot. And we're covering it all next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:05]

TAPPER: Welcome to the Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. A packed hour, a slew of new --