Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

House Expected To Vote Tuesday On Bill To Release Epstein Files; Trump Addressing Affordability At McDonald's Summit; House Member Condemns Her Down Party's Election Subversion. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired November 17, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.

This hour, President Trump is set to take the stage any minute at a summit alongside McDonald's franchise owners here in D.C.

[18:00:06]

The topic is affordability. Will the president tell the truth about the economy? Will he level with Americans who feel the cost of living is still out of control?

Plus, the president's plans for the Epstein file saying today he'll sign any legislation from Congress that calls on the Justice Department to release those records. But why go through a vote when the president could order these files released right now?

Also, a family divided. I'm going to talk to a woman running for a seat in Congress. She's splitting with her mother, who is a sitting senator on a major issue.

The Lead tonight, after attacking Republicans supporting the release of the Epstein files as, quote, weak and, quote, foolish, President Trump now reversing course and telling Republicans to, quote, vote to release the Epstein files because we have nothing to hide and it's time to move on from this Democrat hoax, unquote. It is not a hoax.

This comes just before tomorrow's expected House vote with a bill to release the files is expected to pass overwhelmingly to despite the president's months of objections and just days after that last ditch effort to try to sway Republican Congresswoman Lauren Boebert to drop her signature from that discharge petition, which would force this bill onto the floor of the House for a vote. This is during a White House meeting in the Situation Room, of all places.

CNN's Kaitlan Collins is live for us at the White House. And, Kaitlan, why the sudden flip flop by President Trump, and if he really wants the files released, why not just instruct Attorney General Pam Bondi to release the files right now?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's a great question, Jake. And the president was explaining his 180 here on, saying he doesn't want what's happening on Capitol Hill and the drama surrounding this vote on the discharge petition to release all the files that the Justice Department has on Jeffrey Epstein to deflect or distract from his achievements that he says he has, including on affordability, something that you're going to hear him talk about any moment now at that summit alongside the franchise owners that you mentioned there, Jake. And so that's the question here.

But in terms of what a 180 this is, it is a quite a stark reversal by the president, because it was just last week that not only were they bringing Lauren Boebert into the Situation Room where they monitored the Osama Bin Laden raid to try to convince her to change her vote. Now the president is telling House Republicans they should vote for this when it comes up tomorrow.

Of course, Jake, that is a position and a stance of the president's that came long after it was already decided this was going to be brought for a vote on Capitol Hill against his wishes and against the efforts of the White House and the House speaker, Mike Johnson, after they kept those 218 votes and did not sway Lauren Boebert on this.

And so, Jake, the question now is what is going to happen after there is expected to be a huge Republican vote for this tomorrow, something that would've been one of the first times we'd actually seen Republicans defy President Trump in large numbers since he returned to office, had he not put that position and that statement out there last night.

The question though, Jake, is what happens to it after that? Does it go to the Senate for a vote? And if it came to the president's desk, would he be willing to sign it? Earlier, Jake, he told reporters, yes.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We'll give them everything. Sure, I would. Let the Senate look at it, let anybody look at it, but don't talk about it too much, because, honestly, I don't want to take it away from us.

It's really a Democrat problem. The Democrats were Epstein's friends, all of them. And it's a hoax, the whole thing is a hoax. And I don't want to take it away from, really, the greatness of what the Republican Party has accomplished over the last period of time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Of course, Jake, it was a lot of Democrats who were mentioned in those emails and that were corresponding with Jeffrey Epstein. But Jeffrey Epstein himself in those newly released emails we got last week also named Donald Trump several times. And he was a member at Mar-a-Lago until he wasn't. And there are multiple photos and videos of the two of them together. So, obviously, we'll be watching closely to see what does happen in the Senate after tomorrow's vote.

TAPPER: You know, to be fair, Donald Trump was a Democrat at the time, Kaitlan.

COLLINS: True. TAPPER: All right. Kaitlan Collins at the White House, thanks. Kaitlan is back tonight with more reporting on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. That's tonight and every weeknight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN.

Here now is Texas Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, who's a Democrat who serves on the House Oversight Committee. Thanks so much for being here, Congresswoman. It's always good to have you.

REP. JASMINE CROCKETT (D-TX): Yes.

TAPPER: So, today, Speaker Johnson told CNN's Manu Raju that he never tried to kill the discharge petition to force this onto the floor, the Epstein bill on onto the floor for a vote, but he shares President Trump's concerns about the bill. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): We wanted to ensure that victims of these heinous crimes are completely protected from disclosure those who don't want their names to be out there. And I'm not sure the discharge does that, and that's part of the problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What's your response to that?

CROCKETT: I would cuss, but I'm not going to. I'm just going to say he's full of it. Number one --

[18:05:00]

TAPPER: This is cable. You can cuss.

CROCKETT: I'm not going to do it, but I am going to say that he is full of -- okay, I'm going to do it, he full of shit, because here's the thing. Number one, we know that he didn't even bring the House back in because he was trying to avoid us dealing with Epstein. In fact, he would not even swear in a duly elected now new member of Congress depriving and having to be sued by her state and others because they literally did not have any representation. He violated the Constitution to avoid this. So, miss me on pretending that this is about the victims.

In addition to that, when we finally released some of the information that we got from the Epstein estate and we had all the victims' names redacted, who was it that was out there saying, oh, and this person is the person that is supposedly mentioned in this section?

TAPPER: The Republicans, yes.

CROCKETT: the Republicans did that to the extent that victim's family had to come out against them for revealing potentially her name. So, they're full of it.

So, right now, what I think is going to happen, the only reason that he has switched is because, obviously, he has had lots of conversations. Either the Senate is not going to take it up, or they don't have the votes in the Senate, one of the two. But he never plans for this to actually go forward.

TAPPER: Oh, you think this is going to get killed in the Senate?

CROCKETT: I think that this is going to get killed some way somehow. Or the other option is that I think they're going to do the very same thing, and not necessarily the same thing, but the very reason that the files could not be released before is because there were active cases that were taking place. All the cases have been concluded because this administration decided they didn't want to talk about Jeffrey Epstein, so they weren't going to investigate whatsoever so now the files can be open. But now he said, look into my enemies. I want you to investigate this hoax. Well, if there's open cases, then that is your excuse for legally not allowing those documents to be out.

Well, you're saying something that Congress -- Republican Congressman Thomas Massie of Kentucky, whose bill this is to force the Epstein files out, Trump has told the Justice Department to investigate prominent Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton and their alleged ties to Jeffrey Epstein. That concerns Massie for the reason you said. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can't be released. So, this might be a big smoke screen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them as a last ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Or it could just block the release of the ones having to do with Democrats and any other people that might be released. But either way, you share his concern?

CROCKETT: Yes, absolutely. I don't think that this is about all of a sudden he woke up on the right side of history, right? Like I don't. He has consistently gone against his own base. He's told them on Truth Social, stop talking about this. They shut down the House in a time when Americans could not eat all because they did not want to deal with the Epstein files, and he has called it a hoax, and now he's saying that, well, there's something to investigate. He is all over the place.

The one thing that we know for sure is that he was sued not once, but at least twice by alleged child sex victims alongside Epstein. You tell me what other Democrat was named as a defendant alongside Epstein prior to all of this jazz ever happening. We're talking about nine years ago.

TAPPER: Just to note that those cases never went any better.

CROCKETT: They didn't go anywhere, but the allegations definitely were made and they were made in coordination with someone that we know after looking at the emails, Jeffrey Epstein, when he was charged in 2009, he said in those emails, I'm going to have to take the deal for the mandatory minimum of ten years because I'm afraid I will get more time. After he got a sweetheart deal from Alex Acosta, he then ended up indicted again in 2019.

So, the one thing that I can tell you is while those civil cases may have gone away, we know for sure that Epstein himself admitted that he was a criminal. So, just because the cases went away, it doesn't necessarily mean that the president has been absolved.

TAPPER: I want to ask you about your house colleague, Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

CROCKETT: Yes.

TAPPER: Viewers will remember you once called her a bleach blonde, bad built, butch body during a House committee meeting. For the record, she insulted you first. She had insulted you first.

CROCKETT: That is true.

TAPPER: Rivalry aside, you both agree on the Epstein thing. This has put her on the outs with President Trump. I want to play something that she said to my colleague, Dana Bash, yesterday on CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE (R-GA): I would like to say humbly, I'm sorry for taking part in the toxic politics. It's very bad for our country. And it's been something I've thought about a lot, especially since Charlie Kirk was assassinated, is that we -- I'm only responsible for myself and my own words and actions, and I am going -- I am committed, and I've been working on this a lot lately, to put down the knives in politics.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[18:10:07]

TAPPER: You posted, this almost feels like a moment where Marge should phone a friend, I'm here for you girl. Have you spoken and what's your reaction to what you just said?

CROCKETT: Okay. So, I do want to -- I want you to know that there was sarcasm in that.

TAPPER: I assume so, but I didn't want to state it.

CROCKETT: I was being sarcastic, but there's always a little bit of truth in jest. So, I do want to be clear that another portion of that post is I said, I told you couldn't trust him. And I believe that. I believe that we all need to pay attention to Trump and how he acts. He is the cause of all the confusion and the destruction that we have seen in politics, as far as I'm concerned, because it used to be we could disagree and that was that. I disagree with a lot of Republicans, but it does not necessarily turn violent. Ever since he's been introduced into politics, we have seen a consistent spike in the violence when it comes to politics.

So, here's the deal with Marjorie. I can appreciate what she says, but I'm going to have to see her actions. And the reality is that where was this type of mood when we saw what happened to Mr. Pelosi in his home, who's not even an elected official, but because somebody decided to go after Nancy Pelosi? Where was this when we saw that we had local elected leaders murdered here recently, the former speaker of the house in Minnesota? Like where was this, right?

And so what is so frustrating for me with not only Marjorie but MAGA as a whole is there in the find out phase. And so now that it's hitting them, they're like, oh my gosh, this is awful. But you should have looked at this externally and said, this is an awful environment. The fact that one of you all compete news brands decided to go out and do a whole story on the fact that I paid for security, security I have to pay because of the dumb stories that they run about me, security that I have to pay for because of all of the hate that people like Marjorie and other MAGA put out there, it is problematic.

And then to have the president troll her as well as Laura Loomer troll her about the fact that she needs security, well, my only answer is if the president thinks this is a joke, then give us all the money back for the security that we pay for for him to go and golf or to go and wherever he is going, give us the money back and maybe some Americans can get some healthcare and maybe some children can get some food.

TAPPER: Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, Democrat of Texas, thank you so much.

House lawmakers are expected to get their say on the release of the Epstein files tomorrow. How this step could begin a whole new chapter for Epstein survivors.

And we are standing by, you hear from President Trump. He's supposed to speak about affordability in America. We'll dip into that when it begins.

We're back in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:00]

TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on legislation calling for the release of the Epstein files tomorrow. Now, that would be one of many hurdles before the bill is able to reach the president's desk, not the least of which being the president himself, who only recently began supporting the effort after several attempts to shut down the vote.

But for the many survivors of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's abuse, this does represent a strong first step on a long road to justice and accountability. Joining us now is attorney for Epstein survivors and for Virginia Giuffre, Sigrid McCawley. Thanks so much for being here, Sigrid. I appreciate it.

So, in your view, not only as a lawyer, but as a friend of Virginia Giuffre who took her own life earlier this year, how have you felt seeing lawmakers invoke her name as an argument against releasing the files either quickly or as a whole?

SIGRID MCCAWLEY, REPRESENTED VIRGINIA GIUFFRE: I think it's been really difficult, particularly for her family to see her name being weaponized in this circumstance. I mean, Virginia was a champion for these survivors and a champion for the cause, and so I think in this moment that can be really, really tragic.

I mean, we saw, you know, with her book being released, she was number one on the New York Times Bestseller list, her voice really being heard. But I think, you know, certainly the weaponization of her name can be very difficult for them.

TAPPER: Last week, President Trump urged the Justice Department to investigate Epstein's ties to prominent Democrats. Do you worry that diverting Justice Department resources could affect the release of the Epstein files, and are you worried that if there are active investigations that could further be a reason to block the release?

MCCAWLEY: Well, the survivors definitely want investigations to be ongoing. I mean, certainly, Epstein did not act alone. Ghislaine Maxwell did not act alone. This sex trafficking operation went on for decades and decades. So, there are a number of people who absolutely need to be investigated.

So, we are hoping that with the release of the files and the American public calling for those investigations, that there will finally be more justice.

TAPPER: In recent days, there's been reporting on Ghislaine Maxwell and what appears to be some really special treatment she's receiving while in prison, extra rolls of toilet paper, she gets a comfort dog that she's hanging out with there. A whistleblower also said that Maxwell's preparing to file an application for commutation. What's your reaction to all that?

MCCAWLEY: It's actually atrocious. I mean, this is somebody who, Ghislaine Maxwell, physically herself harmed these minor children. In addition to helping facilitate it, she participated in those rapes. This is pure evil. So, to allow someone who's a convicted sex trafficker to have these extravagance in prison is just remarkable. It shouldn't be happening. It needs to be stopped.

TAPPER: There's been some discussion about -- in relating to the Epstein files case -- about how Jeffrey Epstein wasn't actually a pedophile because the girls were all post-pubescent. This is not me parsing this. This is others. And I guess, medically speaking, there is a differentiation. And, legally speaking, I think in common parlance, people use the word pedophile to mean anyone under 18 being preyed upon by an adult, but what's been your reaction to all of that?

[18:20:03]

MCCAWLEY: I mean, these survivors were young children. This -- the word -- use of the word pedophile is absolutely appropriate for this. This is exactly what Epstein was. This is the type of conduct he was behaving and participating in. He, as Department of Justice has said, harmed over a thousand young lives. So, absolutely, he should be called a pedophile.

TAPPER: So, if the files are fully released, what are you and the survivors hoping for? Are you hoping that there will then be prosecutions, we assume, since only two people have ever been brought to justice in any way on this, Maxwell and Epstein, who took his own life or died anyway? I guess the question is, do you then hope there are going to be names in these files of these powerful, wealthy men who raped these girls or molested these girls and do you assume that this will then begin a series of prosecutions?

MCCAWLEY: We're hoping for a series of prosecutions. I mean, not only for the men who participated in these crimes, but for the other individuals that were in that circle that helped facilitate those crimes. Epstein and Maxwell could not have done this alone. They needed people on their inner circle, making sure they had the money, making sure they had legal coverage, all of those things, to help facilitate those crimes. So, we're really hoping that the government will finally take a very close look at this and call out the people who were on that inner circle and hold them accountable.

TAPPER: All right. Sigrid McCawley, thank you so much. I really appreciate your time.

Ahead, the unusual candidate who entered a race that has a Democrat calling out her own party and raising questions of election subversion by the Democrats. My conversation with that congresswoman, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

TAPPER: President Trump is speaking right now at an event with McDonald's franchisees here in D.C. Take a listen.

TRUMP: -- catastrophe, you probably would've had a bankrupt country. You are so damn lucky that I won that election. I'm telling you.

It's actually true. I hope the press covers at this. You know, sometimes he got up and he ranted and raved and bragged. I don't brag. I just give you the facts. It's true. But those in this room know the people of our country better than anybody. And before the sun rises, you're serving hot coffee to construction workers, nurses, and police officers on the way to the job. In the evening, you stand ready with the fast dinner and a smile for busy moms and their children as they race from school to soccer practice, really, as it's Americana. And late at night, your lights are off and the only one still blowing when the long haul trucker pulls up for a good meal and a best Coca-Cola in America. Best Coca-Cola, woo.

And I bet they use real sugar in your Coca-Cola. You know, they didn't in the United States. I said to the head of Coca-Cola, you got to go to sugar. They do it in other countries. And you know what? They went to sugar. Isn't that nice? I said, you got to go to sugar. Just like I said, why is the Gulf of Mexico called the Gulf of Mexico? I said, we're changing the name, and now it's the Gulf of America. It has nothing to do with McDonald's, but maybe it does because it's very nice cycle (ph). We have 92 percent of the shoreline. They have 8 percent. I wouldn't say I made a lot of friends in Mexico, but they still like me.

Wasn't that a good change? Seriously, wasn't that beautiful? And it was done in an instant. You know, it's like normally you think a thing like that would take years. This took like ten minutes. Somebody, good lawyers in my office, I said, would I be able to change the Gulf of Mexico? Is that possible to the Gulf? Sir, it's been that way for 350 years. You know, they were a here a hundred years before us.

We're 250, they were 350. It's been called the Gulf of Mexico, sir, for 350 years. I said, that's not the question. Am I able to change it? Yes. What do I do? Just give us the order. We'll do it. And I did, and we changed it, and everybody's happy. Well, not everybody, but most people. Most people are happy. But it's great prestige for our country. You know, it's tremendous prestige for our country. And that's good for McDonald's and that's good for everybody else.

As president, I want you to know that I'm fighting every day to support small businesses like yours and the citizens that we all serve. And together we're fighting for an economy where everyone can win from the cashier starting her first job to a franchisee opening his first location, to the young family in a drive through line. I've been on that line many times.

Actually, that line was incredible in the commercial, right? It wasn't a commercial, it was about -- but they have the line. The people had no idea. So, I made the French fries. The guy was really good. He had a great wrist. He was -- so he was going like, sir, yes. I said, huh. It was not that easy, but I got it sort of finally, not the greatest, but I get it, pouring it in, asking him all sorts of stupid questions. But it was very interesting, amazing.

A little thing is not -- it's a little complex right, to father and son over there that own a lot, they're very rich people. But I'll tell you what, I asked, how many do you have? Sir, I have 59. I said, you're rich. But, you know, nobody knew in the line. That line was a long line. They had 25,000 people. So, somebody let them know we were coming. It was toward the end of the campaign.

And after I did the French fries and did some other things I then stood at the window, and the people would drive up a little bored. In all fairness, you know, it is -- I mean, they're waiting for a hamburger, okay? So, they'd drive up like this, they'd look over, whoa, every one of them.

[18:30:04] And it was fascinating. Every one of them, they would -- it was -- the response was incredible, almost like I knew I was going to win when I saw that, I knew because the response was love. It was great. They had a good time. But we did, I think, 12 people, every one of them had the same response. They drive up, (INAUDIBLE) this, they get that, getting a little cash ready and they look over --

TAPPER: All right. We're going to continue to monitor President Trump's remarks about the economy there.

Let's bring in CNN's Daniel Dale. Daniel, President Trump talking about the affordability, talking about the economy, you heard him there talking about groceries, saying that the cost of living is lower -- the cost of Thanksgiving, rather, is lower than last year. He's made this claim before. Is it true?

DANIEL DALE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, so Walmart did say that its own promotional Thanksgiving meal basket is 25 percent cheaper this year than last. What Trump doesn't mention, though, is that it's a different basket this year, Jake. It is 15 products instead of 21 last year, and those 15 include a much higher percentage of Walmart's store brand items rather than the name brand items that were a greater percentage last year, and they're often more expensive. So, this is not an apples to apples comparison.

And if I may, he also made a number of other false claims on the subject of affordability. He also said that prices generally are coming down. Now, he did say this in present tense rather than just claiming prices have come down like usual, but there's no sign that prices are coming down either. We have 3 percent year-over-year inflation in September that was the fifth straight month that year- over-year inflation had increased. Even if you managed to reduce the rate of inflation in the coming months, that won't mean prices are down. That will mean they're increasing by less than before. So, prices are rising contrary to what we're hearing from the president.

And he also repeated this false claim we've been hearing over and over that $17 trillion -- he said over $17 trillion has been invested in the U.S. during his presidency. That number is total fiction. The White House's own website uses a $9 trillion figure. I went through that list line by line and found that even that is wildly inflated. It includes vague promises, vague statements that aren't even promises, promises on trade rather than investment itself. So, this $17 trillion number, sometimes the president says $18 trillion, all of it is just wrong. There's no real basis for it.

TAPPER: All right. Daniel Dale, thank you so much.

In our Politics Lead, we've talked earlier in the program about the civil war and the Republican Party. Let's talk now about a civil war going on in the Democratic Party. The House of Representatives is back in session, and as early as tonight, it's possible we're going to see a vote related to a resolution condemning the behavior of Illinois Democratic Congressman Chuy Garcia. The biggest surprise here is that the resolution was introduced by another Democrat, Washington State's Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. Now, here's what you need to know. Back on Election Day, Congressman Garcia announced his retirement and he did this after the deadline to file to run for his Congressional seat. But Congressman Garcia's chief of staff had been tipped off ahead of time. So, just before the deadline, she filed paperwork to run. So, she will be the only Democratic candidate running in the primary in an overwhelmingly D plus 17 Democratic district.

Essentially, Congressman Garcia picked his successor and deprived his own constituents of a choice. Last Wednesday, Congresswoman Gluesenkamp Perez shocked her party's leadership by taking to the House floor to offer a resolution condemning Garcia's actions, accusing him of undermining the process of a free and fair election. And this afternoon, two sources tell CNN House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries is not formally whipping his caucus to vote to kill the resolution that disapproves of Garcia's action, but party leaders have made it clear to Democrats that they personally strongly oppose it.

In an exclusive interview last night, I spoke with Congresswoman Gluesenkamp Perez about why she did what she did.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: It is very rare for a Democrat to so publicly call out a member of their own party. Why did you feel the need to speak up?

REP. MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ (D-WA): Because I believe election subversion is wrong no matter who's doing it. And I think that right now, we're seeing a profound, very loud call from Americans for transparency and accountability. And it's part and parcel of that, that you don't just turn a blind eye to wrongdoing or unethical behavior when it's, you know, politically convenient, that you do it consistently.

And, you know, I did this on the first day that we were back after Representative Garcia had done this. And I just think it's really important that we are consistent.

[18:35:03]

And whether it's politically convenient or not, it's not fun to call out a member of your own party, but I think it's important that we're consistent in answering. And, you know, we're loyal to the soil (ph), we're loyal to our constituents and say like elections subversion is always wrong. That's not how we run things in this country and that's not the party that I want to be a part of.

TAPPER: Did Democrats try to talk you out of doing this? What was the reaction of your fellow Democrats in the House?

PEREZ: You know, one of the disturbing things was that like immediately after the news broke about how Chuy had basically chosen his successor, I saw a lot of members congratulating him on how clever and slick it was. And I think that galvanized me more to say that this is not something to be proud of or to emulate or copy, that we have to think critically about like what uses it to win an election at all costs, even your own integrity if you are in that process, destroying Americans' confidence in government? That's the thing. Like it's not a prize that's worth winning if you destroy the thing and the process.

TAPPER: One of the arguments from Democrats seems to be that Democrats need to be focused on the Epstein files and on high prices and on Trump's tariffs. And what you're doing is distracting from that. How do you respond to that argument?

PEREZ: Yes, I think that it's -- I understand that Democrats want a unified message, but I also know that where I'm from, when you see things like this, like, you know, it's not just about having affordable stuff or holding another team accountable. It's that we want leadership. We want a team that calls a spade a spade. And, you know, there are so many debatable things in politics today, but this seems really clear cut to me and my community that this is not acceptable.

And I've seen the way that, you know, D.C. will turn you into a frog and it will boil you alive if you do not make consistent and, you know, deliberate steps to stop that. And so I'm in my second term here. I didn't have elected office before this. I'm not a lawyer, but I know that when I see somebody subverting an election and choosing their successor, like that's not what democracy is about. And that's not why I was sent to Congress.

TAPPER: Yes. Look, I mean, without question, what Congressman Garcia did stinks and the voters got screwed without, you know, taking a position on what kind of a politician he is or his successor will be. I mean, just you are right on the facts, but there is just such reluctance of Democrats to criticize Democrats and Republicans to criticize Republicans.

How much, if at all, were you influenced by what happened with President Biden last year and the fact that the DNC kept him away from any challengers during the primary process? There were no debates. There were efforts to keep other people off the ballots. And then, of course, after he dropped out, after the pressure following the debate, there was no contest at all to make Vice President Harris the nominee. Did that play a role in this at all?

PEREZ: Yes. I think there's one school of thought that's pretty strong in D.C., that it's like the threat to democracy is so real that we have to make choices for people, that Americans aren't smart enough to choose their own representatives. And I think like that that lack of confidence in voters, it is toxic and it's not true. Like there are patriots, there are so many people who could hold these jobs and who would do well at them, but it can be so inward-looking and just oriented around what you don't like.

And, look, like I like Chuy, like I think he's like a nice guy. And it's even more important that when it's someone that it can't just be the people that you don't like, that you're willing to call out. You have to be willing to do it within your own family as well. And I believe like that that kind of transparency and faith in voters is what will turn things around. That is how you walk away from authoritarianism, not by picking up that playbook, but by saying no, like this is a strong country still.

And when we -- you know, when we trust American citizens to make a good choice, like we get a better outcome than if these choices are made for them.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Our thanks to Congresswoman Gluesenkamp Perez. We're going to be watching this evening to see what happens to her resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Coming up next, another sharp split in the Democratic Party, this time between a daughter and her mother. One is running for a seat in the house. The other is a sitting U.S. senator. What has them at odds, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, you may recall that Senator Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, was one of the eight Democratic senators who, along with Republicans, voted for that spending bill that ended the longest government shutdown in American history. Senator Shaheen caught a lot of flak for this vote, including from her daughter, Stefany Shaheen. Stephanie is a Democratic candidate for New Hampshire's first Congressional district. The current congressman in that seat, Democrat Pappas, is running to replace the retiring senator, Shaheen. And Stefany Shaheen joins us now.

So, first of all, before I get into the family dynamics, tell me on the substance why did you not support the deal that your mother helped negotiate?

STEFANY SHAHEEN (D), NEW HAMPSHIRE CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE: Well, thank you for having me tonight, Jake. Look, the healthcare has been the cause of my life. It became the fight of my life when my oldest daughter, Elle, was diagnosed with type one diabetes shortly after her eighth birthday, and it really changed the trajectory of my life. When you have to care for a child who's navigating a relentless, persistent chronic disease, like type one diabetes, it affects every single day. And it really became my passion to try to improve healthcare, and that's what compelled me to get into the race.

TAPPER: And this is what you do right now. You have a small business involving chronic disease.

SHAHEEN: That's right. And so when Speaker Johnson said he couldn't guarantee a vote on the floor to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits, I knew I couldn't support the deal.

[18:45:07]

TAPPER: Did you talk to your mom while she was negotiating this? Did you try to change your position? I mean, I don't know how much you know about her day-to-day stuff, even though obviously, you're trying to go into the family business to a degree.

SHAHEEN: Well, sure. I understood where she was coming from. She knew where I was coming from. And ultimately, she did what she believes is right. And I'm doing what I believe is right.

TAPPER: So, you're running to represent voters in New Hampshire's first congressional district, which is like the eastern and southern slice of that great state. What are you hearing from people who get their insurance through Obamacare?

SHAHEEN: Well, we know that if these tax credits don't get extended before January for a family of four, the premiums will go up $7,000 next year. It's just not sustainable. On top of all the other rising prices from the cost of food and housing and energy prices in New Hampshire, we have to get these tax credits extended.

TAPPER: And during the shutdown, a group of moderate Republicans in the House sent a letter to the House Speaker Mike Johnson saying that Republicans as well need to talk about and do something about the rising cost of health insurance premiums, not just in Obamacare, by the way, but throughout the entire marketplace. Do you have any hopes that House Republicans and Democrats could find a solution, or there could be some sort of bipartisan deal?

SHAHEEN: Absolutely. Look, this is why I'm in the race, because I believe we can make government work and we can improve health care. And it starts first by extending the Affordable Care Act tax credits. We have to turn the anger we're all feeling into action and demand the speaker bring a vote to the floor.

And beyond that, I think, as you noted, that's the tip of the iceberg. We've got to go further. We've got to make health care work better for people. We've got to do things like pass legislation that brings down the cost of prescription drugs.

In New Hampshire, the people I'm seeking to serve will face costs for prescription drugs, sometimes four times what our Canadian neighbors are paying for the same drugs. That's unacceptable. We can tackle that problem and solve it.

And look, I know what it feels like to fight the insurance companies. I know what it feels like for a doctor to say, your daughter needs this prescription. And the insurance companies to deny you the right to get that prescription and have to fight them tooth and nail to get the care your doctor says your child needs. And when you've had to stare in the face of your child's mortality as often as I have, and so many Americans who have lived with a very scary condition or diagnosis, it's personal. Fighting for health care and improving health care is personal.

And so, I call on all Americans to demand of their elected officials that they bring a vote to the floor of the house to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. And then let's work together to improve the health care system in a way that works for everybody.

TAPPER: Well, I mean, you know, the way they're getting this bill about the Epstein files to the floor of the house is through a discharge petition. Democrats could be doing that right now. You need 218 signatures. And so, if there are 215 Democrats, all you need is a few other Republicans. I don't know why they're not.

SHAHEEN: I think they absolutely should.

TAPPER: All right. Stefany Shaheen, thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

This is an issue that has the entire Democratic Party divided. The panel is standing by. We're going to talk about this next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:51:59]

TAPPER: We're back with more discussion in our politics lead. With us are Mo and Mike.

And so let me just ask you, Mo. So, Congressman Garcia, Chuy Garcia, Democrat of Illinois, it's a D-plus-17 district. He announces he's not running for reelection after the deadline. His chief of staff has been tipped off. So, she's the only one that files.

And it's pretty sneaky at the at the -- that's the nicest thing I can say about it. Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, a Democrat, goes to the floor of the House to condemn what he did, saying it's undemocratic and it's screwed his voters. I'm paraphrasing and it looks like she's the one that's being made out to be the bad guy by House Democrats.

MO ELLEITHEE, FORMER DNC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: Yeah. Look, I actually don't know a lot about the backstory of this. My understanding is that it had something to do with health issues in the family.

TAPPER: No one -- no one is -- no one is begrudging his retirement from Congress. That's understandable. But he did so in a way so as to anoint a successor.

ELLEITHEE: Look, I never underestimate the Democratic Party's ability to take what could be a good moment and turn it upside down. And, you know, the Dem on Dem political violence is just something you can usually bet on. I think what's probably.

MIKE DUBKE, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: We need more of it.

ELLEITHEE: Yeah. I know Mike's happy.

I think, look, I think what's probably frustrated a lot of people, some people are frustrated at his decision, the way you laid it out. Other people are frustrated that the congresswoman went so loud and so public to take him on and just create another -- another issue. Mike and I were talking in the green room. The thing that's amazing is I don't know that anyone would have said anything in his district had she not blown it up.

TAPPER: Well, there was coverage in the Chicago press. I mean, it's a -- it's a pretty good press group there.

DUBKE: Yeah, but it's still -- I don't think most people we pay attention to the machinations of, you know, who files when and all of that. I think Mo's right that the district in a plus 17, you said?

TAPPER: Yeah.

DUBKE: They're not -- they're not probably going to care. But this does seem -- it is strange that it has gone on as long as it has. And you had the congresswoman on today. And there's something -- I -- there's got to it makes you feel like there's something else going on beneath the surface. But I just like sitting back and watching.

ELLEITHEE: It's the latest battle and sort of the generational approach, the anti-establishment fight that's starting to take shape in the Democratic Party. And I think you're going to see water seep through those cracks wherever you can.

DUBKE: And where you're seeing it really is the retirement of the senior Democrats who where -- if they're not beaten at the ballot box, this new generation of Democrats, really, I think, are forcing a lot of the old guard to step down. We're probably going to see it New York with Chuck Schumer, not to bring it into the shutdown. And the calls that that Democrats have had about his leadership.

But I think we're witnessing kind of the end of some of the senior leadership of the Democratic Party right now.

TAPPER: One of the things that's happened on that, on that line that you talk of, it's interesting you talk about this generation. I hadn't thought about it, but that makes sense.

[18:55:03]

She's very young. Congresswoman Gluesenkamp Perez.

One of the things that's interesting is younger people announcing that they're going to challenge old house Democrats, and then those old House Democrats announcing that they're not running for reelection.

It happened with Jared Nadler in New York and the district. That's very competitive. And I think Jack Schlossberg is going to run in that seat.

Also with Jan Schakowsky in Illinois. And then we had her on the show earlier today, or we taped an interview, I should say, earlier today that were going to air later with Governor DeSantis and a former Democratic member of Congress talking about the need for term limits. I think there is a lot of just like, why are these people staying in Congress forever?

ELLEITHEE: Yeah. And this is the hot -- the hot conversation in the Democratic Party. Look, I -- they're not limiting it just to elderly members of Congress, right? I mean, you've got sort of a young progressive now announcing or likely to take on Hakeem Jeffries --

TAPPER: Right.

ELLEITHEE: -- in his own seat.

It -- I think it is less about generational change or and age as it is about sort of taking on the establishment the same populist wave that hit the Republican Party a dozen years ago or so with the rise of the Tea Party. Democrats are starting to see.

How successful it is, we'll see, right? Ask me when all the primaries are over.

DUBKE: I think they're more successful in getting people to retire than they are at the ballot box, because you're not seeing a lot of primaries in which an establishment Democrat or frankly, an established Republican loses. And the Republican Party, we do have President Trump that can, you know, except for maybe Massie in Kentucky can frighten people out. And now, Marjorie Taylor Greene.

But in the Democratic Party, I think you're seeing a lot more retirements than you are actually losses in primaries.

ELLEITHEE: The question is, do you understand the politics of the moment?

DUBKE: Right.

ELLEITHEE: That's the question that all these members are asking themselves.

TAPPER: Well, you heard Stefany Shaheen, Jeanne Shaheen's daughter. She's running for the House, and she said her mom's wrong for doing that negotiation, for doing the compromise with Republicans.

DUBKE: I want to be at that Thanksgiving dinner.

(LAUGHTER)

TAPPER: I don't think that, Senator --I'm pretty sure that retiring Senator Jeanne Shaheen understands that.

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Daughter seems rather sophisticated, that family. But I agree with you. Like, I mean, what? We'll see how much she goes anti-mom.

DUBKE: Exactly right.

TAPPER: She hasn't.

But I do want to ask about the Epstein files. President Trump has reversed his position on this. He says he has nothing to hide. You know, if he has nothing to hide, then why has he been fighting this tooth and nail for the last six months? DUBKE: Well, I think he's getting ahead of the story now, look, we've

talked about this over. I don't know how many months now. We've been talking about this. And I've been --

TAPPER: I know it's your favorite topic.

DUBKE: It is my favorite topic. And we've been and we've been talking about this is the one area where I could not figure out how the White House isn't getting ahead of the story, and they finally are. They're finally getting to the place where, you know, let's -- you were going to lose this all along.

TAPPER: Yeah.

DUBKE: And they finally, I think, realized it. And I think the president realized it. And, you know, as, as he was asked today, are you going to sign it if it comes to your desk? And he said, sure.

TAPPER: Except it has to get through the Senate. Is it going to get through the Senate? Jasmine Crockett, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett said she thinks the only reason Trump's forward is because the fix is in in the Senate.

ELLEITHEE: And it might be look -- no. Look, I don't know. It could pass. But saying waiting until right before a vote, realizing you're going to lose that vote and then putting out the statement he did is hardly getting ahead of it. If he wanted to get ahead of it, he has the authority to release a lot of the files himself.

TAPPER: Yeah, you can release them right now.

DUBKE: You complain that the Justice Department releases things under Trump's direction, and then when he doesn't give them direction and ask for the congress to act now, now, he should be asking the court?

ELLEITHEE: All the Congress asking --

DUBKE: The level -- this is --

TAPPER: All right.

DUBKE: Anyway.

TAPPER: Thank you so much, Mo, Mike. Appreciate it.

In our last leads today, the national lead, embattled FEMA Director David Richardson, announced today that he's going to step down from his position in two weeks. Sources told CNN plans were already in the works to oust the controversial administrator as soon as hurricane season is over at the end of the month. Talk about getting ahead of a story.

Richardson's departure comes as homeland security, the department that oversees FEMA, prepares for major reforms of that natural disaster agency. Only one week left to get in on the celebrity auction that I'm co-

hosting with George Clooney and Winona Judge. All of the proceeds help build specially adapted custom homes for wounded veterans. The top five bids right now at ebay.com/HFOT, Homes For Our Troops.

Top five are a Zoom call with actor Jeff Probst. It's more than $10,000. What the?

Then premiere tickets to a future Jake Gyllenhaal production, along with a meet and greet.

And the number three spot, an exclusive set visit to filming of "Severance" season three. meet and greet with Ben Stiller, followed by an autographed Superman movie poster.

Rounding out the top five is lunch with Paul Rudd. I will also be there, but I'm sure that's not what's getting the money.

But there are more than 100 items to bid on and a lot of them are really going for low prices right now. Find out more at ebay.com/HFOT, Homes For Our Troops.

If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.

"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts right now. See you tomorrow.