Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

Trump Claims Progress In Talks To End War, Then Threatens Attacks; Israel Government's Activities Draw International Criticism; Airport Lines Ease As TSA Workers Get First Paycheck; Mayor Matt Mahan (D) Is Interviewed About Candidates Pushing Affordability Message As Primary Closes In; Crowded Democratic Field Could Create GOP Victory; White House Allowing Oil Shipments To Cuba On "Case-By-Case" Basis. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired March 30, 2026 - 17:00   ET

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

[17:00:00]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST: A big thanks to my panel here in New York. My friend, Jake Tapper, is standing by for "The Lead." Jake, take it away.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Hey, Abby. Thanks so much. We're going to look for more tomorrow in "The Arena."

PHILLIP: All right. See you then.

TAPPER: The White House says you do the math on how long its military mission in Iran will last. "The Lead" starts right now. The White House says its four to six-week timeline on Iran has not changed. We are in week five for those keeping track. So, is Operation Epic Fury almost over? And with whom is the Trump administration negotiating if Iran says that no direct talks with the U.S. are happening? Our experts are standing by with their take on where the situation stands.

And Trump's new threat to obliterate Iran's oil wells. Is he trying to make good on something that he has wanted to do for decades?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Why couldn't we go in and take over some of their oil?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Plus, TSA workers finally getting their paychecks. But will they get the next one? And could they have been paid weeks ago? See, the impact already lies from one of the busiest airports in the United States.

Welcome to "The Lead." I'm Jake Tapper on assignment in Los Angeles. We're going to start in our "World Lead." The status of the Iran war, as told by the Trump administration, seems to many an ever-changing tale. This morning, just before markets opened, Trump said the U.S. is in serious talks with -- quote -- "a new and more reasonable Iranian regime." But, and there's always a but, he wrote on Truth Social -- quote -- "Great progress has been made but, if for any reason a deal is not surely reached, which it probably will be, and if the Hormuz Strait is not immediately open for business, we will conclude our lovely stay in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their electric generating plants, oil wells and Kharg Island and possibly all desalinization plants" -- unquote.

Wow! A lot to unpack here. First, experts say that attacking civilian infrastructure could constitute a war crime under current international law. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about this this afternoon.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Of course, this administration and the United States Armed Forces will always act within the confines of the law. But with respect to achieving the full objectives of Operation Epic Fury, President Trump is going to move forward unabated, and he expects the Iranian regime to make a deal with the administration.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Now, second point, we still do not know with whom exactly the U.S. is negotiating. No one has heard a peep from Iran's new supreme leader.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF STATE: It's very opaque right now. It's not quite clear how decisions are being made inside of Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Third, all in that same Truth Social post, the president went from saying there's progress to threatening destruction. And this seems emblematic of the whiplash from President Trump's back and forth statements and talks about achievement and talks about threats. Though, we should note, Secretary of State Marco Rubio seemingly frustrated with the news media, challenged the notion that there is any mixed messages or confusing objectives this morning on ABC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUBIO: I'll repeat them to you now because I hear a lot of talk about we don't know what the clear objectives are. Here they are. You should write them down. Number one, the destruction of their air force. Number two, the destruction of their navy. Number three, the severe diminishing of their missile launching capability. And number four, the destruction of their factories so they can't make more missiles and more drones to threaten us in the future. All of these so that they can never hide behind it to acquire a nuclear weapon.

(END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: OK. So, I did write down those four things, and I would note that there are a couple things not on that initial objectives list that are now being named as objectives, not by Secretary Rubio there, but by other administration officials. For example, retrieving the actual nuclear material from inside Iran, which is reportedly being discussed now as a potential mission for U.S. troops on the ground. Number two, opening the Strait of Hormuz. At the onset of the war, the strait was open.

The point is it's all kind of confusing because objectives are being added as the war changes and the enemy gets a vote and, perhaps, things do not go perfectly according to plan. So, two Saturdays ago, the president said if Iran does not reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours and allow oil and gas to flow through, he would bomb Iran's civilian electric power plants, which obviously was also not on that list.

Either way, just hours before the Monday deadline that President Trump set, before that deadline expired, the president delayed the threat by five days and there was, of course, the caveat.

[17:05:02]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If it goes well, we're going to end up with settling this. Otherwise, we just keep bombing our little hearts out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Thursday afternoon, President Trump extended that deadline once again, this time by 10 days. No one can support the goals of this war and also acknowledge the confusing messages. President Trump has declared victory while arguing that the mission is not complete. On regime change, the president said that this would be the Iranian people's best shot to take their country back. Then in recent weeks, President Trump said it was too dangerous for a popular uprising to happen. And then yesterday, he said regime change, that has already happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We've had regime change. If you look already because the one regime was decimated, destroyed. They're all dead. The next regime is mostly dead. And the third regime, we're dealing with different people than anybody has dealt with before.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, yes, the previous ayatollah is dead. But now, his arguably more hardline son is now in charge, we think. So, if the mission is just, as Secretary Rubio noted, the destruction of the air force and the navy and missiles and missile-making capability, it would seem that the U.S. would be close to accomplishing that.

But according to reports in "The Washington Post" and "The Wall Street Journal," the Trump administration is preparing for more. The Pentagon is preparing for weeks of ground operations in Iran, troops on the ground. President Trump is weighing deploying another 10,000 more ground troops to the Middle East region in general. And they are also considering a complex operation to extract, with boots on the ground, in Iran nearly a thousand pounds of uranium from inside Iran. We should note the president has not made decision on any of those options.

Again, one can want a denuclearized and democratic Iran and still wonder if President Trump is kind of making some of this up as he goes along. One can support President Trump and wonder if he's fully aware of how often wars spiral out of control little by little with unanticipated responses by the enemy requiring increasing commitment. President Trump said he would end the Iran war when? When he -- quote -- "feels it in his bones." When so many lives are on the line, that is a remarkably vague and impulsive metric.

Let's discuss this with former Congresswoman Jane Harman, the former chair of the Commission on the National Defense Strategy and a former Democratic congresswoman from California. Also with us, Karim Sadjadpour, senior fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Thanks to both of you for being here. Congresswoman, some people believe Trump's constant back and forth is street strategic four-dimensional chess. What's your take?

JANE HARMAN, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF COMMISSION ON THE NATIONAL DEFENSE STRATEGY, FORMER CALIFORNIA REPRESENTATIVE: Well, first, welcome to my hometown, Jake. Happy to have you in L.A. Wish I were there. But my take is Trump is not negotiating with Iran, he's negotiating with the markets. And I think a lot of this, what amounts to noise, because it changes all the time, is about is the market going up, is the market going down. Maybe there's some early whispers to a few folks who could invest in the markets. But I think that's what it is. And I don't think he ever anticipated that after a couple of days, it would become this.

And let me make one other point. He's not negotiating with Congress. Where is Congress? You know, I've coined this term, CACO, Congress always chickens out to match taco, think all these dates that are getting -- the deadlines that are being passed. I can't imagine why intelligent people in Congress, in both parties, and there are some, sounds like an oxymoron, but it's true, aren't demanding that they play a role here and authorizing or not the use of military force and the sending of our soldiers into harm's way.

TAPPER: Karim, the White House was asked about how the U.S. could trust without -- whomever they're negotiating with given Secretary of State Rubio said it's unclear how Iran is operating. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN (voice-over): As the president is trying to make a deal, how do you ensure that you're making a deal with the people who can actually implement it?

LEAVITT: Well, that's part of the ongoing process that's taking place. In the ongoing negotiations, of course, anything that they say to us privately will be tested, and we will ensure that they are being held accountable to their word.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Karim, what do you think is actually happening inside the regime right now? Are there negotiations going on? Can they be taken seriously? Are they with key enough players?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Jake, we don't have any evidence there are serious negotiations happening. I don't doubt that President Trump's envoys are sending text messages to Iran's foreign minister, Araghchi. But the reality is that, you know, there has been -- after the assassination of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, there has been an enormous power vacuum in Tehran.

[17:10:06]

And at the moment, it's still -- the personnel have changed but the regime and its ideology are very much the same. And at the moment, they think the trend lines are going in their direction and that oil prices are going to continue to go up and American public support for the war is going to continue to go down.

TAPPER: Congresswoman, today, the White House said that additional U.S. troops in the Middle East give President Trump maximum optionality in this war. "The Wall Street Journal" is reporting that he's thinking about possibly sending another 10,000 troops to the region. What's your take on that?

HARMAN: Well, it's a nice word, optionality. It's almost as good as obliteration. Words are obviously -- obfuscation is another one that comes to mind. My take on that is without an endgame, this makes no sense. Military objectives may be being achieved, but global objectives, geopolitical objectives are totally unclear.

I agree with Karim that if you're looking at it from the Iranian perspective, they've got the cards, to quote our president. They've got the cards. They've got a veto over the Strait of Hormuz. And their population is increasing its support for its government. Increasing its support. And they are resilient.

And don't think if we send more troops into harm's way, unauthorized by Congress, oh, my God, that they're not going to be harmed and that there's not going to be repercussions all over the Gulf. So, I think some adult supervision is necessary. I'm really pleased that several of the Gulf states are talking about hosting a negotiation to get to some endgame, which hopefully has global buy-in. Good for the Pakistanis and the others.

TAPPER: Karim, the White House says that the U.S. is going to follow the law. This is after Trump threatened to attack Iran's power plants and desalinization plants that provides potable drinking water for the Iranian people. What sort of reason would there be to attack these targets and how would that impact innocent Iranians? SADJADPOUR: Well, Jake, President Trump is in a predicament because he cannot end the war and declare victory so long as Iran is controlling the Strait of Hormuz. And I think he's making these grandiose threats in the hopes that he's not going to have to actually send troops. But the danger is that the Iranians will call his bluff.

And as Congresswoman Harman alluded to, we may have to send troops or we may decide to send troops into harm's way. And this is going to really put us into a delicate predicament. I don't think there's a popular support for this kind of operation. And it risks Iran potentially causing more American fatalities and the president having to further double down.

And so, I do think he has lost the plot. This war began as an effort to protect innocent Iranians against a murderous regime. And now, the talk is of making lives in Iran more difficult by going after infrastructure and desalination plants and power plants.

TAPPER: Karim Sadjadpour, former Congresswoman Jane Harman, thanks to both of you. Really appreciate it. What's next for the -- what's next for the U.S. is one thing. There is also the matter of what's next for Israel. Israel launched a fresh wave of strikes on Iran today on some 170 targets.

Coming up next, we're going to take a look at some of Israel's emboldened, you might call them, provocative actions since the war started on Iran. Also, in the West Bank where CNN crew was assaulted and detained by Israeli soldiers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Continuing with our "World Lead," the Israeli military's top general today suspended all operation activities of an Israeli reserve battalion that was involved in detaining and assaulting a CNN team in the West Bank.

Last Thursday, CNN's Jeremy Diamond and his team were covering the aftermath of a violent assault by Jewish settlers in West Bank who had established an illegal outpost in a West Bank village. The soldiers detained the team, the journalists, and one of the soldiers placed CNN photojournalist Cyril Theophilus in a chokehold. During the CNN team's detention, several of the Israeli soldiers said on camera that they believe the entire West Bank belongs to Jews and that they were avenging the alleged killing of an Israeli settler days before.

The assault of the CNN crew is a mere symbol of the out-of-control violence being perpetrated by Israelis, Jews, many of them religious zealots, on innocent Palestinians in the West Bank. It's an eruption of violence that the Netanyahu government too often seems to be allowing, if not outright supporting.

It was a busy weekend in Israel. On Sunday, Israeli police prevented a Roman Catholic cardinal and other senior church leaders from entering Jerusalem's Church of the Holy Sepulchre to celebrate Palm Sunday mass, the first time this has happened in centuries. Prime Minister Netanyahu later reversed the decision after a global outcry.

We're joined now by Aaron David Miller, former Middle East negotiator for the U.S. State Department. Aaron, over the weekend, you posted on X -- quote -- "The government of Israel seems to have elevated to an art form alienating and pissing off folks from one end of the planet to the other, and for what?" -- unquote. So, why do you think this is happening?

AARON DAVID MILLER, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT MIDDLE EAST NEGOTIATOR: What did Sir Edmund Hillary say about Everest? Why you wanted to climb? Because it's there? Look, none of this should surprise, Jake. What's surprising is the lack of pushback from the Trump administration.

But you've got the most extreme right-wing government in the history of the state of Israel. Two ministers in particular, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich. Ben-Gvir is minister of what?

[17:20:00]

National security. It gives him extraordinary control, which he shouldn't be exercising over the individual operational decisions taken by the police. The Latin patriarch, right? I mean, we're talking what? One and a half billion Catholics in the world today, five to six million in the Middle East. Basically, per agreement, even with emergency regulations, decided to do a private visit to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. He was going to, I think, broadcast a ceremony. No procession. No big crowds online. That one was resolved.

But what did it take? It took the intervention of the prime minister of the state of Israel. And I might add the statement, basically semi- apologizing for the incident appeared only in English, not in Hebrew.

So, in large part, the right-wing, which is the key constituency, extreme right-wing constituency, a part of this particular government, I think has a stake basically in what? Riling up their base? Isolation, I think, for that particular constituency simply builds the brand in Israel. And none of this should surprise. But as I mentioned to you, what surprises -- and even like Huckabee, who also has made claims about the West Bank, basically being internally Israeli --

TAPPER: Yes.

MILLER: -- issued a statement condemning this. So, not much from the Trump administration on these matters.

TAPPER: You and former U.S. Ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer recently wrote a piece for "The New York Times" predicting a U.S.-Israeli war on Iran will not bring about a dramatic change in the Middle East when it comes to the status quo. You wrote -- quote -- "The end of this war is unlikely to spur new efforts at Arab-Israeli peacemaking, just as the end of the war in Gaza has not yet led to any serious pathway to peace. The Palestinian national movement is divided and dysfunctional, with weak and aging leadership. Hamas is down but not out" -- unquote. Do you think anything is going to get better in the Middle East?

MILLER: You know, it's a region, Jake, by and large, sadly, tragically. I wish I wasn't so devoted most of my professional life trying to advance American interests to help make it better. But it's a region that eats up American ideas on war making and peacemaking. The only time it shows a better face is when you have leaders, Jake, who are masters of their politics, not president of their ideologies.

And frankly, you don't have leaders with judgment, with prudence, with wisdom. You certainly don't have it in Israel. You do not have it among the Palestinian national movement. It's either Hamas or Abbas. That's not a choice that most Palestinians relish.

And in Washington, I think you have a president, frankly, who has tremendous leverage, should he want to use it, with respect to the Israelis. But he's transactional, and he has gotten himself into quite a bind in Iran. And I just don't think the war is going to prove to be a positive inflection point for just about anybody.

TAPPER: Aaron David Miller, thank you so much. For the first time in more than a month, TSA workers are finally getting paid for all the work they've been doing. But what about those long lines? Many of you waited in at so many U.S. airports. Are those getting any better with those paychecks being dispersed? We're going to go live to one of the busiest airports, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: In our "National League," TSA workers are finally getting their first paychecks after going 45 days with that pay being withheld because of the government shutdown. Department of Homeland Security is using funds from the one big, beautiful bill passed last year to pay those workers.

Of course, the question, if President Trump could use those funds to pay TSA agents now, why couldn't he have taken this action 45 days ago? I asked that question to White House border czar Tom Homan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM HOMAN, BORDER CZAR: Look, I don't understand. Look, I'm a cop. I don't understand the whole, you know, appropriations language, appropriations law. I just -- you know, I'm just glad that President Trump is able to pay the TSA agents. At least that's a start.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: CNN's Ed Lavandera joins us now from Houston's George Bush Intercontinental Airport. And Ed, are lines there finally abating? Are they finally easing down?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the change has just simply been dramatic today here at one hardest hit airports as we reported from here last week. This was an area, the lobby of Terminal E, look at it behind me. You can literally walk up to the TSA security checkpoints now. Waits throughout much of the day have been under 10 minutes. And look at this space in the lobby of the terminal. The makeshift lines had been set up. That actually spilled outside of the terminal into the vehicle passenger drop off area, as well as winding their way downstairs for several floors below us as well. Wide open today. So, a dramatic change.

And what has happened here, you know, the wait times here were four to five hours at one point last week. Now, under 10 minutes. Airport officials, Jake, had been telling us that on a good day, they were able to only keep about 50 percent of the security lanes open here.

Now, there is still the caveat here that it is not all back to normal just yet. There are nine security checkpoints at this airport. Two of them, one here in Terminal E and Terminal A, is where they are open. The rest still remained closed. TSA Pre (ph) is not functioning and neither is the clear process. But it is simply just a dramatic change from what we saw this time last week, even at the end of last week.

[17:30:03]

We do know that airport officials have brought in about nearly three dozen TSA employees to supplement the staff that was here. The call- out rate has dropped a little bit.

It was around 40 percent last week. The last figures we have now is about 35 percent. And Jake, we've also seen ICE agents working much more closely with passengers trying to make their way through the security lines.

We've seen them much more up front and center, checking I.D.s, in some cases helping passengers process their personal luggage, passing it through the x-ray machines. That's a little bit of a change from what we saw last week. So all of that kind of leading toward this dramatic change that you're seeing behind me.

And it has been welcome news from everybody that has been whizzing past us today. Jake?

TAPPER: All right, Ed Lavandera, thanks so much.

As mentioned, I'm here in Los Angeles, California, where there's an intense race for the open gubernatorial seat that is opening up when Governor Gavin Newsom retires as governor. Democrats have held this seat for 15 years. It is quite possible that a Republican will flip it. I'm going to talk to one of the gubernatorial candidates, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:35:35]

TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, cue that election music please. Thanks. The election jam. Sixty-four days until California's open all-party primary election. It's a crowded field among Democrats running for governor. You have eight candidates so far. One of them joins me now. The mayor of San Jose, Matt Mahan.

Thank you so much for being here, Mr. Mayor. Let's talk about some issues that are very important to voters here in California. And ones that people out there care about as well. Like affordability when it comes to housing. The housing crisis. A lot of people in California can't afford to live in the city where they work.

Now you say in San Jose you helped solve this problem by eliminating red tape and expediting permitting. Another problem in the state, as you know, is how much private equity firms and corporations are buying up real estate. And then what they do is they hike rents so they can maximize profits. They evict tenants or they refuse to do repairs so the tenants have to leave.

Would you support legislation to limit corporate or private equity ownership of housing in California?

MAYOR MATT MAHAN (D), SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA: Jake, thanks for having me on and for the question. The short answer is yes, I would. But let me just say the reason I got into this race is because undecided has been beating everybody. Voters have not heard from these Democratic candidates what they'll do to make people's lives better.

And in San Jose we have led the way in building new housing by getting government out of the way. The truth is our environmental regulations, long permitting times, high fees have become a barrier to the very thing we most need which is housing that is affordable to working people. And by being willing to change policies when they aren't working San Jose has led the way on housing affordability, public safety, homelessness.

And I just felt voters deserved a real option, a reformed candidate who is willing to hold Sacramento accountable for better policies.

TAPPER: Another problem when it comes to building affordable housing is NIMBY. People love the idea of affordable housing, just not near them. How do you handle that?

MAHAN: That's right. Look, environmental laws should not be abused to allow endless lawsuits. If you've gone through a public process and already zoned land to say this is where we want housing, it needs to be fast. Part of my housing plan on mahanforcalifornia.com includes streamlined permitting. We should be using A.I. to take all the guesswork out of permitting, setting strict deadlines where cities are held accountable for a yes or no within 30 days.

We can do better but it requires us to shake up the status quo in Sacramento and say no to some of our friends in the Democratic Party who have frankly imposed regulations that aren't working in practice anymore.

TAPPER: Another big problem here in California, this is a big problem across the country is gas prices because of the war in Iran and other factors. But the prices here are crazy because there's a 61 cent per gallon state tax on gas. And as you know, gas taxes are regressive. They actually hit working people harder because they have to travel farther to get there or they're involved in trucking or moving, which are not, you know, wealthy pursuits.

MAHAN: Correct.

TAPPER: Now you have called for a temporary gas tax suspension. My question is why temporary? Why not replace this regressive tax with one that, for instance, taxes a lot of the rich people in San Jose?

MAHAN: Jake, I'm the only Democrat in this race who has called for a suspension of the gas tax, and I suspect that's because I grew up in a small farming town. My family was paycheck to paycheck growing up. I know what it means when gas prices go up by $1 a gallon. That means a real tradeoff between paying rent, putting food on the table, being able to gas up the car to get to work.

TAPPER: Yes, but why not get rid of it altogether?

MAHAN: Look, I think we need to phase it out in favor of a fairer flat fee that means that E.V. owners in wealthier communities are paying for the roads they're driving on and we're not shifting that burden to working people. So you're right. But look, this is like a natural disaster.

It's a man-made disaster. Trump's war in Iran has led to higher gas prices that are hurting people today. We should start by immediately suspending the gas tax to provide relief to the people who need it most. And then you're absolutely right. We should restructure this gas tax so that it's not a tax on working people. And we can do that, but people deserve immediate relief today.

TAPPER: Yes. So here's the horse race question I told you would come. You jumped into the governor's race in January, pretty late, considering the primary is coming up June, June 2nd. I've seen a number of polls among likely voters. Your numbers aren't great right now. The UC Berkeley Citron Center for Public Opinion Research political poll has you at 3 percent. There is no clear leader in the race.

But if you look at some of the top candidates, it seems entirely possible. If you look at, where is it, Steve Hilton and then Chad Bianco, he's there at 11 percent. It is possible that it's going to be two Republicans as the candidates last two standing. Not necessarily, but possible. Are you in it till June 2nd? Like, what happens if it's like a month out and you're still at 3 percent?

[17:40:36]

MAHAN: No, I'm in it, and the reason I jumped in was because voters were not excited about what the other Democrats in the race were offering. They've all been in the race for a year. They're offering more of the same. They're saying their top priority is more taxes, just make government bigger. I say no to that.

It is time to make government better and demand more from our political leaders in Sacramento before we ask people to pay more. That's the approach I've taken in San Jose. We have led the state by reducing crime by over 20 percent. We became the safest big city in the country, the only big city to solve 100 percent of homicides.

We've reduced homelessness faster than other cities, brought thousands of people indoors, gotten thousands of new homes under construction, not by raising taxes, by looking at our policies and saying, if they aren't working, we need to change them, even if it upsets a highly organized interest group that's part of the Democratic Party Coalition. So be it. Our job is to serve the people and deliver better results in people's lives.

TAPPER: After eight years of Gavin Newsom, what grade would you give him as governor?

MAHAN: Frankly, not high. On the big issues, on housing affordability, energy affordability, public safety, homelessness, I think the governor has had some of the right ideas, but we have moved too slowly.

We have not been willing to challenge Sacramento, especially this legislature, to impose policies that actually bring down the cost of living for people.

TAPPER: Is that a C? Is that a D?

MAHAN: Yes, probably in the C range, but it's less about a letter grade, to be honest with you. It's issue by issue. We should be getting people into treatment who are currently dying on our streets and building out shelter capacity, removing barriers to building housing. We aren't moving fast enough or with the urgency that Californians deserve, and that's why I jumped in this race, because we don't need more of the same. We also don't need more MAGA.

We need somebody who's focused on solving problems, and as the only mayor in this race, I've actually been held accountable for delivering results in people's daily lives.

TAPPER: San Jose mayor and Democratic candidate for governor of California, Matt Mahan, thank you so much for being here. Really appreciate it.

MAHAN: Thanks for having me.

TAPPER: Can a Republican actually end up flipping this state red? Is it going to possibly be two Republicans facing off? Well, not if Mayor Mahan has anything to say about it, but we're going to talk about it with two California insiders coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:47:20]

TAPPER: And we're back with our Politics Lead, and we're going to continue to focus on the race for governor of California. And who better to discuss this with than CNN anchor Elex Michaelson and CNN senior political analyst Ron Brownstein, both of whom live here in Los Angeles. Elex, as I don't need to tell you, right now, several polls show the top five candidates for governor in California include two Republicans who are running, Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, who's facing some legal challenges after he seized more than half a million ballots from the state's 2025 election to investigate an alleged processing discrepancy.

And then, of course, there's Steve Hilton, a "Fox" contributor and former strategist in U.K. politics. Overall, there's no clear leader in the race among the Democrats, but it seems entirely possible that the jungle primary, the way they do things here, is the top two vote- getters, whatever party, face off against each other. So you could have two Democrats or you could have two Republicans. It seems entirely possible they could end up with two Republicans.

ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR & CORRESPONDENT: Yes, there's a guy named Paul Mitchell who's sort of the leading data scientist. He put together a model to look at these possibilities. He says it's about a 20 percent to 25 percent chance, which is not zero.

And you think about it, in a state where there are two-to-one Democrats, the bluest state at the height of the Trump resistance, that there could be two Republicans in the final two, and that the Democratic Party could be completely boxed out of leading the biggest, most populous state in the union is a remarkable thing. And it's why the Democratic Party itself is pushing back so hard to try to get some of these guys out of the race.

TAPPER: Well, if you look at the Democrats right now, the top three Democrats are Tom Steyer, the billionaire who ran for president before, and then Congressman Eric Swalwell and Congresswoman, former Congresswoman Katie Porter. Ron, at what point will the pressure on everybody not in that first line to get out of the race so as to increase Democratic support for some of these Democratic candidates? At what point will that happen?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's growing. And there's also going to be pressure on party leaders to endorse, to kind of put a hand on the shoulder of somebody, whether it's Nancy Pelosi or Alex Padilla or even Gavin Newsom. I mean, Gavin Newsom does not want a Republican governor while he is out running for president, who would both be trying to embarrass him every day and also, you know, it would be a talking point for the right during this whole campaign that, you know, the state turned against him.

Look, it is possible there will be two Republicans here, but it is threading the eye of a needle. The total Republican vote, as you're saying, is only about 35 percent, 36 percent. So you need two Republicans to split it almost exactly in half and no Democrat get above 18 percent. Now, you look at it today, you say that might happen, but there is some consolidation already happening. Swalwell has won some big endorsements, California teachers, the SEIU. You -- again, it could happen, but as Elex was saying, maybe about one in five or one in six chance of it happening.

[17:50:19]

TAPPER: And Swalwell might actually get help from Kash Patel, the FBI director who's talking about posting investigatory notes and such. Even though he's not been charged with any crime whatsoever, and that really just puts a target on his back from the Trump administration, which could help him here.

MICHAELSON: It's an in-kind contribution from the team Trump because Swalwell is running on, I'm going to be the biggest fighter against Donald Trump. And in a state like California, that might work. And to show that the Trump administration is afraid of you and going after you could be a real political win for Eric Swalwell.

But you look at that field of even the top folks, and most of the folks in that second tier think that all three of the folks at the top are flawed and have potential political liability.

BROWNSTEIN: And they're right.

MICHAELSON: And all of them could fall for different reasons or potential negative stories could potentially bring them down, which is why all these folks, many of whom are running the last campaign of their life and can't really have been swayed, are going that direction.

BROWNSTEIN: I still think the circuit breaker here is the number you have to get to, to get into this race as a Democrat is pretty low. Paul Mitchell, who you cite, basically if any Democrat gets to 20 percent, they are certain, almost certain to be in it because like I said, you have a total Republican vote of like 35, 36, 37. So the highest that two Republicans could get to would be like 18 or 19 percent.

Now, could that happen? Yes. But I think if there is a real risk of it, the pressure would not only be on the lower tier candidates to drop out, it'll be on the party leaders to send a clear signal to voters with endorsements.

TAPPER: So the Iran war is not the only priority on President Trump's mind. We should note last night on Air Force One, minutes after talking about Iran, Trump showed off several of the latest renderings of the White House ballroom. He mentioned what will be built underneath it. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The military is building a big complex under the ballroom, which has come out recently because of a stupid lawsuit that was filed. And the ballroom essentially becomes a shed for what's being built under the military, including from drones.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: I mean, I know that he's a real estate guy, but at a certain point, like people are losing their lives. He's holding up pictures.

BROWNSTEIN: And look, this is like a second order. I mean, two thirds of the country say he is not focusing enough on what they elected him to do to begin with, which is, you know, deal with their cost of living and make their lives more affordable.

The war itself is seen by most voters as a distraction from that. And then even on the war, he is kind of, you know, talking about his ballroom and his bunker and tearing down the East Wing. I mean, this is a real issue that, you know, he was elected above all, clearly to deal with people's cost of living. And so many voters see him as dealing with anything, anything else, including his own personal interests.

TAPPER: Thanks to both of you. Elex Michelson, of course, is going to have much more tonight on his show. It's called The Story Is with Alex Michelson. You can look at that at midnight Eastern or here in California. It's at 9:00 p.m. Pacific, right here on CNN.

[17:53:24]

Coming up next, hear how the White House today explained why it's letting Russia, of all countries, send oil tankers to Cuba.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Cuba's going to be next. Cuba's going to be -- Cuba's a mess. It's a failing country, and they're going to be next.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Cuba, they're going to be next. That's a warning from President Trump last night. What exactly the President means by that is anyone's guess, although coming after Venezuela and Iran sure seems suggestive.

The President also told reporters last night that he would not oppose Russia from sending Cuba oil shipments. Today, reporters tried to press White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt about this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To clarify, why was the administration OK with Russia sending that oil to Cuba and not other nations?

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Look, again, this was a decision. It'll continue to be made on a case-by-case basis for humanitarian reasons or otherwise, but there's been no firm change in our sanctions policy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In this case, it's Trump giving Putin a pass and letting a Russian-flagged oil tanker with more than 700,000 barrels of oil reportedly reach Cuba today as an energy crisis on that island deepens. CNN's Patrick Oppmann is in Cuba. Patrick, all of this oil drama is playing out as you've conducted a fascinating new interview.

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Thank you so much, Jake. Yes, a member of the Castro family, an influencer, grandson of Fidel Castro, one of the most vocal and public members of this family decided to sit down with us, and he says, never mind about communism.

We actually would welcome, he says, speaking for himself, deal with Donald Trump. I don't like his threats is what he told me. But if he opens up the island, if he improves the economy here, then it could all work out for the best. And so let's just listen to this conversation, which was more than a little surprising.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OPPMANN: What would your grandfather Fidel Castro say that you're more capitalist than communist?

SANDRO CASTRO, FIDEL CASTRO'S GRANDSON AND SOCIAL MEDIA INFLUENCER (through translator): My grandfather was a person who had his principles like everyone else, but he also respected others opinions. That's my way of thinking.

OPPMANN: But all the capitalists had to leave Cuba.

CASTRO (through translator): There are many people in Cuba that think in a capitalistic way. There are many people here who want to have capitalism with sovereignty.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

OPPMANN: And so, you know, it's interesting to hear that because of course, the Cuban government has said their official statements have been that they won't accept the U.S. telling them how to change their economy in their country. But then you have a member, you know, the black sheep, definitely of the most famous family on this island saying, you know, we are now welcome in capitalism. We are willing to make a deal. But of course, we still have to be in control of our country.

[18:00:23]

TAPPER: All right, Patrick Oppmann, thanks so much.