Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

First Anti-Weaponization Fund Applicant Speaks To CNN; Former Trump Attorney Says He Wants Payout From $1.8B DOJ Fund; Colbert To Sign Off "The Late Show" As CBS Ends Iconic Show; Republicans Revolt Over Trump's $1.8B Anti-Weaponization Fund; Sources: Iran Restarted Drone Production During Ceasefire. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired May 21, 2026 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: All right, thanks very much to my panel. Really appreciate you all being here. Thanks to you at home for watching as well. But don't go anywhere because Jake Tapper is standing by for "The Lead."

And Jake, I will not be here tomorrow. So enjoy your Memorial Day weekend.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Have fun with your babies, Kasie.

HUNT: Thank you.

TAPPER: We'll look for more tomorrow in "The Arena" even though you won't be there.

HUNT: Sounds good. See you soon.

[17:00:44]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Do you want a piece of that $1.8 billion Trump fund? Well, get in line. The Lead starts right now.

From legitimate cases of grievance to January 6th rioters to election deniers, even a T.V. network many, many coming forward claiming they too were wronged by the federal government and they want in on Trump's $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund. Two of the men seeking claims will be here on The Lead.

And new U.S. intelligence revealing Iran is rebuilding its military arsenal faster than expected. What could this mean if the U.S. restarts its military campaign against Iran? I'm going to talk to a top member of the House Intelligence Committee about that.

And we're just hours away from Stephen Colbert's final show. Is CBS hurting itself by canceling the late night comedian? My guest ahead is trying to make that case.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. The lead tonight, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is on the defense over the Justice Department's $1.776 billion Anti- Weaponization Fund. Convening with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill today for more than 90 minutes in what sources call the tense meeting over the controversial pool of money. Blanche was just spotted this afternoon arriving at the White House as the fund risks turning into a massive political liability for the Trump administration, depending upon, of course, how they dole out the daughters -- dollars.

So who exactly can apply for a piece of this nearly $1.8 billion? Well, I'm not limit -- it's not limited to President Trump's closest allies.

2020 Election denier Mike Lindell, the CEO of MyPillow, says he plans to apply for the fund, calling it Trump's way of looking out for people that were attacked unfairly. His false election claims, of course, led to several defamation lawsuits, including one where a judge ordered Lindell to pay $2.3 million in damages to an ex Dominion Voting Systems executive. Other lawsuits from Dominion and Smartmatic are ongoing. An attorney for the far right Channel One American News Network tells CNN that the company is also seriously considering applying for some of the fund. OAN settled lawsuits with Dominion and Smartmatic for undisclosed amounts after promoting falsehoods about the election and voting machines. Then there is the biggest club of potential fund applicants and nearly 1,600 people convicted or charged from the U.S. Capitol attack on January 6, 2021. People such as Rachel Powell or Brandon Fellows, both of whom spoke to CNN's Donie O'Sullivan.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RACHEL POWELL, PARDONED JANUARY 6TH RIOTER: My crime that day of breaking a window, technically that's a misdemeanor charge and yet I had three years of a house arrest. Than having to endure everything I did through prison and getting a five year sentence on top of that, that's clearly weaponization.

BRANDON FELLOWS, PARDONED JANUARY 6TH RIOTER: I rationalize people, even violent people getting paid for that day because the government set it up. And also on top of that, they stole the election.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: OK. Attorneys for the former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio tell CNN that he also intends to apply for funds. At 22 years, Tarrio received the longest sentence for any January 6th defendant for his role in shaping how the neo fascist militia group led violence that day. In addition to a hefty potential check, you'll recall, on his first day in office, President Trump pardoner commuted the sentences of everyone charged with January 6th related crimes, yet some of them have been since rearrested. In fact, a December report from the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, they found that of the pardoned insurrectionists, at least 33 had been charged in other crimes. Six were charged with child related sex crimes, five charged with illegal possession of a weapon, five DUIs, two resulting in fatalities, two charged with rape. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche says violent conduct will be weighed by the five person commission responsible for approving these applications. And that commission is yet to be appointed.

I want to bring right now CNN's Chief Legal Correspondent Paula Reid.

And Paula, you spoke to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche at length yesterday about the details of this fund. What more can you share with us tonight?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Jake, from that conversation with the acting attorney general, it was clear that he does not think the criticism of this fund is valid. And that was somewhat surprising because the Justice Department certainly they put forth a lot of money, but they haven't put forth a lot of details about how they're going to prevent this from becoming a feeding frenzy. So in our subsequent reporting today, talking to other people involved in this settlement, it's clear that they really didn't have any outside voices at the table as they were putting this together. And by that I mean many of the people involved in this, you know, have been working on Trump related cases over the past five or six years. People either represented January 6th defendants or, for example, Todd Blanche represented President Trump.

[17:05:27]

And Jake, these people feel in their soul that the Justice Department was unfair to President Trump and that they were the victims of lawfare. And that's part of why maybe they haven't tried harder to make their case to the American people about why this is necessary. But I pressed the acting attorney general on this. Let's take a listen to what he said to taxpayers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REID: But wouldn't the average taxpayer respond and say, OK, but why is that now my problem? Why do my tax dollars now need to go to people who are upset about their involvement in investigations?

TODD BLANCHE, ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Well, the -- if you're just upset, you're not getting it done. On the other hand, I think if you said to the American taxpayer that there was a horrible wrong committed by your government and now you can apply and you can have your lawyer's fees back, you can -- you can be compensated for what you lost financially, what American would say, oh my gosh, that's terrible? I mean, I don't know, I very much disagree with the idea that the American taxpayer is indignant about the fact that a victim of weaponization, OK, a victim who suffered, whether it was legal fees, lost a job, had their life turned upside down in a way that was not appropriate. If it was appropriate, there should be no compensation. And that's why we have five commissioners who will take a look at it.

But I do not think the American people have issues with that. To the contrary, I think they do want their tax dollars spent on things like that. (END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: So he is asking people to trust that these, as of yet unnamed five members who will vet these claims will prevent their -- from being abuse against this fund. But he has about a month to announce who will be vetting these claims. And as he found out on the Hill today, again, this is not just a few people pushing back on this. There is bipartisan pushback, especially from key members of Congress that he needs to get funding on a lot of key priorities.

TAPPER: All right, Paula Reid, thank you so much. Here now with us is the former Trump advisor Michael Caputo. This is his very first CNN interview since he made the first claim to receive some of the Anti- Weaponization Fund on Tuesday.

Michael, first of all, let me start off by suggesting -- by saying that I am in no way suggesting that your case is related to any of the people who committed acts of violence on January 6th. There's a separate issue and I'm not lumping you in with them. You have a discreet separate manner.

MICHAEL CAPUTO, FMR. ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS, HHS: Understood.

TAPPER: OK. You acted quickly to take advantage of the fund. You're requesting a $2.7 million payout. You're alleging that you were targeted in the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation into the alleged links between Russia and Trump's campaign in 2016. Tell us what happened to you that made you want to apply for these funds.

CAPUTO: Well, I think what's missing here in your -- in your preamble is that in the first quarter of 2021, after Joe Biden was inaugurated, they initiated another illegal FBI criminal investigation into me. And the people who helped me make a film about, about Hunter Biden and Joe Biden shaking down Ukraine when he was vice president, they didn't like my film, so they decided to open yet another federal criminal investigation, which, Jake, that was alive and well all the way until December in the first year of the Trump administration. Nobody could find my case. It's one of those ones in the closet, I guess, a prohibitive access case.

But it was -- when it was closed, curiously, I was a senior policy advisor on the Trump campaign, actually in charge of weaponization policy development, they actually put a search warrant on all my bank accounts, my e-mails and everything a week after Donald Trump was elected in 2024. And they were actively searching all of my information until it was closed in mid-December. This is weaponization in its finest form and by the way, a continuing conspiracy because my family endured for nine years across two different stints of Democrat and their conjugal media weaponizing the government against me and my family.

TAPPER: So let --

CAPUTO: Now, what happened to us? It's been pretty clear.

TAPPER: OK.

CAPUTO: It was happening when I was a commentator on CNN. You know, my family fell apart. And you know, we -- I lost all my opportunities, my business went south, I spent my children's college funds, we lost all of our savings, we had to leave our hometown, we lost our house and I lost my health. I went down with cancer, damn near died. And in the end, my doctor said it was largely stress driven. So from my perspective, I'm first in line here.

[17:10:02]

And I got to tell you, there are thousands more who deserve it even more than my family does. Even more. I mean, that comes to mind Waleed Ferris (ph) and his family, he never did a thing and he won't even tell me how much he spent on legal fees. This is really welcome news to all of us.

TAPPER: So let me ask you, first of all. So you're saying there was an investigation into you. I'm talking about the second investigation you just referred to --

CAPUTO: Yes.

TAPPER: -- because you were making a film, you were making a documentary about Hunter Biden --

CAPUTO: Yes.

TAPPER: -- and Joe Biden and Ukraine and such. What exactly were they investigating? Because that just sounds like a matter of freedom of the press and freedom of speech to me, the way you describe it.

CAPUTO: Yes, I guess it should. It's funny how we're also worried about what happens with Russia when we're -- when we've been really, in a lot of ways, we live there. This is exactly what would happen in Russia.

The fact is, I made a film and it was alleged through manipulation of the media. You know, the whole thing. The ODNI came out with a report alleging that somebody close to Trump made a film for a network. And then they talked to the media that night and said, that person is Michael Caputo. I actually now I have Judicial Watch getting all of my -- all the e-mails related and all the different communications. Judicial Watches in the ODNI while I'm suing FBI, DOJ, and we're getting document production now.

But, Jake, what's really interesting is I always thought the FBI was awful. You know, after this started, I thought you should shatter and scatter it to the winds. But I'm getting things from cloaked e-mail addresses, copies of e-mails clearly from FBI agents that are really pissed at the way this thing's been run. I have e-mails that prove the FBI leaked my, you know, my allegation that I was paid by the Russians to make this film to a reporter. I have the e-mails.

So, I mean --

TAPPER: So --

CAPUTO: -- I'm going forward with this -- with this fund for sure.

TAPPER: So the compensation that you're seeking is largely because of the money that you had to spend on legal representation during both Crossfire Hurricane and the second investigation?

CAPUTO: No, no.

TAPPER: No? OK. Tell me -- what is -- so you're seeking $2.7 million.

CAPUTO: No. No. I mean, really, a guy like me ends up, since I was never charged, I didn't go through trial, I end up paying, you know, a couple of $100,000 in legal fees with these guys like Roger Stone, Paul Manafort, Steve Koch. They got from, you know, $4 to $20 million in legal fees because they got really buried by the weaponized state. This political weaponization gets really expensive when you're on trial.

They tried to get me there. I went through the House interrogation, Senate interrogation, Mueller interrogation. I hired very expensive attorneys. But if you're not charged, you don't have the terrible charges that other people have had. No, I believe, really my lawyers and I have been working on separate litigation, which we haven't filed, trying to put this kind of a value to what happened.

But this is lost income. This is lost savings. This is the fact that I couldn't work. And of course, the one thing is 2.7 million that were put in there. I made very clear the letter to the acting attorney general this number may change, but we couldn't put a number on was my health --

TAPPER: Yes.

CAPUTO: -- damn near killed me. And so that's hard to put a finger on. And also, by the way, I believe you look at General Flynn and Carter Page, who have recently gotten settlements from the same fund. It was about $1 1/2 million or 2 million. Carter's not done yet.

Look at what happened with Peter Strzok and his girlfriend Lisa Page when they were, you know, playing, you know, kissy face in the FBI headquarters, they were sending e-mails about how they wanted to stop President Trump from serving out his term, they got a couple million bucks. Iran got one point, what, $4 billion from this fund? All these people complaining about it.

TAPPER: Yes.

CAPUTO: Spare me the hand wringing.

TAPPER: Michael Caputo, we're so glad your health is significantly improved. It's good to have you on. Thank you again for being here.

CAPUTO: Yes. Jake, thank you for being fair as always.

TAPPER: Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen also wants in on this $1.8 billion fund. We're going to hear him out. Plus, the growing Republican revolt on Capitol Hill against this money pot, especially when it comes to potential cop beaters receiving any of it. And later, the president's plans for a massive arch in his honor moving forward today. How a report from 1924 is helping him get around the need for congressional approvals?

[17:14:31]

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY: Now I go on. I mean, the document is, as it stands right now, several pages long and I have every, every intention of finishing it today, if not the latest tomorrow, running my ass down the street to FedEx and shipping it off to Washington D.C.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, that was President Trump's former fixer and personal attorney Michael Cohen yesterday on his podcast saying he intends to join the group, Michael Caputo from you just heard from and January 6 rioters and others in staking a claim to part of President Trump's new $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund", which is paid for by taxpayers, of course. And guess what? We have Michael Cohen right here.

Thank you so much for being here, Michael. Good to see you again.

COHEN: Good to see you.

TAPPER: So why do you think you deserve money from this fund?

COHEN: Well, like I said on my substack, if there is any two people who are connected in terms of the causes of action that Donald Trump brought in that $10 billion lawsuit against the DOJ and the IRS --

TAPPER: For the IRS for hit for his tax returns leak.

COHEN: The identical scenario happened to me not just once, but actually twice. Interestingly enough, the first time it happened, it happened by a guy named Jonathan Fry, who was an IRS agent out of San Francisco. He downloaded my information, put it on a thumb drive used improper -- improperly used the FinCEN system and then gave that thumb drive to Michael Avenatti, who gave it to Ronan Farrow, and then reported on it.

[17:20:03]

I then ultimately learned about two years ago, this is during now the Biden administration, I learned two years ago that an individual named Charles E. Littlejohn, who is the individual who stole Donald Trump's tax documents -- TAPPER: Yes.

COHEN: -- had stolen mine as well. So it didn't just happen to me once, it happened twice.

TAPPER: So but did Ronan Farrow's article result in your being prosecuted? Is that -- is that -- we're you suggesting that's the connective tissue?

COHEN: No, what I'm suggesting is that it's improper for my tax documents to be --

TAPPER: OK.

COHEN: -- released. However, what ultimately led to it were people like James Comey, people like Andrew Weissman, people like Jeffrey Berman, Robert Khuzami, who turned around and were on some sort of a mission within which to use me in order to damage and to harm Trump. And it all started with the fake dossier, the Steele dossier.

TAPPER: Right, but that -- but you weren't, you didn't go to prison because of the Steele dossier. You went to prison for other reasons.

COHEN: Well, I -- eventually, yes, but it all started with the Steele dossier. Remember, there were 13 allegations that were raised against me, none of which were true. Never been to Prague, never worked at Russian conference.

TAPPER: Who was the one on T.V. that said you'd never been to Prague?

COHEN: It was you.

TAPPER: It was me.

COHEN: That's right. I mean, you were -- you were actually one of, if not the first to turn around.

TAPPER: It's a different Michael Cohen.

COHEN: Exactly. If assuming that it was even a Michael Cohen, because they were never able to prove that either.

TAPPER: Let me ask you because --

COHEN: But what ultimately --

TAPPER: Yes.

COHEN: -- happened and part of my charges were the tax violations. And as I've said, I take responsibility that the amount of tax that was paid was inaccurate. I do also want to remind everybody what I also said, which was that I have never had a tax violation in my life. I was a first time offender who absolutely --

TAPPER: Right.

COHEN: -- had the most comprehensive documents put together. I never had overseas businesses or nominees.

TAPPER: But what you're suggesting here, and this ties into another question I want to ask you, is that because your tax information was leaked, which resulted in it going to Avenatti, going to Ronan, and then obviously people started looking into you and you ultimately went to prison, you're saying that was kind of like --

COHEN: Yes.

TAPPER: -- the Campbell's nose under the tent. You're suggesting that this was all happening as a way of people wanting to get Trump --

COHEN: Absolutely.

TAPPER: -- using you. You caused a big stir, earlier this year you wrote that you felt, quote, "pressured and coerced" by prosecutors for Letitia James and for Alvin Bragg when they were like trying to lean on you to get information for their cases. Tell us more about that.

COHEN: Well, no, what I had said and again, I'm glad that you actually stated it properly, I felt --

TAPPER: You felt, yes.

COHEN: -- it's my personal feelings towards it.

TAPPER: Right.

COHEN: Now, mind you, anybody who has ever been subpoenaed to testify feels pressured and coerced. I actually have, which I gave to my counsel, a book. It was one of about three or four, three ring books that are filled with about six, 700 pages each that I had to review to ensure what point I was trying to make there is that what they do is they base their questions on information. This is all normal prosecutorial --

TAPPER: Right.

COHEN: -- stuff. However, was the case really even worth bringing? You talking about a violation predicated on what?

TAPPER: Talking about Stormy Daniels?

COHEN: Well, one was Stormy Daniels. Another one had to do with his --

TAPPER: Right.

COHEN: -- his personal finance statement.

TAPPER: So let me just ask you a quick yes or no because I'm out of time. But I do want to ask you this. This fund is going to be supervised by Todd Blanche and basically Trump is going to get to decide who gets it. Do you really think Donald Trump's going to want you to have any money?

COHEN: Probably not. TAPPER: OK.

COHEN: But wouldn't that be something if he actually decided to do it?

TAPPER: It would be something. Michael Cohen, always interesting, always a pleasure. Thanks so much.

Live images outside the Ed Sullivan Theater here in New York right now, fans getting ready for tonight's very last late show with Stephen Colbert.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think he's changed the format for late night.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, it's like a bittersweet, you know?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I hope he goes out with a bang. I mean, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think this is going to be a really good show. So I think anything he does is going to be amazing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[17:24:13]

TAPPER: What might be next for the comedian? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHNNY CARSON, HOST, "THE TONIGHT SHOW WITH JOHNNY CARSON": I bid you a very heartfelt good night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: In our Pop Culture Lead that was Johnny Carson signing off from his 30-year run as king of late night host of NBC's "The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson." Then in 2015, after 33 years and 6,028 shows, David Letterman surpassed Carson as the longest serving late night talk show host.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID LETTERMAN, HOST, "LATE SHOW WITH DAVID LETTERMAN": All right, that's pretty much all I got. The only thing I have left to do for the last time on a television program. Thank you and good night.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Not all goodbyes, of course, are as amicable. Conan O'Brien initially started on NBC replacing Jay Leno on the "Tonight Show." That was short lived in part because of low ratings. Lots of backstory there, of course. NBC brought back Leno. Here's how O'Brien said goodbye to the "Tonight Show."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CONAN O'BRIEN, HOST, "THE TONIGHT SHOW": This is the best job in the world. I absolutely love doing it. Every comedian dreams of hosting a "Tonight Show" and for seven months I got to do it and I did it my way with people I love. I do not regret one second of anything that we've done here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Tonight there's going to be another sign off after hosting 22 years CBS's "The Late Show" after hosting 11 seasons of CBS's "The Late show," it's Stephen Colbert's turn to say goodbye. But his send- off is a lot more political, of course.

[17:30:04]

Let's bring in former New York Times media reporter Bill Carter. Bill, CBS says this was a financial decision, 100 percent. Of course, the backdrop was a big merger. CBS's parent company, Paramount, led by Shari Redstone at the time, was looking to merge with Skydance, a deal that needed FCC approval. How much do you think politics factored into the decision by CBS and Paramount at the time to cancel the show?

BILL CARTER, FORMER MEDIA REPORTER, NEW YORK TIMES: Well, I would probably say 100 percent, but I'll give them the benefit of the doubt that there was a financial reason for it. But everything else around it just tells you strongly how the politics were a factor. I mean, they came to Stephen a couple of years before this, during the Biden administration, I point out, and they were going to get him down for a long-term contract. They didn't do that.

Trump comes in. The merger is going to happen if he approves it. You know, they go through the process of doing it. They then have this deal with "60 Minutes" where they get money out of "60 Minutes" in a settlement, and Stephen Colbert comes on the air, calls it a big, fat bribe. Three days later, they cancel him, and seven days later, the merger goes through. Those things make you think there's a lot more going on than just the financial aspect.

TAPPER: Something else that's odd, of course, or important, I should say, isn't just removing Colbert. They're canceling the Late Show altogether. Now, there are those who argue that the economics of late night don't make as much sense these days with declining advertising revenue and streaming options and such. But in a new "New York Times" op-ed, you say CBS is canceling itself. What do you mean?

CARTER: Well, look, CBS created that show, David Letterman created that show, but they hired him to do it, and they had never had that kind of presence in late night. And he put them on the map for 30 years, and Stephen came on and continued that. And it's been a franchise for them, and they're walking away from that at a time when networks are considered, you know, a backward-moving thing.

And if they want to be a network of significance, you would think they want to keep at least the franchise going. Even if they think Colbert is too expensive, couldn't they find a less expensive alternative? No, they're backing away from it. And to me, I just think they've diminished themselves, and they've assented to that diminishment by just saying, we're not going to do it anymore, we're walking away from this.

And you have to say, at least a part of this is because the atmosphere is very tough. They're facing a President who is examining everything in late night with his eye of, if you make fun of me, I'm going to come after you. And he's the first president to do that, Jake. I mean, every president, you know this, every president has taken barks from late night hosts. That's what they're hired to do, really, to go on and comment on the news.

So it just looks to me like CBS decided, we're going to get out of this game, run away, hide or whatever. And it's a big loss for them, in my opinion.

TAPPER: One of the things that's odd about the financial excuse is that there are ways to cut costs. I mean, Seth Meyers had to get rid of his band. "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon," I think, does reruns now on Fridays instead of new shows. Colbert had a big band. I mean, there obviously were ways to cut costs. And the other thing is, and Kimmel has made this point, having a show like that, you can't judge it just by the revenue versus cost. It's prestige, so local affiliates want the show. Colbert was doing well in the ratings, so that also helped local affiliates. I mean, it's a much more complicated thing.

CARTER: Absolutely. And they didn't come to Stephen and say, you're in trouble, we have to find a way to economize. They didn't do that. They didn't make that move. So he didn't get that opportunity. And what Kimmel is pointing to, really, the idea that their affiliates are getting prestige, but also getting, they're paying for that show. They have to pay the network for fees for the programming.

So they're not going to be doing that anymore. So they're losing that. They also drive viewers to the local news --

TAPPER: Right.

CARTER: -- because if you watch Colbert, you probably watch the CBS local news. There are a million other factors. And if you want to just say, let's just look at the narrow thing about advertising revenue being down, it looks like Hollywood accounting, which has always been questionable.

TAPPER: What is next for Colbert, do you think? I know he's working on a "Lord of the Rings" script, but what else?

CARTER: Well, that's a real open question. And, you know, he has really not pointed to anything. I mean, you know, well, he mentioned a sort of Netflix and passing at one point. I'm not sure what he's going to do. I think he's going to take time. I'm pretty sure he's going to take time. What I know is that he is a different talent. This is a guy who was a sketch comedian. He did a spectacular show before where he was a character for nine years. And that is a great strength of his. So I could see him doing a lot of things. I have just wildly speculated that he could easily do a one-man show on Broadway, for example.

TAPPER: Yes.

CARTER: I think he'd be great at that.

TAPPER: Yes.

CARTER: So that's just one idea. I don't think that doesn't mean he has that idea, but it's just a thought I've had.

TAPPER: Bill Carter, always great to have you on. He literally wrote the book on the late shift. Bill Carter, thanks so much. Great to have you.

[17:35:05]

CARTER: Anytime.

TAPPER: Coming up next, some of the strong pushback from Senate Republicans to that $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund. Plus, why President Trump said today that he might not attend his oldest son's wedding this weekend. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): These people don't deserve restitution. Many of them deserve to be in prison. I mean, this is just stupid on stilts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: You heard that, right. Stupid on stilts. Maybe that's a North Carolina expression. I'm not familiar with it. I like it, though. Just a portion of the backlash from Senate Republicans today over The Justice Department's $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund created, critics say, to compensate targets -- targeted Trump allies. Some people call it a slush fund for Trump's friends.

[17:40:09]

The DOJ's push for this fund has now derailed GOP plans to pass a major immigration enforcement package. Senators are now heading home for Memorial Day recess. Because they say the fund blindsided them and they're at odds at how to rein it in. Let's discuss this and more with the panel.

Thank you so much, John and Alyssa, for being here. Some reporters asked President Trump today about all the pushback to this fund. Not just from Democrats, but from lawmakers who are on the Republican side of the aisle as well. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you losing control of the Senate, Senate Republicans?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I don't know. I really don't know. I can tell you I only do what's right.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Alyssa, is he? Is he looting? I mean, they went home instead of trying to take up an immigration bill because this was such a pain. This was such a distraction.

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: He certainly, at least temporarily, just derailed this reconciliation package. But this is a number of things happening at once. Most Senate Republicans are furious that the President did not back John Cornyn.

This is a beloved, someone who's been in the Senate for nearly 20 years, somebody who raises a ton of money for Senate Republicans. And they're seeing the Senate majority actually on the line, something that, you know, weeks ago many of us didn't think was possible. And here in supporting Ken Paxton, you're going to have to divert resources to that race that Texas shouldn't even be a race that Republicans are having to play in.

So then add this slush fund that they have to go explain to their constituents why there's a billion plus dollar fund for people who were weaponized at a time when gas prices are $5 to $6 a gallon. You've got, you know, inflation rising. You've got a lot of folks out of work. It's kind of a disaster scenario at this moment ahead of the midterms for Senate Republicans.

TAPPER: And not to mention that, there's also the issue of this billion dollars for the ballroom and other security measures. The President was asked about the congressional funding needed for that, which remains in jeopardy. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: If they want to spend money on securing the White House, I think it would be very, very much a good expenditure. But the ballroom is being built.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But what if Congress doesn't sign off on the security?

TRUMP: Then the White House won't be a very secure place.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So, I mean, what's your take on this? If the President and future presidents are going to have this ballroom, and it should be secure, obviously, do you think Congress should just get on board or?

JOHN AVLON, AUTHOR, "LINCOLN & THE FIGHT FOR PEACE": Absolutely not. It's another billion dollar slush fund. He said it was going to be paid for by private donors. That's corrupt enough. But the genesis of this is corrupt from the beginning. Tearing down the East Wing, built by Teddy Roosevelt, without any consultation with Congress, the American people. It's not his house. It's our house.

Anyone running for president said, we should tear it down if it's built, keep all the security underground, but rebuild the East Wing as it was. It's corrupt from the beginning, and it shouldn't be funded by the taxpayers.

TAPPER: So this isn't the only project going on in Washington. I bring you news from Washington, D.C. What I see as I drive around, a lot of construction going on. Today, the Commission of Fine Arts did approve plans for Trump's proposed triumphal arch, although they knocked off eight feet and four lions from the structure. No animals were hurt in the process, I have to assure you. It would still be about 250 feet high. The President was pressed on whether he'll need congressional approval for that. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: No, no, we're doing it. The land is owned by Secretary, by the Interior Department. We don't need anything from Congress.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: So the administration is citing a report from 1924 for this. They called for two shorter columns not far away. They were never constructed, though, those shorter columns. So the administration's already arguing this has already been approved because of the approval for those shorter columns. Alyssa?

GRIFFIN: I mean, this is just a tough sell. First, historically, monuments are built in honor of presidents when they leave office by others.

TAPPER: Well, he says this is going to be called the Trump Arch.

GRIFFIN: The Arch de Trump. But also, this goes through a congressional appropriation process. That's how you build things in Washington, D.C. That's how you build monuments. Both this and the slush fund, I actually think, are going to face some significant pushback. I think that Congress is going to, in some way, try to reclaim the power of the purse.

I mean, that billion-plus dollars was, to my understanding, was allocated for the IRS for certain purposes, but not for this purpose. And here, I mean, I'm sure there's a way you could try to redirect those interior budgets for this, but that certainly wasn't what it was congressionally approved to do. And there's always the backstop of the courts to intervene as well.

TAPPER: And, John, was it Everett Dirksen who said you have a billion dollars here and a billion dollars there? Pretty soon, you're talking about real money?

AVLON: Pretty soon, you're talking real money. Everett Dirksen, I dig the reference. Like, honey over gravel is how his voice was described. Yes, look, I mean, but here, too. We -- past presidents had common sense and common decency enough not to destroy monuments or build things out of the way on the people's plaza, on the people's grounds.

This can't be allowed to occur. In the future, we're going to need to rebuild the guardrails and make sure that rules are enforced. But some kind of trumped-up, you know, crony commission is not the same as Congress.

TAPPER: So, speaking of interesting timing, the President was asked today if he plans to attend his son, Donald Trump Jr.'s, upcoming wedding to Florida socialite and model Bettina Anderson, I think, am I pronouncing that right? Bettina Anderson. Here's his response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[17:45:16]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your son's wedding this weekend, by the way?

TRUMP: He'd like me to go, but it's going to be just a small little private affair, and I'm going to try and make it. I'm in the midst. I said, you know, this is not good timing for me. I have a thing called Iran and other things. That's one I can't win on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Alyssa, is he really going to skip Don Jr.'s wedding?

GRIFFIN: You got to go, Mr. President. Please go to your son's wedding. I'm certain he will go. I think the optics of missing it would be terrible. And I actually think that clip goes on to him say, I've known him for a very long time. That is a child, of course.

TAPPER: That's true. Fact check, true. He has no -- Donald Trump has known Donald Trump Jr. for a very --

AVLON: Very long time.

GRIFFIN: But I wish the happy couple their best. But, yes, the President --

TAPPER: We all do. And we wish that the father was there.

AVLON: That'd be nice.

TAPPER: Of course. Thanks to both of you.

If Iran quick -- is Iran quickly rebuilding its military arsenal? What new U.S. intelligence is revealing? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:35]

TAPPER: Our World Lead now, multiple sources familiar with U.S. intelligence assessments tell CNN that Iran has restarted some of its drone production during this six-week ceasefire that President Trump declared in early April. CNN is also told U.S. intelligence indicates that Iran's military is reconstituting much faster than initially estimated. Still, President Trump insists the U.S. is in control of the situation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We have total control of the Strait of Hormuz, as you know, with our blockade. The blockade's been 100 percent effective. Nobody's been able to get through it. It's like a steel wall. It's our navy. We have the greatest military anywhere in the world. We wiped out their navy. We wiped out their airport. I think they're down to about, I would say we knocked out 85 percent of their missile capacity. It's very hard for them now to build missiles, to build drones.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: We're joined now by CNN's Natasha Bertrand. Tell us more about what you're hearing Iran is up to according to intelligence assessments.

NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Jake, so recent U.S. intel assessments actually assess that Iran is rebuilding its military industrial capacity at a much faster rate than previously anticipated. One U.S. official actually told us that, "The Iranians have exceeded all timelines the intel community had for reconstitution of their military capabilities." And one big example of that is how fast they have been able to rebuild their drone program.

They have restarted that program, we're told. They have already been able to produce a lot of new drones, and their drone program could actually be fully reconstituted, we are told, within six months. And that's worth noting as well because, of course, those drones pose a huge threat to Iran's regional adversaries, many of which are U.S. allies.

They have proven to be extremely lethal, these drones. They -- one of these drone attacks actually hit a U.S. military facility early in the conflict and killed U.S. service members. So the drones do pose a huge threat. And even prior to them reconstituting their drone program, they still had thousands of one-way attack drones still in their inventory. So this is just adding to that.

In addition to this, they are also able to, we are told, rebuild, and they have been reconstituting their bombed-out missile sites that the U.S. did attack, of course, throughout the course of the war, as well as their missile launchers, many of which were buried underground. That they have now been able to dig out and produce more of.

And the reason for this is multifaceted. Part of it is that Russia and China, we're told, have continued to provide assistance to the Iranians. The Chinese have continued, for example, to provide missile components to the Iranians throughout the course of the war, something that Beijing denies, but that U.S. intelligence has seen very clearly.

And the Russians, of course, have continued to provide dual-use technology, drone technology, drone tactic advice as well to the Iranians that has allowed them to continue to produce and manufacture a lot of this equipment. So bottom line here is that while U.S. Central Command Chief Brad Cooper testified to lawmakers earlier this week that Iran's military industrial capacity will take them years to rebuild, in fact, it's only been set back by a matter of months, according to U.S. intel assessments, Jake.

TAPPER: Pentagon responded.

BERTRAND: I'm sorry, you broke up there for a sec.

TAPPER: How has the Pentagon responded to this reporting and to this information?

BERTRAND: Yes, so U.S. Central Command actually declined to comment, saying they don't comment on intelligence matters, but we did get a statement back from Sean Parnell, who is the chief Pentagon spokesperson.

He said, "America's military is the most powerful in the world and has everything it needs to execute at the time and place of the President's choosing. Didn't exactly address the reporting there that Iran has rebuilt its military capacity in a significant way.

TAPPER: They're completely nonresponsive to the point. All right, Natasha Bertrand, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

[17:54:41]

First today on CNN, the DNC's autopsy of the 2024 presidential election. It had been kept secret for a long time, but CNN was first to get their hands on it. So what did go so wrong for the Democratic Party and for Vice President Kamala Harris? Why did it take so long for us as the American people to get our eyes on this report? And what does this say about Democrats in the elections going forward?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, Jeffrey Epstein's longtime assistant testified on Capitol Hill today as part of Congress's investigation into the dead pedophile and his sex trafficking network. Sarah Kellen was once labeled a potential Epstein co-conspirator, she said today that she was actually one of his victims. We're going to go live to Capitol Hill for more details of her closed door interview.

Plus, it's the report that the Democratic National Committee fought for you to not see. CNN has obtained the party's autopsy of its 2024 presidential election loss and it paints a pretty dismal picture for Democrats. We're going to dig through the key findings with a top official from the Harris campaign.

[18:00:07] And a veteran struggling with --