Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

U.S. And Iran Reach Tentative Agreement, But Deal Still Needs Trump's Sign-Off; Former Judges Challenging DOJ Compensation Fund; Three Months Since Attack Killed 168 Children At Girls' School; Some Maine Voters Struggle To Look Beyond Platner's Past; Jill Biden: "I Thought, Oh My God He's Having A Stroke". Aired 5-6p ET

Aired May 28, 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]

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: The show on X and Instagram at The Arena CNN, but don't go anywhere. Jake Tapper is standing by for The Lead. Hi, Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Kasie Case, how are you?

HUNT: I'm well.

TAPPER: Good show.

HUNT: Thank you so much.

TAPPER: Really good show today.

HUNT: Thank you.

TAPPER: It's a must watch and if you miss it, of course you can always watch it on the -- on the app, on the CNN app.

HUNT: Is this just for your mom?

TAPPER: Or you can listen, or you can listen to the CNN podcast. Fantastic work for you.

HUNT: All right. Well, I'll be watching the lead. Have a great show.

TAPPER: All right. We'll look for more tomorrow on The Arena. Could one wrong move unravel a ceasefire proposal that seems to be close to maybe happening? The Lead starts right now.

A series of strikes from the U.S. and Iran. Yet today, word of a tentative ceasefire deal. Really? We're going to sort out what both sides are saying here.

And plans in the works to put President Trump's face on a $250 bill. Why? Well, the treasury secretary says there is good reason.

And 300 gold bars, such as these, 2 million in cash, 35 luxury watches. No, this is not from an episode of Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous, if you remember that one. The FBI says this was all inside the home of a now former CIA officer. What we're learning about his arrest, ahead.

Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. We start with breaking news in our World Lead, a tentative agreement between the U.S. and Iran has been reached. Despite the U.S. and Iran unleashing fresh strikes against one another in the last 24 hours. A U.S. official says the deal would do two big things. One, reopen the Strait of Hormuz. That's a major U.S. demand. And two, the deal would start a 60-day negotiation period to address Iran's nuclear weapons program, including the fate of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

Now, there remain many sticking points in the language here that would have to be worked through. And of course, if passed as prologue, it seems highly improbable that this nuclear issue can be resolved in just 60 days. But that is what's on the table. And crucially, this deal still has to get the sign off from President Trump, who just yesterday said he was not satisfied with the current state of talks.

Today, the Secretary of the Treasury, Scott Bessent, briefed reporters at the White House where he declined multiple times to confirm exactly what is in this deal and whether President Trump would sign off.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT BESSENT, TREASURY SECRETARY: The teams have been going back and forth. I think that we can see that the president very clearly stated out, stated his three the open the strait, highly enriched uranium, no nuclear program.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are those three aspects that you just outlined part of the temporary deal that has been agreed?

BESSENT: That if there can be no deal without those, why would there be a deal without those?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: It's also not clear whether Iran's Supreme Leader has given his sign off, not to mention it's not clear where he is or what conditions he's in, whether he's able to even give a sign off. It's also not clear if President Trump's demand that other Gulf countries join the Abraham Accords and sign treaties with Israel, whether that demand is even being discussed anymore.

And as for those strikes, yesterday, the U.S. military says it targeted a site around the Strait of Hormuz that posed a threat to U.S. forces and commercial traffic. And in response, Iran launched an attack targeting a U.S. air base in Kuwait, which Iran said was the source of the U.S. strikes. The U.S. says all Iranian drones were intercepted, calling it all an egregious cease fire violation.

CNN's Alayna Treene is at the White House for us. CNN's Matthew Chance is in London. Alayna, what more are we learning about this potential agreement and when might President Trump make a decision on it? ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, look, I mean, I think the one thing that people need to be clear on is that this is just essentially what we've learned is that the conclusion is really on the language, the squabbling. We know that has been going on between Washington and Tehran for days now on this memorandum of understanding that has been completed. But now it is up to both President Donald Trump and the Supreme Leader of Iran to actually sign off on it.

But again, this is just a short term framework, as you mentioned, Jake, that would trigger the 60-day period to really what sources I've spoken with who are familiar with the language of this document would actually tackle the most thorniest issues that they still have to work out.

That includes not only a commitment from Iran on to never have a nuclear weapon, but also the language on enforcing that Iran keeps its word on that front. And then of course, having to deal with the highly enriched uranium.

Now, as for your second question about when will Trump sign it? I mean, he is so unpredictable. I wouldn't presume to try to guess that. But the understanding I'm getting from my conversations with people around this is that he wants time to make sure that this is going to be a strong deal.

[17:05:06]

I know he's been seeking advice from advisers, particularly in this instance of, you know, wanting to ensure that it comes off and is perceived as being stronger than the deal that was struck during the Obama administration. He's also, of course, getting pressure from the Israeli Prime Minister and people in Congress, people like Lindsey Graham, to not take a deal that is not strong enough. So all of that weighing on him as he considers whether or not to give his approval for this short term framework.

TAPPER: All right, and Matthew, just within the past 48 hours, we've seen the U.S. and Iran trading strikes amid the ceasefire. How shaky is the situation in the Middle east despite all this talk about a possible deal?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think we're in an incredibly precarious situation. A precarious moment. Not just, as Alayna was just saying, does the future of this memorandum of understanding hang in the balance on the word, on the decision of one man, possibly two men, President Trump in the United States, the Supreme Leader in Iran, both of whom have political considerations before they make that decision.

President Trump does not want to be seen as having kind of gone to war without an absolute victory. It's going to be very hard for him to reach a deal and close off that potential line of criticism. At the same time, on the other side, the Iranian Supreme Leader and the hardliners there have an enormous amount of influence on the decision makers. They are the decision makers. They don't want to capitulate to the United States.

When I was in Tehran just last week, people on the streets in protests, government protests, pro-government protests, were telling me they are most fearful of their country doing a deal with the U.S. president. So, you know, it's that idea of resistance they want to sort of perpetuate and continue.

In addition to that, the military action is escalating. A couple of strikes over a three-day period by the United States military on targets inside Iran at the IRGC. The Iranian military striking back against that air base in Kuwait. So a very sort of delicate moment in this sort of ongoing fragile ceasefire and peace talk situation. Jake.

TAPPER: All right, thanks to both of you. Let's discuss this all with Karim Sadjadpour. He's a senior fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. So, Karim, what's your take on this deal as much as we know about it right now?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, SENIOR FELLOW, CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE: So, Jake, no one has ever made money betting on short and swift, successful U.S.-Iran negotiations But whether an MOU is signed this week or next week --

TAPPER: Memorandum of understanding.

SADJADPOUR: Memorandum of understanding. You can see the impetus from both parties, both Washington and Tehran, to want to reach a ceasefire, because essentially what's been happening over the last couple months is a policy of mutual strangulation. Iran has been strangling the global economy, so oil and gas prices have been going up for Americans heading into the summer travel season. President Trump wants to end that.

Likewise, the blockade has been strangling Iran's economy. They're losing about $450 million daily as a result of this blockade. So you can see why both President Trump and Iran's leadership want a ceasefire which will end this mutual blockade. But then, as you alluded to, we get into the difficult issues, which is the future of their nuclear program, and there I'm very skeptical we're going to be able to resolve those issues in 60 days.

TAPPER: No, I think anybody who knows anything about this knows it's not going to happen in 60 days. President Trump has reportedly been fixating, as you heard from Alayna there, on making sure this deal is better than the Obama deal, which obviously he and Republicans criticized quite a bit.

Is that possible? I mean, it seems to me like this desire to add on Abraham Accord countries and have more peace treaties between Arab Gulf states and Israel might be an attempt to do that.

Obviously, he would like that to happen as well, but that way he can sell it as an improvement. But without that, how could it possibly be better?

SADJADPOUR: So, first, I'd say there's virtually zero chance of those countries, in this moment, those Gulf countries, signing on to a peace deal right now with Israel.

TAPPER: Certainly not with Netanyahu taking over 70 percent of Gaza.

SADJADPOUR: Exactly. So I'd kind of throw that out. The second question is, you know, can he do a better deal than President Obama? The challenge President Trump has is structural, which is this war has been incredibly costly, probably when you consider both the defense cost and munitions, and then the damage to American bases in the gulf, upwards of $100 billion.

So, you know, he can potentially get Iran to freeze enrichment of uranium for a longer period of time than President Obama got. The question is whether it will ever vindicate the enormous cost of this war.

[17:10:02]

Iran yesterday launched an attack toward a U.S. base in Kuwait. And today Secretary Bessent was asked how the administration can still argue that a ceasefire is in effect when there's all this kinetic action. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BESSENT: We did not have regime change, but we changed the regime. The first layer of leadership was eliminated. The second layer, and we're now at the third layer. And the way to think about it, is the Iranian government, such as it is, there is three pillars. It is the elected government, it is the IRGC, and it is the clerics. And they are having trouble communicating. So we are being patient. We do not have unlimited patience.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What do you make of that answer?

SADJADPOUR: Well, with due respect, I don't think he has a good understanding of this Iranian regime. Essentially, we're dealing with a Revolutionary Guard.

TAPPER: It's basically just the IRGC right now.

SADJADPOUR: Exactly.

TAPPER: Yes.

SADJADPOUR: Those are the folks who are calling the shots on these critical issues. And the Revolutionary Guards are arguably more cohesive than they were. They've been able to act as a unitary actor. And so I think the challenge we have is not that Iran is unable to communicate internally, it's that Iran feels that it's prevailed in this war. They feel that they've suffered enormous costs and what they're demanding now is much more than they were demanding before the war. And they go back to the structural challenge.

President Trump is demanding more to justify the cost of the war. They're also demanding more to justify their sacrifice. And that's why I don't think we're going to get to any deal in 60 days time.

TAPPER: Secretary Bessent was also asked whether sanctions for relief for Iran was on the table in this deal. He said if that happened, it would move very slowly, wouldn't be on the table until the U.S. achieves its major demands, including the straight being open. Do you think that would be an acceptable trade off for the US?

SADJADPOUR: You know, I think ultimately the Trump administration understands that if it wants those major Iranian concessions on the nuclear file, it will have to give up some with regards to both sanctions and the unfreezing of Iranian assets.

What I've been told by folks in the administration is that there's going to be no relief without performance. So Iran is only going to get economic relief if it indeed gives up its highly enriched uranium and agrees to a long term freeze of enrichment.

TAPPER: All right, Karim Sadjadpour, thank you so much. Always good to have you on. Today also marks three months to the day since that deadly strike on an Iranian Girls School. 160 girls killed. Preliminary assessments suggest we were responsible.

The United States was responsible for that strike, although the U.S. government has not admitted it. We did ask the Trump administration today about the pending investigation. We'll tell you more about that in a second.

And how much -- how more than 30 retired judges are pushing to get rid of Trump's $1.776 billion so called anti-weaponization fund. I'm going to talk with one of those judges, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:17:03]

TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, a bipartisan group of retired judges are doing what they can to try to end The Justice Department's $1.776 billion so called anti-weaponization fund.

In a court filing Wednesday, the judges asked a federal court to reverse course and reopen that lawsuit between President Trump and the IRS. The settlement from that case resulted in this nearly $1.8 billion fund.

Let's bring in one of the judges making the case. Retired judge for the Southern District of New York, Shira Scheindlin. Thank you so much for being with us, Judge.

This filing argues, your filing argues is the settlement quote, was not and never will be legally justified because it created this fund through collusion, not a legitimate legal dispute. In other words, because the President essentially sued his own administration and then settled with himself, because the buck stops with the President, that the deal has no valid legal foundation.

Do you think it's unlawful or is it possible we're just in uncharted legal territory?

RET. JUDGE SHIRA SCHEINDLIN, FORMER U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: Oh, no, I think it's unlawful because a case must be a case or controversy. If there's no case or controversy, the court has no jurisdiction and the case should have been dismissed. Then if the case had been dismissed, there would be no hook, there would be no settlement from which you could use the fund, which does exist. The fund is for cases that are settled against the United States, settled or tried, but there's a judgment against the United States.

And so the fund pays out the settlement number. But if there's no case or controversy, and the judge would have said so, the case would have been dismissed and there would be no hook to create this fund.

Now, she had -- she said, briefs had to be filed within two more days from the date that they filed the notice of voluntary dismissal. So she would have had that issued before her, she would have received briefs, and she would have made a decision as to really whether there's a case or controversy. And the idea is there wasn't, because it was collusive. He was on both sides of the V, as we say, both plaintiff and defendant.

TAPPER: So we can't avoid talking about this fund and without talking about some of the folks who hope to get the money. There's a great piece in slate today about the January six rioters who hope to get some of this money. Here's just one example, quote, and I apologize for the language that I'm about to read, but it's a, quote, Brian Mock, a Minnesota man, filmed shoving an officer to the ground before later boasting that he, quote, beat the shit, unquote, out of the officer, believes that the fund could finally allow him to retreat into a quieter life. Quote, I think I've earned my peace, he said. What's your reaction?

SCHEINDLIN: My reaction is he hasn't earned anything. He was a rioter. He probably was convicted. He probably was sentenced to jail. Then he was pardoned, which, of course, the President has the power to do, but it was morally wrong to do it.

[17:20:00]

And now the president is calling these people innocent victims of a weaponized prosecution, which is just nonsense because you can look at this video over and over again and you can see that these people charged the Capitol committed violence. In no way are they victims and in no way are they entitled to compensation.

TAPPER: Reporters pressed the secretary of the treasury on the fund today. Take a listen to what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BESSENT: President Trump is a great American who has endured more than 10 years -- 10 years of non-stop harassment and weaponization from the federal and state government actors. A bad actor at the IRS leaked more than 400,000 tax returns, including the Trump family, all the employees, and that's how we got here. Now, no American should be targeted for political reasons. And every citizen deserves fair treatment, full protection of the law.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: What's your reaction?

SCHEINDLIN: First of all, my reaction is every citizen is required to pay their taxes, so he has not been mistreated. But in another case where someone sued the government for wrongfully releasing these tax returns, the same man. The same man. The same man, I think his name was Littlejohn, the government defended and said he isn't even an employee any longer of the IRS. He's a former employee, he's a contractor. So there's no case against the government.

And here it's the same guy, the same defense could have been raised. Plus, this case is time barred. So had this ever proceeded, I think it would not -- would have failed and that would have been the end of it. But instead, there's this collusive settlement which really affects the integrity of the judicial process, which is why the former judges feel that they have a strong interest in intervening here and asking the court to reopen this case.

TAPPER: Madam Judge, thank you so much for joining us. We really appreciate your time.

SCHEINDLIN: My pleasure.

TAPPER: What a senior official from the Biden administration told me about former first lady Jill Biden revealing this week that she was so scared about her husband's 2024 debate performance, she thought he was having a stroke.

Plus, three months since that deadly strike on an Iranian girls' school. And we just got an update from CENTCOM about their investigation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:26:45]

TAPPER: Returning to our World Lead. Today, May 28 marks three months since 168 children and 14 teachers were killed in a missile strike that hit a girls' school in Iran. It also marks three months that we at The Lead and in the public have been waiting for answers about what went so horribly wrong.

If you recall, this happened on the very first day of Trump's war against Iran. President Trump initially tried to blame Iran for the strike, but video surfaced showing an Iranian revolutionary -- an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps target near the school being struck by a Tomahawk missile. Tomahawk is mainly used by the U.S. military. Reuters first reported that military investigators believed that this that the U.S. was behind the strike.

The New York Times first reported that the reason was due to outdated intelligence because the IRGC was so close to the school. CNN's own investigation revealed satellite imagery from 2013 showed that the school and the IRGC base once were part of the same compound. Later images from 2016 revealed that there was a fence that then separated the school and the IRGC base.

Now this afternoon, CENTCOM told the lead that their investigation into what went so horribly wrong with that girl's school is ongoing. But coming to a close with us now, former JAG officer Rachel VanLandingham.

And with me in studio, Amanda Klasing, is it Klasing?

AMANDA KLASING, NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS AND ADVOCACY, AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA: Klasing.

TAPPER: Klasing, apologies with Amnesty International USA. Rachel, let me start with you. As a former JAG officer, do you really think after three months the Pentagon doesn't know what happened?

RACHEL VANLANDINGHAM, FORMER JAG OFFICER: Thanks for having me, Jake. And I actually worked at U.S. Central Command and I was part of various investigations and of course they know what happened. Even after the terrible tragedy regarding the medicine Psalms Frontiers Hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, in which a U.S. gunship, it killed numerous individuals, doctors and patients, the U.S. military Central Command knew within a month of actually what went wrong. They didn't release it until that spring, but they knew within a month here.

Even though Admiral Cooper, the commander of headquarters U.S. Central Command has called this investigation complex, there really doesn't seem to be much complex about it. I think he and I disagree on the definition of complex. There's already been preliminary data that's been leaked that shows that, as you said, that this was a case of reliance on outdated data. 10-year old intelligence, where was the failure? Why was 10-year old intelligence relied upon?

It's a pretty simple question. I think there's a pretty simple answer. And so it's atrocious that we haven't had an acknowledgment, an explanation and an apology yet to date.

TAPPER: Amanda, Amnesty International's own analysis concluded back in March that the U.S. violated international humanitarian law by failing to take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian harm. What do you think? If it is proven that, as we all suspect, the U.S. was behind this missile strike that killed all these girls and teachers, do you think the U.S. should pay reparations to the families of the victims?

[17:30:01]

KLASING: Yes, absolutely. So first of all, what does all feasible steps take and precaution look like?

TAPPER: Yes, what does that mean?

KLASING: So this was on the first day. This is the first thing to think about. This was not a fog of war. They had time to really do the types of investigation that we all did.

TAPPER: Yes, this was one of the first targets they hit.

KLASING: Exactly, exactly. So not only in 2016, could you see the wall, but by 2017, that wall was painted colorful colors, just like other schools in the area. By 2023, 2025, our satellite imagery shows congregations of people in an area that looks like girls at recess, right? So there are families that are hurting because the U.S., whether they made a mistake or they had a serious breach of international law, had to bury their children, and they absolutely deserve reparation, both under international law, but U.S. law has a process for amends. And so there's actually a process where people could be paid for the mistake that the government has made.

TAPPER: And again, just to remind people, we're talking about 168 girls and 14 teachers. And Rachel, the Iranians certainly have not forgotten what happened. Western media outlets, including Reuters and Sky News, recently were allowed to go to the cemetery and film where they were told the victims' families still come to mourn every night. Now, presumably, the Iranian regime did help that visit, given the controls they exert and the lack of freedom of the press.

Still, camera crews were allowed to see that and also to see the still-standing ruins of the school. Note the proximity there of an Iranian flag. What do you make of it?

VANLANDINGHAM: Well, it shows that these kind of mistakes, because I do believe this was a tragic error. There may be, you know, recklessness, and therefore accountability needs to occur here. But at the end of the day, this was a tragic mistake, and it lowers and degrades U.S. legitimacy when the United States doesn't stand up and say, hey, we make mistakes. This was horrible. We didn't mean to do this. Let's make amends. Let's pay condolence payments like we did in Afghanistan when we accidentally killed civilians.

By failing to take responsibility, we cede the information battlefield to the Iranians, right? The Iranians don't care about their own civilians. They're just using this in the media warfare against the United States, and the U.S. administration right now is letting them. We should be taking the high road and admitting our mistakes and then trying to make amends and trying to figure out where our processes went wrong so that the service members in harm's way right now, when they press the button on the next target, they can be confident that they're not killing little children.

TAPPER: Final thoughts?

KLASING: Absolutely. There is an investigation that needs to be public. We need to know exactly what went wrong and how not to repeat this, because it is absolutely unbelievable that we have access to this information afterwards. And the military had plenty of time. They had plenty of time and access to information. Outdated data is just not an answer.

TAPPER: Yes, it's a horrible, horrible thing. Again, 168 dead girls, 14 teachers, and the U.S. government and CENTCOM refused to tell the public and those families what happened. Thanks to both of you.

[17:33:16]

CNN's John King's up next. What voters in Maine are telling him about controversial Democrat Graham Platner, all his controversies, his run for Senate, and more. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Politics Lead now, we're looking ahead to big primary dates in the month of June. Next Tuesday, California's governor's race is one to watch. Voters are going to decide which two candidates, regardless of party, move on to November's general election. Then the following Tuesday, look for the primary in Maine's U.S. Senate race.

Democrat Graham Platner pushing to replace Republican Susan Collins, who's been in office for nearly 30 years. Platner is a Marine Corps veteran, yes, but then, of course, there's the tattoo on his chest that was a Totenkopf, Nazi war skull and bones. He's since covered over with that. Of course, then there's also the old inflammatory posts on Reddit.

CNN's John King went to Maine to see how Platner's controversial past is sitting with voters, especially with women.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN KING, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Portland headlight at Cape Elizabeth. Nearly half of Maine's population lives near the gorgeous southeast coast, and there are lots of these.

KING: Do you stay with a known entity in which you have a lot of recent disappointments, Senator Collins, or do you go with an unknown, a young political newcomer who has said some things that piss you off? Perfect.

KING (voice-over): Southeast Maine votes big time blue. Portland and the towns an hour or so north and south are critical to any Democrat running statewide. Yes, Graham Platner is a phenomenon, but Emily Bruce Plumb is proof he still has a math problem.

EMILY BRUCE PLUMB, MAINE VOTER: I don't have all I need to be 100 percent behind him.

KING (voice-over): A Democratic Senate to stymie Trump would be a dream, and she's willing to move past shocking things Platner has said about women and sexual assault.

PLUMB: What I like about the moment and the amount of people who are forgiving of the things he said is that it's not this purist cancel culture. I like that. I think we need to be able to give people second chances.

KING (voice-over): But she can't get to yes, despite all her Democratic friends who say stopping Trump is much more important than any Platner shortcomings. Bruce Plumb is a seasoned marketing executive and brand shaper. To her, the war veteran turned oyster farmer turned candidate sometimes feels too perfect. PLUMB: I admire what they're doing as a brand builder, for sure. It's pretty flawless.

[17:40:05]

KING: Does that worry you?

PLUMB: I know enough to know to ask questions. That's what I would say. I just want to see some more qualification.

KING (voice-over): Bath is about 40 miles up the coast. This, the northern end of Casco Bay. Like Platner, Virginia Schaffer is an oyster farmer, lady oyster to those who come for her tours and tastings.

VIRGINIA SCHAFFER, MAINE VOTER: That's the sweetest part of the oyster, the adductor muscle.

KING: OK.

SCHAFFER: But that's probably enough because it's looking a little pre-chewed at this point. So it's sort of a beautiful art. I fell in love with it, you know, 12 years ago.

KING: It's kind of hard to imagine this becoming this.

SCHAFFER: Truly.

KING (voice-over): Big generational change is more important to Schaffer than Platner's imperfections.

SCHAFFER: I'm going to live a long life and it's OK to give someone without some experience who really knows me and knows my lifestyle a shot. There are some problematic things there, but I think that we really need to think about people who understand life as it is today for a working community.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KING: The example right there at the end, Jake, the generational change we saw. A lot of the younger women who are inclined to be Democrats and progressive don't like Donald Trump, would like the Senate blue. They're much willing to forgive Graham Platner more quickly, if you will.

There are a lot of professional women, college educated women who voted for Susan Collins maybe in the past. They're mad she hasn't stood up to Trump enough. They would love to flip the Senate blue, but they're just having a much harder time getting to Platner because of his past. Doesn't mean they won't get there, but they're having a hard time.

TAPPER: All right, fascinating stuff. John King, thanks so much.

We're learning a lot more about what former first lady, Jill Biden, really thought at the time about her husband's 2024 debate performance. Not only did she think at the time that he was maybe having a stroke, she then thought maybe he'd been drugged. More of her comments and the reaction rolling in. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[17:46:21]

JILL BIDEN, FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: Joe, you did such a great job. You answered every question. You knew all the facts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Yes, in our Politics Lead, that's former First Lady Jill Biden praising Joe Biden right after his 2024 debate performance. Now, selling a book nearly two years later, former First Lady Biden says she wants to record -- to set the record straight about that night. So here she is in a new "CBS News" interview promoting her memoir out next week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Were you horrified as you saw it unfold?

BIDEN: I wasn't horrified, I was frightened. Because I had never, ever seen Joe like that before or since. Never.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Or since.

BIDEN: Yes, or since.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Never seen him like that.

BIDEN: Never, no.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What happened?

BIDEN: I don't know what happened. I mean, as I watched it, I thought, oh my God, he's having a stroke. And it scared me to death.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: Today, "The Atlantic" published some excerpts from the memoir, quoting her, "Is he short-circuiting? Jill Biden thought. Is this a stroke? I felt like we were watching an A.I. hologram of the man we knew, and the hologram was glitching. Has he been drugged?"

Now, I asked a senior Biden administration official what he thought about all of this. And he said, "That's quite an untimely revelation. She should have said it at the time because that fear reveals immediate concerns about his wellbeing, his health fragility, and his vulnerability, and brings into question his fitness for continued office." Again, that was a senior Biden administration official.

Let's discuss with the panel. Jonah, what is your reaction to what we are now hearing from First Lady Jill Biden?

JONAH GOLDBERG, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first of all, it really underscores that that doctor and Dr. Jill Biden is not a medical doctor.

TAPPER: An education degree.

GOLDBERG: Yes, so first of all, I would like to think that if my wife saw me on stage and thought I was having a stroke, she would, the technical term for it is do something, right? I mean, I don't know.

TAPPER: There were a couple of commercial breaks.

GOLDBERG: Yes, but, and then if you thought there was something like that that had happened after the debate was over, maybe you wouldn't rush to like a diner for a campaign appearance. I don't like to be too harsh about it. I've never been a huge fan of Jill Biden's, but I just think she's lying. I just don't think it makes sense with the time. There are a lot of Democratic people from the Biden campaign who don't believe that what she's telling.

It just doesn't make -- it doesn't line up with how she reacted at the time or any of the reporting at the time.

TAPPER: Just to be clear, you think that she had seen plenty of moments like that behind the scenes, and that's why, and so you think it wasn't actually a shock to her?

GOLDBERG: I don't think she thought it was a stroke. I think that is some post -- I think she's trying to in some weird way protect her reputation for some reason. I can't quite get behind it, get my arms around it. And the fact, the idea that she had never seen him in a bad way before, it makes no sense because we had seen him in a bad way, and one of the only reasons he wasn't in the dock for hoarding classified documents was because an independent counsel made a big stink that all Democrats screamed about for saying that he was too out of it to put on trial.

So I just, I don't get why she's doing this. I don't think it's good for Democrats. I don't think it's good for the country, but, and I don't think it's good for her, but I flatly do not believe her story.

TAPPER: Well, it's definitely good for "Fox's" primetime lineup for the next week.

GOLDBERG: For sure.

TAPPER: Karen Finney, here's a new clip just released from "CBS News" asking if Jill Biden ever saw signs that Joe Biden, her husband, the President, was falling into any sort of cognitive decline. Here's that clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[17:50:07]

BIDEN: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Truly?

BIDEN: No.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I mean, people were saying he wasn't the same Joe Biden.

BIDEN: Well, I don't think that's true. He was the same -- the essence of the same Joe Biden, but yes, he was slowing down. He was getting older. I mean, we all observed that.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: Karen?

KAREN FINNEY, CNN COMMENTATOR: I just don't think -- I think I'll hurt my brain if I roll my eyes too hard. So I'm going to --

TAPPER: Please don't.

FINNEY: And as you know, that's not good for me.

TAPPER: Please don't. That's sensitive territory.

FINNEY: Right, let me not do that. I mean, this is ridiculous. Look, to my mind though, let's go back. The moment Joe Biden said he was running for re-election, he broke his promise. The promise was, I will do one term, I will be a bridge to the next generation.

And so to my mind, everything that comes out after that is a little bit of a sham. We had to defend it. He put the party in a terrible position. He put Kamala Harris in a terrible position trying to run in 107 days. And I don't really see the point. I don't understand why, write a book, and why try to clean it up now instead of just let it go and let's focus on the future.

Except what I will say is, the Democrat in me has to say this, a conversation about Joe Biden's frailties is a reminder that our conversations about Donald Trump's frailties are perfectly fair. It is fair for, and I know you do it all the time.

TAPPER: He just did it Tuesday when he had his checkup at Walter Reed.

FINNEY: And you got attacked for it, as I saw as well.

TAPPER: I mute all that stuff. So you think the real problem was his decision to run for re-election?

FINNEY: Yes, that's when he broke his promise.

TAPPER: That's the proverbial original sin, you might say.

FINNEY: Correct. Oh, have you read a book about that?

GOLDBERG: Soon to be out in paperback. TAPPER: Do you think this matters for the midterms?

GOLDBERG: Well, I mean, it depends what she says on her book tour.

TAPPER: I assume this is the juiciest stuff because they want to sell books and because "CBS News" wants the people to watch.

GOLDBERG: Ultimately, I don't think so. I think it gets, I mean, like, it gets washed up in the noise. People are already turning to the $250 bill and all that stuff. So probably not, but I don't think it's good for Democrats because it puts Democrats, let's put it this way. I don't think it does an enormous amount of damage, but it opens up a bunch of old ruins.

I don't think it's necessarily good for Kamala Harris. And it's just a conversation about Democrats when Democrats want to be having conversations about Republicans.

TAPPER: Yes, former Vice President Kamala Harris, whose book tour lasted longer than her 107-day campaign, and seems to be looking possibly to run again in 2028. She sat down in an interview with Jon Stewart. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAMALA HARRIS, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I believe he was fully competent to serve.

JON STEWART, ACTOR: Do you really?

HARRIS: Yes, I do.

STEWART: That surprises me, actually.

HARRIS: No, I do. But he -- but there's a distinction to be made between running for president and being president.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

TAPPER: What do you think?

FINNEY: Uh-huh. OK. Yes, OK, Kamala.

TAPPER: That's honestly, that's the argument that his people make that, like, all the stuff on the campaign trail is just performance, whereas his decision-making was solid. I'm not saying I agree with that, but that is the argument by the Politburo and we hear Vice President Harris making the same argument.

FINNEY: Yes, look, she is entitled to her opinion. As I said, my opinion was he should not have been running for a second term. That was not what he promised. And as we saw, it did a real damage to the party. That being said, you were asking Jonah whether or not it's going to matter in 2028. Not with the way the economy is right now.

TAPPER: Right. FINNEY: Not with the fact that we're at war and people are, you know, economically, I don't care what Scott Bessent says, it's not, people don't feel like it's actually better.

TAPPER: Well, he's very wealthy, so I'm sure.

FINNEY: Oh, for him, it's fine, but you know.

TAPPER: Yes. Jonah, just this week, Josh Shapiro, the governor of Pennsylvania, who also might be running for president in 2028, he was asked if Harris should be the Democratic standard bearer in 2028 if she decides to run. He said the person that needs to be the nominee needs to be, "looking forward, not backward." What do you think?

GOLDBERG: I think Josh Shapiro's running for president and that's a pretty good talking point for why it should be him instead of Kamala Harris.

TAPPER: All right, Jonah and Karen Finney, thank you so much, appreciate it.

For a seventh straight day, protesters are outside a New Jersey ICE detention facility. Democratic Senator Cory Booker, also from New Jersey, also went to that facility. He spoke with individuals detained inside. He's going to join me next to tell us what he saw.

[17:54:29]

And later, we're going to have former reality star Spencer Pratt on the show. He is now running to be mayor of Los Angeles and I will ask him about some things he said in which he seemed to embrace 9/11, truther, crazy conspiracy theories.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, protesters gathering outside an ICE detention facility in New Jersey for the seventh day in a row. While inside, lawyers say detainees are on a hunger strike. They're protesting the conditions that they're enduring. Senator Cory Booker, Democrat of New Jersey, toured the site yesterday. He joins me live to discuss what he saw in moments.

Plus, a new poll shows an incredibly tight race for Los Angeles mayor, with former reality T.V. star Spencer Pratt in striking distance of current Democratic Mayor Karen Bass. So what are Pratt's plans to fix the most pressing issues in one of America's biggest cities? I'm going to ask him ahead.

Plus, a former CIA officer has been charged with stealing tens of millions of dollars in gold bars and foreign currency from the U.S. government. Not only that, the FBI claims he only got the job by lying about his military service and education. How did all of this get by the CIA?

[17:59:52] And final preparations underway right now for a risky rescue mission after five men became trapped deep inside a flooded cave in the country of Laos. An international group of divers was able to find the men yesterday more than a week after they got stuck there. But now the race is to safely get them out --