Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
Blanche's Nomination in Peril; New Turns in Comey Case; Fauci Hearing Turns Testy. Trump Vows To "Beat The F**king Sh*t Out Of" Iran; K-Pop Group BTS Won't Submit Music For 2027 Grammys. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired July 29, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, Todd Blanche's nomination to be attorney general is in peril at this hour as two key Senate Republicans are demanding guarantees from Trump's nominee. Blanche was just seen leaving the Capitol. So does that mean deal or no deal? Is there an admission that the votes are not there right now?
Plus, Dr. Anthony Fauci soon could be held in contempt of Congress after he invoked his Fifth Amendment right more than 100 times during a contentious hearing earlier today in the Senate. Fauci, who led the U.S. COVID response, refusing to answer questions about his handling of the pandemic.
[18:00:04]
We're going to play you some of the most heated moments ahead.
Also, newly released court filings reveal the U.S. Secret Service surveilled James Comey after his seashell post on Instagram. Federal officials apparently acting without a warrant tracked Comey's phone as he left the beach and headed back to D.C. But will this evidence help Comey's case, his attempt to get the case thrown out against him?
And after putting his personal touches on the White House and the Reflecting Pool and the Kennedy Center, today, we learned about President Trump's latest renovation project, which will cost more than $20 billion and affects millions of people each year. Those details coming up.
The Lead tonight, lightning rod nomination in peril, two Republican senators threatening to tank Todd Blanche's nomination to permanently become the U.S. attorney general. The holdouts ahead of tomorrow's key vote, well, Senators Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who has butted heads with Trump, and John Cornyn of Texas, who has butted heads with Trump. They are demanding written assurances on how the Trump Justice Department plans to kill the so-called anti-weaponization fund for good, as well as wanting language ensuring that any president is not exempt from future IRS audits.
Now, losing either Cornyn or Tillis would keep Blanche's nomination from moving through the Senate Judiciary Committee. CNN's Kaitlan Collins is at the White House. But, first, let's go to CNN's Manu Raju on Capitol Hill with the latest. And, Manu, you just spoke with John Cornyn. What do you have to say?
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, he made clear his concerns are not resolved, Jake, and that he is prepared to vote against this nomination if there is a committee vote tomorrow in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
He simply says the Justice Department has not been responsive to his concerns. Those two chief demands, ensuring written language that says that $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund, a fund that presumably could give taxpayer dollars to people like January 6th rioters, that that is dead all together and it will not proceed, and also to limit future presidents from -- any president, from having any audits happening against them, tax enforcement happening against them. There's been concern that the president and his family and other organizations could be exempt from tax enforcement under this deal that was reached. Cornyn wants that gone completely and wants that written. He says that they have not done that.
And just moments ago, we caught up with him as he was leaving his office after he had met with the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chuck Grassley, along with Thom Tillis, and he made crystal clear his concerns are not met, and he's warning the president not to take his vote for granted.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JOHN CORNYN (R-TX): For Senator Grassley to make a decision. We haven't heard from the DOJ. So, I think I think what he told me is he wanted to wait to see if they made a response and -- but I'm not aware they have.
RAJU: have you even heard from the DOJ at all? They haven't responded to you after you sent that back to them?
CORNYN: As I told you earlier, it was not responsive to my concerns. I mean, we've heard from them, it's just that they refuse to commit to writing what he testified to under oath. And it's not a big ask. We're trying to help them get this solved, but they refuse to accept our help.
RAJU: But you're still ready to vote no right now? If this happens tomorrow, you're going to vote no still?
CORNYN: Well, I don't know whether there'll be a markup tomorrow.
RAJU: If it happens?
CORNYN: Senator Van Hollen, he's got something he wants to say.
RAJU: If it happens, you're a no? If the vote happens, no?
CORNYN: Well, I'm not going to speculate. I'm going to wait and see what happens. REPORTER: Senator, are you advising Chairman Grassley to delay tomorrow's markup given you haven't heard from DOJ yet?
CORNYN: Senator Grassley's been around here a lot longer than I have. I'm not advising him anything.
RAJU: But how was that meeting with him? You met with him for some time. What was the purpose?
CORNYN: McCade (ph), how do we get out of here?
RAJU: What is --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We can go this way, sir.
CORNYN: Okay.
RAJU: What was the purpose of the meeting?
CORNYN: We lose all the time
RAJU: You've been here so long, you know that?
REPORTER: If nothing changes right now, though, you're not a yes?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You going up?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Watch out.
CORNYN: I am -- I'm not going to speculate.
RAJU: But why --
CORNYN: This could be solved in just a matter of seconds. But --
REPORTER: Are you in contact with the White House about this, Senator?
CORNYN: I think Senator Grassley has been talking to The White House.
RAJU: Is your issue more about the IRS settlement language more than the fund at this point?
CORNYN: It's both.
REPORTER: But where you are you are right now, you are not yet ready to vote in favor of Todd Blanche's nomination?
CORNYN: That's right, and the vote hasn't -- that time has not yet occurred.
REPORTER: President Trump noted today in The White House that he didn't endorse you. He's wondering, kind of openly speculating whether or not that might have been -- have something to do with this.
CORNYN: I think that's a convenient excuse for not cooperating with the Judiciary Committee's appropriate role in the confirmation.
REPORTER: Why do you think --
RAJU: But you would acknowledge, though, having -- not having to run for re-election anymore has freed you up to be more independent from the president?
[18:05:05]
Would you acknowledge that?
CORNYN: Have you noticed?
REPORTER: You've been --
RAJU: I mean, is that why?
REPORTER: You've been extremely clear -- sir, you've been extremely clear in what you want. Why don't you think Todd -- why don't you think Todd --
CORNYN: Will you tell the DOJ that?
REPORTER: Why don't you think Todd Blanche has met your demands at around the 11th hour before this vote?
CORNYN: Well, I assume he's getting some pushback from the president's lawyers.
REPORTER: Have you heard that directly from the DOJ?
CORNYN: No. No. I'm assuming that.
REPORTER: I mean, given the attorney general is supposed to be an independent person in the administration --
CORNYN: Yes, but he's not. In this case, he's not representing the president.
RAJU: So, when the president says that you're doing this as a political vendetta, what do you say to him?
CORNYN: That's a convenient excuse, and it happens to be untrue.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
RAJU: So, as you heard there, Jake, and saw, Senator Cornyn is being clear that he's not heard anything from the Justice Department that could get him to yes ahead of tomorrow's vote in the committee.
Now, that vote is still scheduled for tomorrow, Jake, and it's unclear whether it will be delayed. The chairman of the committee, Chuck Grassley, has refused to say whether or not he's prepared to delay this. He did make some comments after leaving John Cornyn's office, saying they're working to try to get a solution. So, clearly, there's not a solution. I will say that Thom Tillis is sounding more optimistic than John Cornyn, which is why, really, the focus at this moment is more so on Cornyn and whether he's ready to defy a president that he worked so hard to court in his reelection campaign in Texas.
Of course, Cornyn eventually endorsed his primary foe, Ken Paxton, who won that nomination. But since Cornyn lost his effort to win reelection, he's come back here. And as you said, what you heard what he said to me, he's feeling a lot more independent these days. Jake?
TAPPER: I'm sure he is. Kaitlan, after spending time on Capitol Hill, Todd Blanche then went to the White House. What's the White House doing behind the scenes to try to salvage Blanche's nomination?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I mean, Jake, earlier this week, the White House seemed to think that this was on a glide path to happening, and that Todd Blanche was going to get confirmed. They weren't going to have any issues with this. And now they're on the verge of this vote happening tomorrow, and listening to comments like that from John Cornyn to Manu, and it is not clear at all that this is even going to move forward, even if that vote happens tomorrow, if Todd Blanche cannot get enough votes here. And so I think that's been a big point of frustration for the White House.
And the problem, Jake, is that Todd Blanche has a lot of Republican support on Capitol Hill. He doesn't have it from the two Republican senators that the White House has the least influence and leverage over because, obviously, they are not coming back here to Washington after next January. And so it's pretty difficult for the White House to pressure them or influence them, as they would any other Republican who is running for reelection or simply returning to Washington. And I think that is at a crossroads for this White House right now in terms of where this is going to go next.
Now, the White House was frustrated that Senator Cornyn had canceled that meeting that he was expected to have with the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, earlier today, you know, just about a half hour before it was expected to actually take place. But, Jake, all of this is happening in the background, and the White House does seem worried about it when we speak to officials about this. One person who seemed unaware of the drama that is unfolding on Capitol Hill right now with one of his biggest nominees was President Trump himself, because this is what he told reporters earlier this afternoon inside the Oval Office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Todd Blanche is outstanding, and I thought he's -- I thought it was pretty routine because he's so good. He's just wouldn't find a better person. So, I don't know, maybe John Cornyn's upset with me because I didn't endorse him. I don't know what it is. But I haven't heard that there's a problem. I heard he's going through quite nicely.
(END VIDEO CLIP) COLLINS: And going through quite nicely, obviously, Jake, does not contort with reality in terms of what we are hearing from John Cornyn and others on Capitol Hill. Potentially, it could change overnight. Things move fast here sometimes in Washington. But right now, obviously, this is a real problem for the White House in terms of whether or not they are willing to give Senator John Cornyn, who seems to be the most staunchly opposed to this unless he gets it in writing from the administration or from the Justice Department on something that the president has touted, Jake, which is the protection of IRS investigation that came as part of that, that agreement.
TAPPER: All right. Kaitlan Collins at the White House, Manu Raju on Capitol Hill, no better team covering this stuff, thanks so much to both of you.
Don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Her guests tonight include independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who caucuses with Democrats. That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN.
Joining us now, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. Senator, good to see you.
What is your reaction to what your Republican colleague, Senator Cornyn, just said about not willing to vote for Blanche, at least not at this hour?
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): I've been listening to John Cornyn very closely and at the hearing with Blanche, he asked some pointed questions, good pointed questions that were kind of a surprise from his side of the table, and it was clear that he had some issues that he wanted to resolve with this administration and they shouldn't take him for granted.
[18:10:06]
I don't know what happened with scheduling these meetings back and forth, but if anybody in the White House is taking him for granted, it's a mistake. He's not a pushover.
TAPPER: It seems to me that the White House could easily get Cornyn and Tillis' votes if they just put in writing that they're not going to bring back this so-called anti-weaponization fund, or the $1.776 billion for the people who beat up cops on January 6th and the like, and yet the White House doesn't seem to be willing to do that.
DURBIN: And I don't understand that at all. I mean, that is not an unusual or a complicated request. What John Cornyn is asking for is the White House to put in writing what Blanche has already told us. And to think that they're holding back on this reminds me when they went through this escapade where they wouldn't meet with the survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, wouldn't meet with the survivors. Tillis finally said to him, then you don't get my vote if you won't meet them. So, they had a cursory meeting that was not a serious undertaking.
They seem to think they have so much power they don't have to listen to anybody. It looks like there's a confrontation brewing here. I won't speak for my Republican colleagues. They'll speak for themselves.
TAPPER: Have you spoken with either Cornyn or Tillis about their demands and their -- go ahead.
DURBIN: I have not. This is a delicate situation. I don't want to interfere with their decision-making. We're talking about the next attorney general of the United States. Their request is reasonable. This slush fund that they put together, $2 billion, to pay the people that beat up the cops here in the Capitol, I mean, it was a crazy idea. Blanche actually said in my office it was a mistake. He's denied that, but he said it. My staff witnessed it well.
But to ask, put this in writing, particularly when it comes to future liability on tax laws and tax crimes, that is not unreasonable. I think John Cornyn's request, and Tillis as well really are reasonable.
TAPPER: So, one of the things that's interesting is you accused Blanche of lying about this anti-weaponization fund, and I assume that's a reference to you and your staff saying that he told you behind closed doors it was a mistake, and then, publicly, he denied that he said that. I mean, I would think that that If you're convinced that he's just a liar, that should be a disqualification for a U.S. attorney general.
DURBIN: Yes, it certainly would be. And as far as I'm concerned, this MAGA mighty position that no one ever says that they made a mistake, no one ever uses the word, sorry, in a sentence, you know, that may be the manly thing to do from the MAGA point of view, but it doesn't make sense to me.
TAPPER: If Blanche's nomination fails to advance out of the Judiciary Committee, do you worry at all that the Trump administration simply won't care and they'll keep him in the position as acting or interim U.S. attorney general?
DURBIN: Well, they can do that, but he's certainly in a diminished situation if that's the fact. I don't know what they have in mind in that alternative, and I won't presume anything until these two Republican senators make up their minds and announce it to the public.
TAPPER: Democratic Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Good to see you again.
DURBIN: Thank you.
TAPPER: Members of another group also against Blanche's confirmation made their opposition known on Capitol Hill today. They are, as the senator just referred to, survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, and they were carrying portions of the Epstein files urging senators to vote no on Blanche because of the way he has treated them, and one of those survivors, Liz Stein, joins us next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:00]
TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, some survivors of Jeffrey Epstein are going door to door on Capitol Hill. They're delivering copies of the Epstein files to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee. They say it's a last-ditch effort to try to stop Todd Blanche's confirmation to be U.S. attorney general. Also today, Defend.org and the Institute for Primary Facts launched a nationwide bookmobile campaign carrying 3.5 million pages of the files around Washington, D.C., in an effort to keep pressure on lawmakers and demand more transparency.
Joining us to discuss is Epstein survivor Liz Stein. First off, as always, how you doing? This sucks to talk about. It sucks to talk about publicly. You're trying to confront politicians. Are you all right?
LIZ STEIN, EPSTEIN SURVIVOR: Yes. We're hanging in. You know, this is a long haul. This is not anything that's going to happen immediately, and we're here for it.
TAPPER: So, two senators, Cornyn and Tillis, on the Judiciary Committee, both Republicans, are raising concerns about something else, the anti-weaponization fund. Although Tillis did say that he wouldn't even contemplate voting for Todd Blanche if he didn't meet -- if Blanche didn't meet with survivors, and Blanche did meet with survivors, although the meeting didn't go so great, from what I understand.
You met with Cornyn's staff earlier today. Do you feel like that was productive?
STEIN: We did. You know, it was really -- we really appreciated Senator Cornyn's staff sitting down with us and listening to what our exact concerns were about the nomination of Todd Blanche. You know, Senator Cornyn has a longstanding track record of standing behind survivors of human trafficking, and I think that, you know, something that gets missed a lot in all of this, I say all the time that there's so much political emotion infused into what is the crime of sex trafficking.
I think that when we are able to get these face-to-face meetings with people and really make them understand the human element of this case, their whole perspective changes.
TAPPER: Survivors delivered copies of the files to lawmakers today. What was that moment like, those moments?
STEIN: You know, I think that it was really important for us to do because I think that sometimes when we talk about the Epstein files being 3.5 million pages that have been released so far, that feels very abstract. But when you bring into someone's office a book that has been earmarked with potential investigative leads and you say, here, look, here are some of the files, here are some of the leads, you can't deny that when it's sitting right in front of you.
[18:20:09] TAPPER: Yes. And just to reiterate, your -- and tell me, correct me if I'm wrong, your concerns about Todd Blanche is, A, he was in charge of releasing the Epstein files, at least according to then-Attorney General Pam Bondi, and by even the admission of Vice President Vance, that was all mishandled. B, it was mishandled in such a way that exposed names and addresses and information about survivors and redacted information about possible perpetrators. And, C, you know, until Thom Tillis demanded it, he refused to even meet with you guys.
STEIN: Yes. We had been requesting meetings with the DOJ for months. And when Senator Tillis requested that meeting, we really think that he did that expecting a good faith meeting between the parties. We certainly went into that meeting with Todd Blanche prepared to get some answers but he just didn't seem interested in giving us any.
TAPPER: And I know that I saw some social media video of Dani, one of your sisters in this -- your survivor sisters, describing the meeting with Blanche, in which Blanche -- the way she described it, he just sounded rude.
STEIN: Yes. He didn't seem to have any concern for anything that we had to say to him. He was very dismissive, and it was very clear to us that he was just trying to check the box.
TAPPER: So, the book mobile launch today, it's an effort to keep attention on the call for transparency ahead of the midterms. It's going to go to other cities, other Congressional districts, is that right?
STEIN: Yes.
TAPPER: And what's the goal?
STEIN: I think the goal is to raise awareness. Like I just said to you earlier, it can be really difficult to grasp what, you know, 3.5 million files looks like.
TAPPER: Even though there's still 3 million that they haven't released.
STEIN: Exactly.
TAPPER: Right.
STEIN: And I think that you know, the reading room and the book mobile are tangible visual representations of how large the files are, the magnitude of what we're looking at in terms of potential evidence. And I think that that's something that, you know, you just can't grasp when you're scrolling through documents online.
TAPPER: All right. Liz Stein, thank you so much, and thanks for having the strength, as always. I know, not fun, not fun talking about this or being an activist for this.
STEIN: Thank you. TAPPER: Newly released court documents show President Trump was following the James Comey case in real time, asking to have files sent directly to Air Force One so he could use them in a press conference. Do these revelations help Comey's team in their efforts to get the case thrown out of court? That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
TAPPER: Continuing in our Law and Justice Lead, in new court filings, former FBI Director James Comey claims that federal officials followed him without a warrant from North Carolina to Virginia after he posted photos of seashells on a beach in North Carolina spelling out 8647 last year, which President Trump claims he views as a call to violence.
The filing, part of Comey's efforts to get what he calls vindictive and selective charges against him dropped, also show how deep President Trump was involved in the investigation, detailing interaction on Air Force One after Comey was interviewed by the U.S. Secret Service. One agent saying, quote, it's a hot topic on the plane, and redacted code name for President Trump is very interested. The FBI also apparently interviewed Sammy the Bull Gravano, a former member of the notorious Gambino crime family, who said Comey knows that the number 86 refers to killing someone.
CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig joins us now. Elie, is there any legal relevance to the revelation that Trump asked for and was given FBI summaries of interviews in real time about the seashell posting?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Oh, for sure, Jake. Jim Comey already had a strong motion to dismiss based on vindictive prosecution, and now I think that argument is overwhelming. So, vindictive prosecution is when a defendant can show that he's being singled out for prosecution because of personal animus, animosity from someone in the government towards him. It's really hard to show that.
But here, Jim Comey, first of all, has an exhaustive record. In fact, he attaches a 77-page appendix showing examples of times when he and Trump have publicly verbally attacked one another. On top of that, you have the fact that Jim Comey already defeated the first indictment against him, which he got dismissed a few months ago, and now this new revelation shows that Donald Trump was directly monitoring this investigation on a real-time basis. He was demanding updates, and he was even planning to use that information for political purposes. So, I think Jim Comey has about as strong a vindictive prosecution motion as I've ever seen.
TAPPER: Would any of this impact Todd Blanche's pending nomination, do you think?
HONIG: I don't think it's going to flip any votes given the reporting that we've seen, but it's really important to remember so much of the focus in Blanche's confirmation hearing was on the Epstein files and was on the slush fund, rightly so. But there's also a question of Blanche has said repeatedly that DOJ doesn't take orders from Donald Trump. It doesn't tell what -- do what Donald Trump tells it to do with respect to prosecution. These revelations directly undermine that, and I think it's important for people to understand that.
TAPPER: Comey also argues in his brief that his 8647 post does not rise to the level of a criminal threat. What do you make of that?
HONIG: Comey's argument on this point, I think, is also incredibly strong. So, the courts have made clear, in order for something to rise to the level of a federal criminal felony threat, first of all, there has to be a clear statement of an intent to inflict physical harm, and, second of all, there has to be some intent by that person to actually pursue physical harm.
[18:30:02]
If you start with the second part of that, there's no chance Jim Comey had any intent to go and come after Donald Trump. They let him stay out there for 11 months, and he took the post down immediately. He agreed to talk to the Secret Service.
With respect to 86, you can see in this brief, the government was scrapping desperately to try to make the argument that 86 means kill. Now, occasionally, it can be used for that, but the far more common usage just means we're out of something or to get rid of something. That's what all the dictionary definitions show. Many other high- profile public people have made posts about eighty-sixing various political people and have not been charged.
So, I think the argument that this was a criminal threat that overcomes Comey's First Amendment rights, I think that's a real stretch.
TAPPER: Comey's motion also reveals that the FBI apparently desperately looking for evidence that 86 definitely means kill. They looked at the fact that mobsters in New York have used the term and then cited mobster John Gambino when he was a young prosecutor. It's something like that. Explain this to me.
HONIG: This is a real stretch. They were looking desperately for evidence that gangsters use that terminology. They actually looked at the entire FBI database, something called Sentinel, and could not find a good example. And, yes, Jake, they pulled up a 30-plus-year-old file against a gangster named John Gambino that Jim Comey worked on, and in thousands of pages found not a single reference to 86.
They're left instead relying on the very credible source of Sammy The Bull Gravano. I'm being sarcastic here. And, of course, Gravano even said, Yes, Comey probably knew that 86 meant kill, but no gangster actually uses that expression. So, they're really grasping at straws here.
TAPPER: Yes, it seems like something like a, a gangster on Bugs Bunny would say. Like it doesn't actually -- like gangster --
HONIG: Yes, it's a cartoonish image. TAPPER: Yes, gangsters say things like, hey, take care of our friend, if you know what I'm saying.
All right, Elie Honig, thanks so much. I appreciate it.
TAPPER: A Capitol Hill hearing got so heated today that the Republican chairman had security escort Dr. Fauci's attorney out of the room. Our panel is here to break down some of these incredibly tense moments. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
SEN. JOSH HAWLEY (R-MO): During the pandemic, you got rich, didn't you? You got rich while people were dying.
SEN. RICK SCOTT (R-FL): You forced people to watch their loved ones die alone over the phone. It's disgusting.
SEN. BERNIE MORENO (R-OH): Here I am sitting in front of you six years later saying, who the fuck do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace what you did to this country.
SCOTT: What would you do differently knowing what you know today, Dr. Fauci?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Very intense questions today for Dr. Anthony Fauci. That was the Senate Homeland Security Committee questioning Fauci's handling of the pandemic. In his opening statement, Fauci accused Republican lawmakers of using the hearing to try to put him, quote, behind bars. He was afraid of a perjury trap. They ask him a question he answers incorrectly, and then they send his referral to the Justice Department.
The hearing quickly turned into a one-way conversation, Fauci refusing to answer questions, invoking the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times. Some Republicans asked about Fauci's private diary entries, which was recently made public by Committee Chairman, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, a longtime Fauci critic. Apparently RFK Jr. turned over the diary.
Senator Paul said that the committee is going to vote next week on whether or not to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress.
Our panel is here to discuss. So, Lauren, you were on Capitol Hill today. Is this pretty much what Republican lawmakers thought was going to happen?
LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think they were surprised that he decided to plead the Fifth. I think they were surprised that this continued on for hours and hours. I sort of expected that once the moment happened where he announced that he was going to just continue pleading the Fifth that they would give up very quickly. That is not what transpired.
And I do think it's interesting that Rand Paul said they're going to vote for contempt in committee next week. Even if that gets out of committee, Jake, it faces really long odds on the Senate floor. That's because you need 60 votes at some point, which means you would need some Democrats to vote with Republicans. That's not going to happen here.
But I think that what is clear is that Rand Paul has long time -- long had a vendetta against Dr. Fauci. He has waited for this moment, and he wanted to ensure that Dr. Fauci was questioned, embarrassed, and that Republicans got every single thing that they wanted to talk about today out in the open.
TAPPER: So, Mo, some -- I mean, one of the things that I think Republicans were going for here was that Fauci was saying things publicly that didn't necessarily line up with what he was thinking or saying privately.
Some of Fauci's private diary entries seem to contradict his previous public statements. For example, in a March 2020 entry, Fauci recalls a conversation he had with then-New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio. Fauci wrote, quote, I spoke with Bill de Blasio and convinced him based on what I was saying publicly in my conversation tonight to close the New York City schools. He had already decided based on what I was saying on T.V., unquote.
Fauci also wrote about a similar call he had with Gavin Newsom's chief of staff, Gavin Newsom, the governor of California. But in a 2022 interview with ABC News, Fauci denied any responsibility for having the schools shut down. Here's that clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, FORMER DIRECTOR, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: They always come back and say Fauci was responsible for closing schools. I had nothing to do. I mean, let's get down to the facts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: So, what do you think, Mo?
MO ELLEITHEE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, GEORGETOWN INSTITUTE OF POLITICS AND PUBLIC SERVICE: Look, I think if before today Democrats and actually a plurality of the country trusted Anthony Fauci, they get why he was pleading the Fifth today. They saw the trap that Republicans were trying to lay for him. If you're a Republican or if you're someone who distrusted Anthony Fauci today, I think you still distrust Anthony Fauci today.
I actually don't think today moved the needle on this debate in any real way. I get why he pleaded the Fifth.
[18:40:00] They clearly were trying to lay out a perjury trap for him. The uproar over him pleading the Fifth is a little rich considering Donald Trump was pleading the Fifth like 200 or more times during his deposition last year, or a couple years ago, in a civil trial.
So, at the end of the day, if you didn't like Fauci, you still don't like Fauci. If you did like Fauci and trust him, you probably still do.
TAPPER: Shermichael?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, look I do also understand why he pleaded the Fifth, but I think what this also does is it allows a lot of Americans who have legitimate questions about what Dr. Fauci knew and what he had concerns about privately as opposed to what he stated publicly, and what were the implications of that, particularly for people with younger children at the time, the psychological impacts, the academic impacts that many families across this country are still dealing with as their children were left behind, and some friends went ahead, and now you have children now who have a ton of issues in terms of navigating the world with other children because, for two years, they were locked indoors.
And so someone, in my opinion, has to be held accountable in that regard. So, I get not wanting to answer questions. I legally understand that. But I think it would've helped, at a minimum, to say, you know, maybe we did make some mistakes here in terms of what we told the American people and some of the advice we gave to governors across the country. To acknowledge that, I don't think, would've been harmful.
TAPPER: Well, could they, if the goal was truly fact-finding? And, look, obviously a lot of things were said and advised and done in 2020 by the person, in fact, who was the president at the time, President Trump. Let's not forget Anthony Fauci was senior adviser to President Trump, who actually made a lot of these decisions. But a lot of things were said and done that people probably regret. If they actually were trying to find facts, why not give him immunity for his answers thus to encourage a greater, fuller conversation?
SINGLETON: Yes, no, I actually would not be opposed to that at all. There's a little political theater here. I think we can all acknowledge that. But to your point, Jake, if the objective was to get further clarity in terms of mistakes made then and figuring out a fact-finding mission to avoid making similar mistakes when we have another pandemic at some point in the future --
TAPPER: Which will happen.
SINGLETON: -- which will happen, then I probably would've given him immunity to be transparent with the American people.
But, again, I do beg the question, should there be some level of accountability for errors that were made, and what should that look like? And I don't think we should be afraid to have that conversation while granting the doctor immunity to be clear and free to tell the truth.
TAPPER: But the only question I would say, Mo, is just why is -- no one comes out of 2020 in terms of the political decisions that were made in this town looking infallible.
ELLEITHEE: Sure.
TAPPER: But why is only one person being held responsible?
ELLEITHEE: And that's a great question. Look, we were all reacting in 2020 in real time to information that we were just learning in real time. We'd never been through this before in our lifetime. So, it is likely that mistakes were made. And in retrospect, we can see where we could have done some things differently.
I would also welcome a fact-finding conversation about what we can learn, but this was performative. This -- that's not what this was.
TAPPER: There should be like a, like the 9/11 Commission.
ELLEITHEE: President Biden --
FOX: The House did have a Coronavirus Task Force that did try to do some of that work. But, again, it got bogged down in politics.
TAPPER: Brad Wenstrup, the doctor and Congressman from Indiana, I think, or Ohio maybe, like he headed it. I do think, though, and I think we can all agree, there should be like a bipartisan 9/11-type commission about.
I want to ask you about, speaking of Ohio, Congressman Max Miller, he's running for reelection in Ohio's 7th Congressional district. His ex-wife, who is the daughter of Senator Bernie Moreno, who we saw in that piece, dropping a nice F-bomb, he accuses Miller of -- she accuses Miller of abuse. In police videos, she described allegations against him, including an incident in which she says he held a gun to her. Miller denies all of it and calls his ex-wife manipulative. The New York Times is now reporting that Republican officials are actually worried that all of this drama is harming his reelection chances.
You've covered this for us before but we covered it not as an election story, not as a political story, but as, you know, a family story, very sad because there's a child involved, too. Are you hearing that people are worried he might lose election -- reelection?
FOX: Well, and I would just point out that this is not an isolated incident because there are some ethics issues that are roiling Congress across the board, and a couple of them involving Republicans directly. And, yes, Democrats are feeling much more bullish about this seat than they felt, in part because this is supposed to be a safe Republican seat. And the fact that it is feeling more competitive, the fact that they have a Democratic opponent in Brian Poindexter, who they believe is really resonating with voters there, that is all having an impact.
[18:45:01] It isn't an isolated incident. You also have that ethics investigation into Chuck Edwards. That is having an impact in his race in North Carolina, another potentially safe Republican district that could be upset here.
And then there's obviously Cory Mills down in Florida. He is also facing an ethics investigation in the House of Representatives and Democrats are feeling quite good about their chances in that race if he wins his primary. So, this is not an isolated incident and I think that that is part of if you're talking about a wave election year, issues like this can make a huge difference for voters.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: All right. Thanks to all of you.
President Trump said today he's going to, quote, "beat the effing shit out of Iran". That's a quote. Does that mean we're closer to more military strikes and further away from any sort of ceasefire? That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Topping our world lead this afternoon, President Trump was perhaps a bit more restrained after he told Fox earlier today in the morning that he was going to, quote, "beat the effing shit," unquote, out of Iran for firing several ballistic missiles at U.S. forces in Jordan last night.
Here's the president in the Oval Office this afternoon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're going to be hitting them very hard because it's our turn to hit them. They know it's coming. They're asking us not to do it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Shortly after the attack, the U.S. and Saudi militaries jointly struck Iran-backed militias in Iraq.
[18:50:04]
Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth at Blair House earlier today.
And joining us now is the former Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz.
Thank you so much for joining us, sir.
So just hours before President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu met yesterday, the Israeli defense minister, your successor, Israel Katz, said that Israel had wanted to strike Iranian energy infrastructure, but they had been held back by the Trump administration, which begs the question: how much is the Israeli Defense Force taking direct orders from President Trump during this war with Iran? BENNY GANTZ, FORMER ISRAELI DEFENSE MINISTER: I think we have to differentiate between what has to do with national self-defense I would say. where we are totally independent and other issues that we might be more considerable with our backers like the United States or our allies around the region.
So, I don't think we can measure it yes or no. It depends on the issue and the circumstances. And I think that both Israel and United States know how to respect each other's interests or needs.
TAPPER: I'm sure I don't need to tell you that support for Israel among the American people is declining significantly according to many, many recent polls. You were part of the war cabinet during much of the Israel-Hamas war. Do you have any regrets about how Israel waged the war?
GANTZ: Basically, no, I don't. I wish you to -- it would be shorter, but let us not forget the facts. We were brutally attacked and butchered by Hamas, the very same Hamas that we kind of held him responsible for keeping Gaza straight safe and quiet. I don't have to remind you that, you know, close to 20,000 workers were working in Israel prior to this attack.
Everybody would blame us for supporting Hamas, for financing it, all those things that you can talk about. And eventually they did what they did. So, I've said before, and with your permission, I would like to say it again, Israel is not revenging in Gaza. There's nothing we can do to satisfy our human sense of revengement for what they did for us.
No, we are retaliating in Gaza, but we are securing the future, and we cannot afford to have hostile, radical organization, terror organization, Hamas, supported by the Iranians on our borders whatsoever.
TAPPER: CNN's Clarissa Ward just did an in-depth report on Israeli extremism, zealots pushing Palestinian Christians out of the occupied West Bank, which they've called home for 2,000 years. The United Nations released a report today saying that Israeli settler violence has reached an all-time high. And the Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid was on the show, my show this week, and said that the situation in the West Bank, what he called Jewish terror, is a, quote, "disgrace for Israel".
Why is Prime Minister Netanyahu tolerating this?
GANTZ: I agree that it's a disgrace, but I would like to put it in the right proportion. I don't agree, even not for one Israeli, to take the law in his hand, definitely not to reach to terror activities, and I think we should work as hard as we can against those people. However, this is extremist functions and groups that we should fight against, 99 percent of the people who live in Judea and Samaria are law-being people.
We cannot change the fact that thousands of Israelis were murdered by Palestinians, not the other way around. So, I don't accept any kind of those activities. I think we have to make sure that we take care of our security, but leave the Palestinians to live their own life. And I think we should act against those extremists.
Don't get me wrong, but please put it in the right proportion. It will not give us any discount from fighting those elements, but the truth must be said.
TAPPER: Former Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz, thank you so much. Appreciate it.
GANTZ: Thank you very much.
[18:55:00]
TAPPER: Coming up next, why one of the most popular bands in the world is now saying it will not submit its music for next year's Grammys.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: A Washington D.C. area airport is going to get a major upgrade. President Trump announced today a $22 billion upgrade to Dulles Airport in Northern Virginia. The president says the proposal, which he oversaw, includes upgrades to the parking garages, a new walking tunnel, a new hotel, and the big upgrade for people familiar with Dulles, the scrapping of the clunky 60-year-old so-called people movers that currently shuttle passengers from one part of the airport to another.
And our pop culture lead, K-pop supergroup BTS announced today they're not going to submit music for next year's Grammy Awards. The members saying on social media, they, quote, "hope that music can be heard and loved for what it is rather than being divided by region or language."
This is an apparent reference to the move by the Recording Academy to launch five new categories, including one for Asian Pop.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.
