Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
Trump's New Comments On 2026 Midterm Elections; U.N. Says, Deadly U.S. Strike On Iran School May Have Been War Crime; The Battle For Control Of Congress; NY Prosecutors Reopen Investigation After Former Student Files Lawsuit Over Alleged Gang Rape At Cornell University; Trump Contradicts U.S. Ambassador's Statement, Says He Did Not Discuss Possibility Of U.S. Selling Weapons to China. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 28, 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 HOST: The Lead tonight, MAGA, pretend I am on the ballot. That is a quote from Trump's Truth Social post coming 36 days until midterm Election Day. Trump's advisers are betting on him to get enough base voters out to the polls, this as a new Trump taxpayer- funded ad hit the airwaves over the weekend, a video sounding quite similar to a message delivered during Trump's 2024 campaign. Here's part of it
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We will liberate America from these villains once and for all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: With approval ratings at an all-time low and a largely unpopular war with Iran, consumer confidence down quite a bit, and three-quarters of the American people thinking the country is on the wrong track, Trump advisers privately are acknowledging that there is little expectation that the president can win over large numbers of independents and swing voters.
Despite that, President Trump's team is planning an aggressive campaign schedule for Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance in both battleground and in deep red states alike.
Let's bring in CNN's Chief White House Correspondent Kaitlan Collins. Kaitlan, when talking about the midterms, one Trump adviser told CNN, quote, it's obviously going to be effing rough, except the U-C-K were mentioned. So, why exactly do they think Trump is the best answer to help Republicans keep control of Congress when he is so unpopular?
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, probably because the president thinks that, Jake.
[18:00:01]
And he has seen polls before where he's been down and believes that they're wrong or fake or just misguided, in his view, and believes that he is actually the best person to help his party when it comes to maintaining control of Congress. And the president himself was asked about the midterms today, Jake.
So, yes, that might be what his advisers are saying privately, but this is what the president said today publicly
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We have the best economic numbers. We have Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. We're going to win that war very soon. That'll be over. And the gas prices will come tumbling down. So, nobody else could have done that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now Jake, obviously, that is an argument the president has been making about gas prices, that they'll come down as soon as the war is over. The problem is it's not really clear to voters when the war is going to be over. It's not clear that it's clear to the White House when it's going to be over.
And so we'll see if voters buy the president's message there in terms of what the economic outlook is going to be. But we do know what the polls show, and they've been widespread through many different outlets and different polling companies, that have not indicated good things coming in November for the president or for his party.
And I think part of just how this is clearly an indication that has spread to the West Wing is obvious is this new ad that the White House is putting out, now their second ad, that is a taxpayer-funded ad the White House is running, arguing that the president and his party should stay in power, basically, Jake.
And it's something that even Republicans are criticizing, including John Kennedy of Louisiana, who said, you can't spend public money to promote yourself, as he told CBS News yesterday, John Thune also criticizing it as well. But, really, the question, Jake, with that ad, beyond just, you know, is it ethical to be spending taxpayer dollars on such a political -- overtly political ad, is also whether or not it's going to make a difference.
When you look at the numbers and you see what the president is arguing there, basically saying the economic numbers are really good and the polls are fake, I mean, these are Americans who are going to show whether or not those polls are true or not when they go and vote in November. And a lot of that obviously has to do with affordability, with gas prices, and with how they're viewing the handling of the war in Iran.
TAPPER: Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. Don't miss Kaitlan on her fantastic show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins. Her guests tonight include Charles Spencer, Princess Diana's brother, who has a new book out. That's tonight at 9:00 Eastern only on CNN.
My next guest is demanding answers about the Trump taxpayer-funded ads. Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan of the great state of New Hampshire joins us now. Senator, before this latest Trump video came out, you sent a letter last week to the White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles about the previous one. Have you gotten any sort of response?
SEN. MAGGIE HASSAN (D-NH): No. I'm not waiting with bated breath for the White House to respond. As we know, they don't think they're accountable to Congress, but here's what the American people know. Donald Trump is using their money, taxpayer money, to fund an ad promoting himself. It's propaganda. It's political. It's not lawful. And right now our latest figure is he has spent at least $1.7 million of taxpayer money on these ads, and it needs to stop.
It isn't going to keep the American people from understanding how bad the economy is and how many campaign promises Donald Trump has broken.
TAPPER: In a similar response to a previous Trump video, the White House says this latest ad is, quote, Educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country. What do you make of that argument?
HASSAN: I think the American people know a political ad when they see it. And this response from the White House is just insulting. And it's really adding insult to injury because people are struggling so much right now. This is millions of dollars of their money, along with the other vanity projects that Donald Trump has undertaken.
We did at the Joint Economic Committee, an analysis of the cost of vanity projects, like the new ballroom, the Reflecting Pool, a bunch of the other things that Trump has done. That's about a $1.8 million total. And people can see what that money could pay for, school lunches, rent, childcare for people, by going to house.senate.gov, because we have an interactive calculator where people can see what that $1.8 million in vanity spending that he's already done could actually cover that would help the American people make ends meet at the end of the month.
TAPPER: So, I know well, from having lived in New Hampshire and traveling there frequently it's a purple state.
HASSAN: Yes.
TAPPER: And your colleague Senator Shaheen was here last week. She's a little worried. She's retiring and she's a little worried about the race to replace her. There is some new polling suggesting that Democratic Congressman Chris Pappas, who is the Democratic nominee, and former Senator John Sununu, who is the Republican nominee, that Pappas has a narrow lead over Sununu by eight points, but with the margin of error, it's pretty close.
[18:05:05]
Do you think -- how worried are you about the Senate seat in New Hampshire going Republican?
HASSAN: Look, first of all, New Hampshire is a purple state, and we have wicked close races. I won my seat in the Senate in 2016 by a little over 1,000 votes. So, this is a really close race. The Republicans are relying on a well-known political dynasty's name in New Hampshire.
And people are needing to be reminded of the things that John Sununu stands for. He's arguing that the Affordable Care Act isn't any good, which would take us back to a time when people with pre-existing conditions couldn't get health insurance. He was one of the architects of privatizing, trying to privatize Social Security with President George W. Bush.
Chris Pappas is of New Hampshire, knows New Hampshire, serves New Hampshire, small business owner and is really out there talking to people. And the New Hampshire voters know how expensive things are, that the country is on the wrong track. They don't want taxpayer dollars used for political ads or vanity projects either. They're just trying to build a better future for themselves. Chris Pappas knows that that's what his priorities are and should be, and John Sununu is trying to pretend he's something he's not.
It's going to be a close race but this is about people getting out and voting. If people are dismayed right now with the direction of the country, and they should be, they need to get out and vote. And we know that the administration, the Trump administration, is going to do its best to make that difficult, even purge people from voter rolls, so people need to make sure they're registered, and they need to have a plan to vote, and vote early if they can.
TAPPER: You're on the Senate Homeland Security Committee. What was your reaction to the news of the alleged terrorist plot near the U.S. base in England the same base where the U.S. uses to launch attacks on Iran? And why were the five suspects released?
HASSAN: This is a really serious issue. Counterterrorism is one of my areas of focus. Unfortunately, the Trump administration has been focusing so much on illicit interior enforcement with ICE, people shooting down folks in the street, that they are taking their eye off the ball, and we are working really hard to learn why the suspects were released.
TAPPER: Democratic Senator Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
Today marks seven months since the start of the Iran war, and seven months since that deadly U.S. strike against the Iranian school that killed more than 160 children. Coming up, a reporter is going to lay out how the site of that strike ended up as a target.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:10:00]
TAPPER: In our World Lead, it has been seven months today since a U.S. missile struck an elementary school in Minab, Iran, in the opening hours of the war, killing at least 168 children and 14 teachers according to Iran state media. A U.N. report recently concluded that the deadly strike may have actually constituted a war crime. The Trump administration told CNN it does not give credibility to the U.N. findings. To date, not one U.S. official has claimed any responsibility for those lives lost in Minab. The Pentagon says an investigation is ongoing. They've been saying that for quite a bit now.
Bloomberg News spoke to officials with direct involvement in the investigation who said, quote, the strike didn't result from a single catastrophic decision, but an accumulation of smaller ones, unquote.
Bloomberg News Ben Bartenstein joins me now. Ben, thanks for joining us. What you lay out in this smaller accumulation is a kill chain process of determining targets. From what you learned in writing your story, how did the Minab school end up on this final end list of targets?
BEN BARTENSTEIN, SENIOR INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, BLOOMBERG NEWS: Well, Jake, yes, that's a great question. It's something that we set out to try to understand over the past six months. The context you laid out is really important. When we look back, we're looking at least in terms of child casualties, the deadliest American military targeting error of the 21st century. So, there's a lot of folks who are seeking answers and accountability, and it's not just the families of the children, these seven, eight, nine-year-old girls and boys who were killed who are seeking these answers.
So, as we sought to reconstruct why the U.S. military would attack an Iranian school, we were both trying to understand what Pentagon investigators were finding as well as other sources with knowledge of the events. And the Pentagon investigators have identified, as you said, a cascade of preventable failures. This includes both intelligence issues from the Defense Intelligence Agency, a misclassification still identifying the site as an IRGC naval facility, but also outdated imagery and an overreliance on artificial intelligence in the form of Maven Smart System, which is made by Palantir Technologies.
Of course, another wrinkle to this is the reductions in civilian harm mitigation personnel since the Trump administration took office, reductions by about 90 percent overall for more than 200 down to fewer than 20. Of course, within CENTCOM itself, these reductions meant that the team went from ten down to one, and that one individual, our reporting found, was not involved in planning or operations ahead of this strike.
That's not to say that this team on its own necessarily could have prevented the failure, but these are specialist, folks with the technical expertise to identify civilian sites. They have -- they can add some of the cultural context. For instance, the fact that a Saturday morning is the start of the Iranian school week, and there would be more civilians present at the time, so a lot of additional nuance that could have potentially prevented this failure.
TAPPER: Let's talk for a second about Maven Smart System. As you noted, it's an A.I. software made by Palantir. What did you learn about Maven's involvement in this strike?
[18:15:02]
How much was this target picked by A.I.?
BARTENSTEIN: Well, yes, it's important to unpack the nuances there. So, in the past few years, the Pentagon has really ramped up the adoption of Maven, and Maven really sits at the center of the kill chain. So, you have these intelligence inputs that are going in on the front end of the kill chain, then Maven really helps Pentagon personnel expedite the processing of all these dozens of different intel inputs to make decisions at a faster pace. But there are still humans on the back end of the kill chain who are still ultimately making their own assessments before a targeting decision is made.
So, our reporting found that the DIA had this classification of the site as an IRGC naval facility. Maven failed to suddenly discount that site and flag any of the intelligence inconsistencies that some of the CENTCOM personnel expected it to. It also failed to flag the outdated imagery that was leading this misclassification to occur in the first place. But still at the back end of the kill chain, there were still humans who, you know, were ultimately making the final decisions and answering the tough questions of whether this was a legal military target that the U.S. was willing to strike.
TAPPER: All right. Ben Bartenstein, thank you so much. I really appreciate it.
BARTENSTEIN: Thanks for having me.
TAPPER: Coming up next, I'm going to speak with the New York prosecutor who has announced that he's reopening this disturbing case of the alleged gang rape at Cornell University. We're going to ask, of course, why charges were not filed when the case first surfaced two years ago.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:20:00]
TAPPER: In our Politics Lead, cue the music please, the CNN election jam.
Republicans hope to turn things around 36 days, in the next 36 days. That's when Election Day is. But in the White House, CNN has learned that there's some sagging hope, shall we say, among President Trump's inner circle, that Republicans can win this battle for Congress, given the president's all-time low approval numbers, and as Republican candidates are increasingly openly breaking with him in the White House.
Let's get some more analysis on the state of the battle for Congress with our panel. So, Lulu, let's start one of the key close Senate races we're watching is in Iowa, where a recent Marist poll shows Democrat Josh Turek with an eight-point lead over Republican Ashley Hinson. Today, Hinson joined Trump in the Oval Office, where he touted a plan to build a $15 billion steel plant there, the largest and newest history, and he said this about the race.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: First of all, the polls are fake. But when you see somebody like Ashley, one of the greatest politicians, you'll see it, one of the greatest. She'll be one of the greatest politicians in America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Now, it is true that about a year ago people would think, Ashley Hinson, that's a cakewalk. She's attractive, she's smart, local T.V. anchor, popular incumbent congresswoman. But now it really does seem like she's in trouble.
LULU GARCIA-NAVARRO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I was about to say it is also true the polls have not been great. Yep. So I will also just want to caveat all of this with --
TAPPER: The quality of the polls are bad.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: The quality of the polls and --
TAPPER: Iowa's tough to poll, yes.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Iowa's tough to poll, so I don't know.
But I will say that all indications are, both anecdotal and through every other metric, that people are really mad, and they're hurting. And they want to punish the people that they feel are responsible for that, and those are Republicans because, you can't say it enough, they control all three branches of government and also, obviously, in Iowa are very strongly represented.
And so it is fascinating to think how much this has swung in such a short period of time, and I think there's one answer for that, and it's not just affordability. You can really look at the war in Iran as a moment when things just started to go south.
TAPPER: So, Bob, I agree. I don't look a lot at the polls. I haven't really trusted them much since 2016. But I will say what I do believe is how politicians behave. Because their polling is much better and much more intense, and they know what's going on with their voters much better than public polls. They spend a lot more money than we do. And Iowa Republicans are acting funky. I mean, two of them voted, if not three of them, voted against Trump's war in Iran.
CUSACK: Right.
TAPPER: Ashley Hinson's running these ads about how bipartisan she's going to be. This is in red Iowa.
BOB CUSACK, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER: Yes. And this is consistent in red states. And I agree, in 2022, the last midterm, the polls were off. We were going to get a big red wave. That didn't happen. But Hinson has broken with the president publicly on tariffs as well as the war. And I agree with you, like a year ago, no one was talking about the Senate flipping. Nobody -- the House, definitely. And now more people than, you know, are at 50 percent that it's going to flip, maybe 60 percent. So, it's that's why they're breaking with him.
So, Trump is putting these Republicans in such a tough spot. Do they appear with him or not? They need his base, but yet they have to be independent. It's very difficult for them.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's a dance.
CUSACK: It is.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: It's a dance. It's such a hard dance because also the president doesn't help their cause.
I mean, if you remember when Nancy Pelosi was being made the villain of the right, she would tell candidates, you know, if you have to condemn me, if you have to break with me --
TAPPER: Say whatever you want in the House.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: -- say whatever you want, just win.
TAPPER: Right.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Like she was very brass tacks, but that's not the president of the United States right now.
TAPPER: No.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: He does not accept this kind of bargain. So, they're in a tough spot.
TAPPER: Speaking of keeping away, there's a lot of excitement on the progressive left about Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez possibly running for president in 2028. And she certainly has encouraged some of that with things that she's said and done. She went in upstate New York to campaign, maybe she'll run for Senate, who knows, but also talking about like how you don't necessarily get to pick your time.
[18:25:06]
But look at this headline from Axios. Swing-state Democrats shun AOC in fall campaigns. The story from Axios features a Democratic strategist saying the polling for her in their areas is atrocious. One of the examples in the story from a Montana Democratic House candidate, Sam Forstag, who Ocasio-Cortez endorsed and traveled to Montana to campaign for in May. He's now scrubbed her endorsement from his campaign website. What do you think of that?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I think that she is suffering from what has been a really big focus for Republicans, which is let's focus on Democratic socialism, and let's make it communism. And let's talk about it in a way that is as scary as possible. And she, of course, is the most visible person, the most prominent person who is an adherent to that strain of the Democratic Party. And so -- TAPPER: The most visible person under the age of 80.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Under the age of 80, indeed, of course, Bernie Sanders. But he's an independent. He's not a Democrat, as we should say.
But, you know, I do think that she is dealing with that. But it also shows the headwinds that someone like she might face if she decides to run for president, which is why all bets now are saying she's going to run for Senate and try and give Chuck Schumer a run for his money.
TAPPER: What do you think?
CUSACK: I'm not so sure. I wrote a column on her recently. I'm not so sure she's even made the decision yet.
TAPPER: Oh, I don't think she has.
CUSACK: And she -- I mean, she -- could she win a presidential primary? Yes, especially with 20 Democrats who run. She could win with 30, 35 percent of the vote. At the same time, her greatest weakness, as evidenced by that news, is her electability. And I've talked to a number of Democrats who say, listen we need a white male governor. We need to win in 2028. And whether that's wrong or not, but people are very concerned that she would not be electable in a general.
TAPPER: You know who I --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I don't think it -- Is it really about her gender, or is it about her progressive credentials?
CUSACK: I think it's in the back. I think it's --
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, that's so depressing.
TAPPER: I hear that from Democratic women.
CUSACK: Yes.
TAPPER: I hear that from Democratic women.
CUSACK: Yes.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Oh, I find it so --
TAPPER: I don't support it.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: I'm not saying you do. I'm just -- but let me just be on the record as saying that is depressing me.
TAPPER: You don't hear that from Democratic women, that they want to nominate a man because Kamala and Hillary lost?
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes, of course, but I don't know that is the answer that we should take from that, you know? I obviously -- and I don't care if they're Republican or a Democrat, I would like to see a female president of this country.
TAPPER: Sure.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: And I don't think that we are too far gone that we can't see one. Obviously, she herself, AOC herself has said and acknowledged that she faces headwinds because of her gender, because of her ethnicity, being Latina, you know, that there is compounded issues with that. But I just -- I don't know. I don't want to feed into the narrative.
TAPPER: She also -- and this is not a criticism, but she also looks like she's 27. I mean, like she looks really young. She is not. She's 35, I think. But like --
CUSACK: Yes.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes, she's almost 38.
CUSACK: Yes, 38. 38.
TAPPER: Okay. Okay.
GARCIA-NAVARRO: Yes.
TAPPER: But she's older than 35.
CUSACK: Yes.
TAPPER: The key there, everyone stand by.
I want to bring in Dave Wasserman. He's a senior editor and elections analyst for the Cook Political Report. Thanks for joining us. So, I want to play something your boss, Charlie Cook, said about the state of the midterm race. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHARLIE COOK, FOUNDER, COOK POLITICAL REPORT: I agree completely that the House has been kind of a done deal for a good while. But the Senate, a year ago, it wasn't realistic to think that the Senate might flip. But now it's very realistic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Dave, which states do you think give Democrats the best shot at flipping the Senate?
DAVE WASSERMAN, SENIOR EDITOR AND ELECTIONS ANALYST, COOK POLITICAL REPORT: Yes, Jake, it used to be that Democrats needed to win both North Carolina and Maine, and two of the four of the red quartet of states that Trump carried by between 11 and 14 points of Ohio, Iowa, Alaska, and Texas.
Now, Maine and Michigan are in some question for Democrats, I think Maine more so than Michigan. And that means if Susan Collins does hang on and win, Democrats need to win three of five states that are now double digit Trump states that are in play. I've added Kansas onto that list. And it's looking like Democrats are in good shape right now in Ohio, where Sherrod Brown is leading, in Alaska, where Mary Peltola has benefited from this split Republican opposition with a second Dan Sullivan on the ballot.
And even though Texas and Iowa look good for Democrats in the polls today, I think those are going to be tougher for them to win, while Kansas has leapfrogged Nebraska as Democrats' best long shot opportunity.
So, they have multiple paths to get there, but my sense, Jake, it's either going to be Democrats come up short by a seat, or they win all of these races and get to 54.
TAPPER: Republicans seem to think that they have a real shot at winning Michigan and New Hampshire. You sound skeptical of Michigan. How do you view those races New Hampshire and Michigan?
WASSERMAN: Yes, these are open seats that Democrats are defending.
[18:30:00]
And although they're close in the polls right now, what I think gives Democrats the edge at the end of the day is where Trump's approval rating is among independents and the undecided cohorts in these places. There's no doubt Jon Sununu benefits from his last name as a Republican in New Hampshire. Democrat's nominee, Chris Pappas, is pretty much a standard mainstream Democrat.
And although they're close, what we know is that Trump's approval rating among the people who are undecided, which is close to 10 percent, is in the 20s. And I have a very hard time seeing those independents and undecideds breaking towards a Republican given that he represents the president's party.
The dynamic in Michigan is Abdul El-Sayed has had to mend fences. He's he won the Democratic primary by less than a point. He is an avowed progressive. But the Canadian trade war, these tariffs on Canadian goods, have a big impact on Michigan's economy, and Mike Rogers has had to adopt a very nuanced position. I think that ends up tipping the race to Democrats by a little bit.
TAPPER: So, Charlie Cook says the House is a done deal. Democrats are going to win the House. Why are Democrats and so many analysts so confident about that when we're still more than a month away?
WASSERMAN: Well, the president's approval rating in our tracker today is 38 percent. Considering that Democrats only need to flip three seats to win a House majority, by historical measures, this would suggest that Democrats would end up with a massive majority.
Now, we estimate that Republicans have improved their position in the House by about five seats resulting from this gerrymandering war. It would've been six had Missouri gone the other way at the U.S. Supreme Court. What that means is that Democrats actually need to flip more like eight or nine Republican seats to win the House majority, not just three.
But right now we have 18 Republican seats that are in toss-up or lean Democrat. And so there are plenty of vulnerable Republican seats to get Democrats there, and I suspect if the election were held tomorrow, Democrats would end up somewhere in the 230 to 235 range.
TAPPER: All right. Dave and Lulu and Bob, thank you so much. I appreciate it.
The New York prosecutor in New York near Cornell relaunching that rape case, the gang rape case, that story's next, and we're back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
TAPPER: In our Law and Justice Lead, prosecutors have reopened a 2024 gang rape investigation at the elite Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. This comes days after a former student sued Cornell and seven members of the Chi Phi fraternity. The woman, identified only as Jane Doe, alleges that seven fraternity members drugged and sexually assaulted her at the fraternity house in October 2024, and that Cornell did not do enough to protect her.
The complaint also alleges that the gentlemen at the fraternity used a Snapchat group to invite other members to join the assault. To quote a text message from that chat, free pussy, one of the alleged rapists said.
The woman reported the incident to Cornell University police the following month, according to the complaint. Cornell suspended the chapter, but no fraternity members were criminally charged. The Tompkins County district attorney, Matthew Van Houten, says he did not pursue criminal charges against the fraternity members at the time, 2024, because the woman did not say she was drugged or assaulted in her 2024 sworn statement.
Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten joins us now. Thank you so much for joining us.
So, you called the allegations in the new complaint, quote, dramatically different from the statement she gave to Cornell police in 2024. The attorney for Jane Doe told CNN that the 2024 police report was not materially different from the allegations in this new current complaint. What's your response?
MATTHEW VAN HOUTEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK: Well, having gone through the civil complaint very carefully, I can say that the main difference between the two statements is that the civil complaint omits any reference that Jane Doe consented to the sexual contact, which is in and contained in her six-page sworn statement that she gave to the Cornell investigator. So, that's the significant difference.
I understand that people's trauma develops over time, and it's been two years. We have not heard from Jane Doe or her attorneys during that time. But now that we know that she has filed this lawsuit and recognizing that trauma gives you insight and you heal in different ways as a human being.
We want to reopen the investigation to ensure that she has the chance to speak her truth based on the insight she's gained in, over the last two years to the grand jury so that --
TAPPER: So, you put you put out a statement today that included excerpts from the Cornell police report from 2024, correct?
VAN HOUTEN: Well, not excerpts, but summarizing some of the important content from that, yes.
TAPPER: So, you said you referred to her consenting, and from what I read from the excerpts that you, or summaries, whatever, that you put out today is that she consented to a threesome with two other guys, but she did not consent to the five other guys that came into the room, and that she hid under the covers, and she pushed one away, and nothing that happened with those five other guys sounds consensual at all to me. Am I reading this wrong?
VAN HOUTEN: Frankly, you are. When she was subjected -- there were two instances she describes where someone touched her in a way that she didn't want them to touch her, and she told them no, and they did not continue.
[18:40:08]
But consent or lack of consent is very much -- very specific under New York state law. You either have to be physically compelled or forcible compulsion, physical force, or you have to be physically helpless, which is unconscious, or you have to be mentally incapacitated, which is having been given drugs without your knowledge that rendered you incapable of consenting. None of those things were articulated in her initial statement.
That being said, I don't -- that's what we knew in 2024. Now, we understand that she feels differently, and we want to talk with her. We want to give her a chance to speak her truth before the grand jury and tell the rest of the story, whatever information that she gained and insight she gained in the last two years.
TAPPER: When did you get copies of the text messages that the fraternity brothers were sending each other that are part of her civil complaint?
VAN HOUTEN: Well, that's -- the distinction there, it should be clarified that the question was did she consent? The text messages were completely vulgar and disgusting, but they had nothing to do with her consent, which is --
TAPPER: But when did you get them?
VAN HOUTEN: -- the linchpin of -- we did not see them initially. They were not part of our initial analysis. But I understand that Cornell had them and they sent them to our team.
TAPPER: So, this woman, after this incident happened, where five men that she did not want to be in the room come in, she describes herself at the end of the evening of being an eight on a scale of one to ten on the intoxication scale. She shows up at the fraternity, she's a five before she begins the threesome with the two guys consensually. She's a five or a six, then she's an eight at the end of it all.
She says she did ketamine, but she didn't remember when she did it or who she did it with or why she did it. She doesn't remember any details, but she knows she did it the first time she did the ketamine although it's a blur. She tells the Cornell police about this. This report goes to you, and yet you and your office don't interview her at all? You read the police report, put it down, and that's it?
VAN HOUTEN: When you have a comprehensive six-page single-spaced document that was extremely detailed, extremely candid, extremely specific, we are not going to reach out to her and say, hey, what you said didn't allege a crime. Can you give us more so we can charge somebody? That's not ethical. That is not ethical for a prosecutor to do that.
TAPPER: When you read this document -- look, I understand that some people, including, you know, advocates for rape victims, refer to what you're talking about they call it the voluntary intoxication loophole. Because in New York State -- and people are trying to amend this, but it hasn't happened yet, and New York State generally requires that you can only not consent if you have -- if you're intoxicated on substance that were administered to you without your knowledge.
And that's the only way you can be mentally incapacitated to the degree that you can't consent. It's -- I find that law befuddling, to be completely honest, because that's certainly not how most people think of consent. But when you read this document that you put out, Jane Doe says at least four times she had difficulty remembering what happened in her room. She's in this room. There are seven people in there. She only wanted to be with two of the guys.
The text chain, one of the fraternity brothers refers to her in that room with other guys as, quote, free pussy. None of that made you think, I should interview this woman, I should interview people at the fraternity that night, I should interview her sorority sisters? Not because you were trying to find somebody guilty of a crime, but just to get to the bottom of what happened, because you read this document and it's absolutely horrific, and it just -- I would think that a district attorney would want to find out more.
VAN HOUTEN: Well, it is absolutely horrific.
[18:45:00]
You're 100 percent right. We do not independently investigate crimes in the district attorney's office. We rely on the police to investigate those crimes and this -- the statement, without blaming her, she told the police candidly what she remembered and maybe she remembers more now. And if she does, then we want to put that in front of the grand jury.
But it's not. We can't push her to say something that she didn't say in the course of a six-page detailed statement --
TAPPER: You're convening a grand jury.
(CROSSTALK)
VAN HOUTEN: -- something extra.
TAPPER: You're convening a grand jury. So? So obviously you think it's possible a crime was committed.
VAN HOUTEN: We want to understand, and we don't yet understand what has happened since 2024. I've reached out to her attorney, to Jane Doe's attorney, and we've coordinated. We've discussed the fact that I would like her to testify at the grand jury.
Between now and then, we need to understand what has changed, what insights that she has gained, what additional information is there that we didn't know in 2024? And that's why I want to put the matter in front of the grand jury, so that she can tell her truth to the grand jury and include every piece of evidence.
TAPPER: So you never talked to police and say, I'd like to find out more about what happened here. Can you talk to anybody else that was involved, involved in the situation that never happens?
VAN HOUTEN: My team did not do that. We sometimes --
TAPPER: I know, but I'm asking, do you -- do you do that sometimes?
VAN HOUTEN: It does happen sometimes when there is a less complete story than what we had in the 2024 --
TAPPER: Well, there were eight people in that room. And you -- there were eight people in that room. And you have the story of one woman who doesn't remember a lot of what happened because she was so intoxicated on alcohol and ketamine. She is gone to the police to say something happened to me.
And it doesn't occur to you or any of the people who work for you to say, well, let's find out more about what happened, because there are seven other people in that room. Maybe she was passed out during some of this. She can't remember. And certainly, we need to get to the bottom of this.
After all, look at these horrific text messages. That doesn't occur to anybody in your office?
VAN HOUTEN: Well, let's -- let's -- let's back up a little bit, jake, because you're mischaracterizing. There were never eight people in the room at one time. And that's important. Social media has described this in a way that distorts the facts. And you're contributing to that right now.
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: I know that there was one time, and I know there were seven men that were in the room at different periods of time. Correct?
VAN HOUTEN: Well, that's different than what you just said.
TAPPER: I said that there were seven people in the room.
VAN HOUTEN: We can't rehash what you said. It's recorded.
TAPPER: I said there were seven people in the room.
VAN HOUTEN: You said seven people in the room.
TAPPER: Fine. Seven people in the room. What was the most number -- the highest number of men that were in the room at one time, four?
VAN HOUTEN: That's more accurate.
TAPPER: Okay. In any case, in aggregate.
VAN HOUTEN: We're getting -- we're getting -- we're getting sidetracked. Well, the question is --
TAPPER: The point is there were seven men in the room, whether they were all there at the same time or not. There were seven men in the room, and there were four men at one point in the room. And there were three other men that were at different points in the room.
And I am saying, those men may have knowledge in other fraternity brothers may have knowledge of what happened to this woman, and I'm asking why you didn't tell Cornell police or local police to go talk to them to find out more about what happened, given that this woman went to the police to make a complaint, thinking that she had been assaulted, something had happened to her. She didn't know what exactly.
And it's your responsibility as district attorney to get to the bottom of it and find out. That's why I'm confused.
VAN HOUTEN: Well, we can't change what happened in the past as much as the community is outraged by --
TAPPER: But do you regret not interviewing any other witnesses?
VAN HOUTEN: You know, when we have a detailed explanation of what happened going out, first of all, telling the police to interview these individuals, they're going to exercise their constitutional right not to speak to the police.
TAPPER: You don't know that.
VAN HOUTEN: They did but you do. They can -- they spoke in the Title IX proceedings. We are making efforts to get the Title IX transcripts, because if they spoke in that proceeding, that's evidence that we could potentially use in the grand jury. TAPPER: You know, I have a daughter. I can't imagine how mad I would
be if a district attorney handled this case that way for my daughter.
[18:50:05]
It's just -- do you not acknowledge that your office dropped the ball by not looking more into what happened? I'm not saying I know what happened. I'm just saying, based on the document you had, the Cornell University Police Department complaint, six pages, single spaced. It makes me think, oh, my God, this woman was at the very least, assaulted. Doesn't remember things that happened. Who knows if she was even conscious for all of it?
I want to know more about what happened, and that's -- correct me if I'm wrong -- your job.
VAN HOUTEN: My job under the New York state constitution is to apply the penal law of New York state. We are constrained by that law. Whether you agree with it, whether you think someone's conduct is morally repugnant or vulgar or disgusting, I'm still constrained by the law. That is --
TAPPER: I get the loophole --
(CROSSTALK)
VAN HOUTEN: -- duty.
TAPPER: I understand the loophole, I cited it, I get the loophole.
I'm talking about the curiosity to find out what happened and to talk to local police, which you have acknowledged you do. Hey, I need to know more about what happened because this woman did ketamine twice, was an eight out of ten on the intoxication chart and doesn't remember a lot of what happened. And there's a group chat of fraternity brothers saying free pussy like that would make me think we need to do more to find out what happened, because this sounds horrific.
I understand about the intoxication loophole in New York, and it's insane that that exists, and I'm not holding you responsible for it. I'm talking about working with police to get to the bottom of what happened, which is now you're trying to do two years later, after this woman is hired an attorney and filed a civil case. Don't you regret not doing more?
VAN HOUTEN: Well, let me push back on you one minute there, because she, Jane Doe, remembered explicitly virtually everything that happened that evening. And the fact that Jane Doe retained an attorney, that's -- no one reached out to us. If she remembered more. If she had more insight. In the last two years, that attorney knows very well how to contact my office to say she's dissatisfied with your decision. Let's sit down and talk. We would absolutely talk with her and figure out what the additional evidence is and pursue the grand jury.
TAPPER: Well, she says she didn't remember everything that happened that night. And I would just say she went to the police. And she thought that society was going to try to get to the bottom of it. And society failed her.
Matthew Van Houten, thank you so much for your time, and thank you for taking our questions.
Given the gravity of this story, do want to remind folks who may be dealing with any similar crisis in their past or currently, there are resources who can help you any time at the RAIN Network that's short for rape, abuse, incest national network, RAINN. You can reach them anytime@rainn.org with two ends, or you can call 1-800-656-HOPE.
Let's go now to our world lead. And a notable comment on the Sunday shows.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DAVID PERDUE, AMBASSADOR OF THE UNITED STATES TO CHINA: President Trump continues to say, hey, we sell arms to other people around the world. He actually asked President Xi, would he like to buy some at one point.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Sunday's comment by America's top envoy to Beijing appeared to catch President Trump by surprise earlier today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Did you make such a suggestion --
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To China?
REPORTER: To China.
TRUMP: You mean to Taiwan?
REPORTER: No, to China. That's what he said.
TRUMP: I never heard of that one. I'm going to have to ask him. I mean, we're going to sell -- now, they're probably like to buy it because we do make better equipment than them. So maybe it's a good idea. But we didn't discuss it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: It's also against U.S. law to sell arms to China. Interesting.
CNN global affairs analyst Brett McGurk joins us now. Brett, you have a new book out. We're going to talk about it. But what do you make of Trump saying maybe it's a good idea to sell weapons to China?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I hope that was not a serious conversation.
TAPPER: I mean, we just got it from -- the U.S. ambassador to China said it.
MCGURK: Chinese are from basically supporting Iran in the war against us. It's a very serious situation. The ballistic missile production in Russia and Iran are serious threat, all with Chinese technology. That should be the focus of a presidential conversation.
TAPPER: Last week, CNN reported that Iran has been increasingly effective in its missile strikes against U.S. military bases in the Middle East, thanks to intelligence from Chinese groups.
This is what the U.S. ambassador to China said when asked what are the consequences if China does continue to assist Iran? Here's former Senator Perdue -- Ambassador to China Perdue.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PERDUE: Presidency assured him that changes had been made, that they were looking into it. They had looked into it, and we see some improvement in that. But it's an ongoing effort that we have to make sure that they stay out of that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: I mean, they're talking about they're talking about it as if, like President Xi is going in the swimming pool, that he's not supposed to be going into.
MCGURK: The Chinese technology has enabled the Houthis anti-ship ballistic missiles, which I cover in the book that's coming out next week, enabled Iranian missiles. This has been a -- going on for two administrations, and it's extremely serious.. So that should be the focus.
We have Americans under attack. Anything China's doing to support our adversaries needs to stop.
TAPPER: Give me your book here. Let's show it off.
"Brink: Inside the Race to Free the October 7th Hostages". It comes out next Tuesday. There's a fascinating excerpt out today in "The Atlantic" detailing how then President Biden helped avoid a wider conflict in the Middle East by working with Israel to defeat an Iranian missile attack.
Tell us about that, and the phone calls between Biden and Netanyahu.
MCGURK: Well, Jake, we were just talking about missile attacks, and I bring readers inside the Situation Room as we had 170 Iranian drones, 30 cruise missiles, and 120 ballistic missiles heading to Israel. I described that scene in detail, what it was like, what it took to defeat that attack.
And then President Biden talking to Prime Minister Netanyahu right after we helped defend Israel, to say, now we got to contain the situation, get back to the hostage and cease fire talks. That's just one scene from this book, the excerpts out today in "Atlantic". And there's a lot more comes out next week.
TAPPER: What else do you want people to know about in terms of the race to free the October 7th hostages? Because that was a long, long effort. We hear, by the way, we hear some, uh, I don't know how to describe them, far left commentators saying that Hamas was ready to free the hostages on day one. I don't think that's true.
MCGURK: The whole story is here in this book. We had a deal, Jake, in November, about a month after the war, all women and children come out successful eight-day cease fire. War stopped. Aid is flowing throughout Gaza. About 100 hostages came out. Hamas refused to release the younger women that were part of the deal.
That's what broke that deal. And those women then did not come out until the day before the inauguration of President Trump. I tell that whole story, but it's important to get this story right.
And look, I'm tough on the Israelis, too. This is one of the most difficult, horrific crises I've dealt with over 20 years in multiple dimensions. It's emotional, it's horrifying. It's polarizing.
But I really try to bring readers inside the room. You're inside the Oval Office. You're with the prime minister of Israel. You're in Doha with Hamas downstairs.
You're in the Situation Room as missiles are flying. You are -- Americans are under attack and being killed by Iranian drones. How do you stop that with the Iranians in Oman, in secret backchannel talks?
The reader gets a seat inside the room in this book, and the reader can make its own judgments.
TAPPER: I remember President Biden going to Israel not long after the October 7th, 2023 attacks and telling Netanyahu, but also telling the Israeli people, basically, I'm paraphrasing, we gave in to anger after September 11th. Don't you do the same thing?
MCGURK: Well, again, the reader is there on that trip --
TAPPER: Do you think they did the same?
MCGURK: -- on Air Force One with President Biden?
TAPPER: Do you think the Israelis --
MCGURK: I think the Israelis face an impossible situation. I think Hamas prepared for this war for 20 years. And I think Israel made some big mistakes.
But at the end of the day, Hamas started this war. Hamas could have ended this war at multiple points by releasing the hostages. And there were times this is what's so tragic. There was times we were very close to a breakthrough and we couldn't -- couldn't quite get there.
TAPPER: All right. Well, again, fascinating excerpt in "The Atlantic" that people can read right now. And the book, "Brink: Inside the Race to Free the October 7th Hostages" comes out next Tesday. It takes you inside all of the rooms where it happened.
Brett McGurk, congratulations. And thank you so much for being here.
Our last lead start in our national lead. The FAA is investigating a rather scary moment for a united airlines regional jet just after taking off yesterday from Houston's George Bush Intercontinental Airport, the windshield cracked glass started falling into the cockpit.
Here's the pilot alerting air traffic control.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
MESA AIRLINES PILOT: Center Shuttle 6309. We need to level out altitude right now. We'll be right back with you in a minute. If we can delay the frequency change, please. We just had our glass break.
We'll declare an emergency, sir. We -- it looks like the glass busted completely through. It's just not a layer.
We're going to slow down at 210 because the glass is actually falling inside.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: Seventy-two people were on board the flight. The pilot made an emergency landing, and amazingly, no one was hurt.
And our sports lead, an 11-year-old chess prodigy, just became the youngest female grandmaster of all time. Bodhana Sivanandan from England, excelled at the 46th chess Olympiad in Uzbekistan this weekend. The record continues her meteoric rise in the chess world. She told the told the International Chess Federation that she's keen to keep making history.
Reminder big night in politics coming up Wednesday. The CNN debate this week in California's race for governor. I'm going to moderate alongside CNN's Dana Bash. That's Wednesday night at 9:00 Eastern, 6:00 Pacific live on CNN and streaming on the CNN all access app.
You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X and on TikTok @jaketapper. You can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.
