Five Charged in Alleged Plot Against White House UFC Fight

23:42In a statement, the Department of Homeland Security tells the New York Times that Mullen, quote, follows all ethics and conflict of interest standards and has not lobbied for any individual or company. New York Times reporter Kenneth Vogel joins us now. And Kenneth, in July last year, Mullen pushed for some federal restrictions on a synthetic form of kratom called 7-0-H. Take a listen. It's legal, but it's an addiction that's ruining lives. It's an addiction that's truly killing people because it leads them down a road that sometimes they'll never recover from. Explain the difference to our viewers between the synthetic version of Kratom and what Mullen seems to be endorsing.

24:27Yeah, the synthetic version, commonly called 7-OH, is basically derived from the natural version, but it essentially contains like elevated amounts or percentages of the psychoactive component, essentially the stuff that makes you feel either high, for lack of a better word, or grants you pain relief, or in some cases acts as a sedative, depending on how much you take. And so what the kratom industry has done, including the company in which he is an investor, which has been a leading player in this influence campaign, is to try to shift attention away from what they deem like natural leaf kratom, which comes in everything from these little shots that this company makes to gummies and extracts and shift that attention to 7-0-H and essentially say like, don't look at us, don't regulate natural leaf kratom.

25:17The real bad guys are these, the folks who make the 7-0-H. Now it's interesting that Mullen is raising concerns about addiction because public health experts actually have concerns about the addictive qualities of both the synthetic stuff and the natural kratom, like the stuff that the company that he's an investor in sells. How does Kratom fit into the broader Maha movement, the Make America Healthy Again agenda? Yeah, I mean, it's been embraced by, you know, folks who see mainstream medicine as like somehow flawed or very corporate and the interest, and that is, you know, the basis of the Maha movement in a lot of ways.

25:54Now what's interesting about this is some of the folks in Kratom say, and this is sort of rhetoric that echoes with what you hear from RFK Jr., that big pharma has clamped, has used its ties to the government to clamp down on kratom and sort of like demonize kratom. And the interesting thing is the folks in the kratom industry are now doing something very similar, using their connections to government to try to get it to clamp down on a rival drug, this 7-OH, which would be good for the kratom industry because they compete with the 7-OH makers for shelf space and market share. But meanwhile, the FDA on its website has a section titled, What Can Happen If a Person Uses Kratom?

26:36And it says, quote, FDA has warned consumers not to use Kratom because of the risk of serious adverse events including liver toxicity, seizures, and substance use disorder. You report the lobbyists have been trying to have that removed from the FDA website, that warning. Yeah, that's right. including the guy who is the founder of the company that Mark Wayne Mullen is invested in. And even more than that, we found out that Mark Wayne Mullen, both as a senator and now as the Secretary of Homeland Security, has actually urged the FDA to dial back its warnings about the health risk of Kratom. That's significant and would be a big win for the Kratom industry because a lot of the states where some of the regulation is happening as a result of the inaction at the federal level look to the FDA for direction.

27:23And so if the FDA is saying Kratom is bad, you can expect that there are going to be state regulators who are going to take their cues from the FDA and try to clamp down on Kratom. I often find myself needing to explain to people how statements from the government have loopholes or lines that you can drive a truck through. In this one from the DHS, it says that Secretary Mullen, quote, follows all ethics and conflict of interest standards and has not lobbied for any individual or company. but Kratom is not an individual and Kratom is not just one company, right? I mean, this is, this is, it's a natural herb or whatever.

28:00Yeah. And it's sort of a burgeoning industry and it exploded, uh, you know, when the government was trying, regulators are trying to clamp down on opioids as a result of the addiction crisis there because people who were either hooked on opioids or no longer could get access to them turned to Kratom because they thought it had some of the same effects, even as the industry has promoted it as natural. So yeah, there are a number of companies that do this. And so the statement from DHS about Mullen not lobbying for any particular company, he is advocating behind the scenes, whether you want to call it lobbying or not, for things that would benefit the Kratom industry, including the company that he's an investor in.

28:37It doesn't say he hasn't lobbied for any industry. That's the thing. Kenneth Vogel, thank you so much. And another little translation of English to Washingtonese, to Washingtonese to English. Thanks, Kevin. As millions of Americans head to the polls today, there was a new push on Capitol Hill to ensure the midterms are secure and fair. Someone who testified in that hearing is going to join us live coming up. Plus, breaking news about a shooting at a hospital in Delaware. New details is coming in. That's next.

29:09And we're back with breaking news. Delaware police say a Wilmington hospital is on lockdown after two people were shot Law enforcement responded to the shooting, which is about 30 miles southwest of Philadelphia. We're going to monitor and bring you updates as we get them. Until then, though, let's turn to our politics lead. Today on Capitol Hill, the integrity of America's election system was in full focus at a Senate Democratic forum as we raced towards the midterms. Lawmakers questioned experts on a host of issues, including the role federal officials have played in dismantling election cybersecurity.

29:40My panel joins me now. David Becker, you were inside that room. You testified. Take us inside. Tell us about the hearing. Well, there were several senators, only Democrats. There were no Republicans in the room. And there was testimony about the fact that the Trump administration has dismantled the cybersecurity around elections infrastructure that it actually was responsible for building back during the first Trump administration and the Biden administration continued. And this gave incredible resources and information to state and local election officials all over the country, particularly as foreign adversaries sought to spread disinformation and perhaps attack election infrastructure.

30:14That's gone now. And our elections are still secure in the United States. We have things like paper ballots and audits to ensure that. But the job has gotten a lot harder because that infrastructure is completely gone. As we also see things like disinformation being spread sometimes by the administration itself and DOJ lawsuits against the states, etc. And it wasn't just about those who are trying to tear down the protections that are there. It was also about the resilience of the election officials that are holding everything together right now. Tell us about that. Right. So we're seeing this in the primaries, right?

30:41We're seeing very high turnout in all the primaries. California had a really high turnout. You and I talked about this before. California took a little longer than what we expect in terms of how long it takes them to count all those mail ballots that come in. I think they're going to work to try to get that better. But one of the stats I just got was that California actually counted over 5 million ballots in the first few hours after the election, reported those out. That's more ballots that have been counted ever in about 40 states. So they just have a huge volume. But we were talking about how election officials, despite the disinformation, despite the lawsuits coming from the federal government, despite the fact that our foreign adversaries might be emboldened by the fact that we've somewhat unilaterally disarmed in the cybersecurity wars in this area, are still doing a really good job.

31:23Their infrastructure is still strong. They're working with each other across party lines in most cases to make sure that their elections are secure. And we're seeing that again in the primaries as people are even voting here today. Are you guys worried about the election? Are you worried about any attempts to subvert the will of the people? Absolutely. I'm most concerned, and I do a lot of work with the civil rights and voting rights community, there is grave concern about the security, for example, of our poll workers, because as we know, they face a lot of challenges that they, threats to their lives, which they should not.

31:55And there are a lot of concerns based on what President Trump has been doing in terms of, you know, what we saw in Fulton County, Georgia, Georgia's voting today, in fact. the things that we've seen him suing the states for voter rolls and the control that he has said he wants to have over certain states. It's very concerning. And there are, in addition to some of the things that Democrats on the Hill are looking at, there are conversations happening about how to ensure elections are secure and that voters are actually able to get to the polls unobstructed by national security, ICE officers, or National Guard, I meant ICE officers.

32:33So there are a lot of concerns. Mike? Yeah, I'm concerned, but I'm also concerned about several of the things that we talked about, that you talked about today, especially from foreign actors trying to, not just at the polls, but in terms of the influence that we see online prior to even going to the polls. So there is concern about that. But I'm also concerned about the speed. California is a perfect example. You talk about 5 million ballots being counted. But I think this lack of speed hurts democracy. And there are other states such as Florida that are very large states that can count the mail-in ballots and do count them prior to Election Day so that when Election Day closes, they can put those ballots out there.

33:19And I think that's we need to do a much better a much better job of getting the vote out in a timely manner, because I think this conversation about how long California takes, it allows this conspiracy theory and these foreign actors and others from speaking and trying to hurt. But not if we actually stop feeding the conspiracy theories and say, look, in California, it's going to take time. Even if we're not feeding it, our foreign adversaries are. They're questioning it. So speed helps democracy, and we should count fast. I think there's the perception of speed and there's speed, right? I mean, we forget that in 2018, it took weeks to tell us who won the elections in Florida.

33:57We think of Florida as being really fast, but Ron DeSantis' election was decided by 0.25 % in 2018. That's not that long ago. Narrow margins mean that. Also, what happened in California is a lot of mail ballots were dropped off on election day. California does pre-process and validate those mail ballots as soon as they get them, as most states do, but you can't do that on a ballot that was dropped off. But these conversations are important because I think everyone wants fast counts. I think we want to know what happens. We also want to know those ballots are being properly validated. But we can't have that fueled by conspiracy.

34:28Yeah, I mean, just have these discussions on that point in 2022. I think it was it took a long time to count the ballots in California. Yes. A lot of those really contested districts ended up going Republican. And Republicans didn't say this is during Biden. And the Republicans didn't say, oh, my God, it was a grand conspiracy, blah, blah, blah. because, you know, Valdeo and the others won. And I think I'm talking about 2022. I think you're 24. I think Valdeo lost in 22. I mean, I know you're taking my point, though. But that's actually my point, though. I'm thinking of Valdeo because it took three weeks for him to find out that he had lost that election.

35:04That, to me, is an extremely long period of time, even if you have a high volume of of ballots. We're talking one congressional district, which across the country, most of the congressional districts are the same size. Why does it take three weeks in California for something that in most states takes only a few days afterwards, even with the ballots coming in? Really, a really remarkably narrow margin there. When you get margins that narrow, I mean, unfortunately, you know, we have really closely divided elections right now. So when we're talking about, I think back to Arizona in 2022, there was an attorney general's race that was decided by 200 or so votes statewide.

35:39It doesn't matter how fast you count the ballots. You're going to be waiting until the very last military and overseas ballot comes in, and that's going to be. I remember the race in Minnesota between Al Franken and Norm Coleman. It took weeks and weeks to count all those ballots. Right. Well, and the worst part about that was then they contested the ballots afterwards. I was actually involved in that. And the Republicans played nice. And some of the contested ballots, they just said, OK, we won't we won't contest them. And then in other in other counties, the Democrats did press. I want to play this clip.

36:07Former Vice President Kamala Harris was one of the speakers of the Schwarzenegger Climate Initiative. She was asked about where she is right now when it comes to possibly running for president again. What I hear a lot is that people know that at the end of this administration, there will be a lot of debris. I tell them often, I can't guarantee that it won't get worse before it gets better. Does that make you more likely to run then? Well, no, you started by asking me what I was going to do next. And what I'm going to do next is get a soccer tort to take home. A soccer tort's an Austrian chocolate cake.

36:45Karen Finney, if you had to bet, is she going to run for re-election? I mean, election? Is she going to run again, is what I mean. No, I think she ultimately will come to the position that she can do great service to this country as a stateswoman outside of the political process. That would be my bet. Ask me. I hope so. I hope so. I know you do. Ask me. Yes, I do. I think that was a perfect example of why. Because soccer tort? Soccer tort and the way that she presents herself. Thanks, everyone. One of the greatest soccer stars, not soccer torts of all time, Lionel Messi is set to take the pitch tonight for Argentina's first match of the World Cup.

37:22And we're live outside the stadium. Where is it? Kansas City, Missouri. That's next.

37:32It is a star-studded Tuesday at the World Cup with the global spotlight fixed on North America. as three of the game's biggest stars take the field. This afternoon in New Jersey, the French squad, led by Kylian Mbappe, defeated Senegal 3-1. In just a few minutes, Norway returns to the World Cup stage in their first appearance since 1998 with star player Erling Haaland. And later tonight, Lionel Messi and defending champions Argentina open against Algeria, chasing another chapter in what could be Messi's final World Cup run. This match is being played in Kansas City, Missouri, and that's where we find CNN's Elizabeth Perez.

38:13Elizabeth, Kansas City is betting that the world's biggest sporting event can put this Midwestern city on the international soccer map. What is the atmosphere like there? Hello, Jake. Thank you so much for having me. Well, today it marks the route, the journey of the Albiceleste, the Argentinian national team, to try to defend the title they won in Qatar 2022. The ambience has been crazy, the atmosphere. Yesterday I visited a park where they celebrated El Banderazo, which is the official ceremony with all the fans celebrating, singing, eating typical food. And of course here is kind of early for the game, which is going to happen in a couple of hours.

38:57But of course, some fans have been coming in and out. And I found this lovely couple here that they are. He is half Argentinian. You were born in America, but you are American from Kansas. So how did you guys meet and how was he able to convince you to wear that jersey? We actually met on a dating app in 2021. And yeah, I didn't know he was from Argentina when we met. I just thought he was, you know, typical guy from New Jersey. And then we met. I learned the whole backstory and here I am five years later, Argentina fan. One of the things that I have learned from Argentinians is that you leave soccer with so much passion.

39:35We were talking before this live hit and he was telling me, I'm kind of nervous because even though we won three and a half years ago, I don't know what is going to happen inside. What do you think is going to happen? I hope a win, but even if it's a loss, it's okay because that's part of luck. Like, you know, Kavala, you have to expect the, even if it's a loss, that's what happened four years ago. So, and world champion. So, it's okay. No matter what, it's okay. They always say, no hacer mufa, which is not jinx it, no? Yes, yes. So, what can you, how can you jinx something like this, like a game?

40:09Like, it happened three and a half years ago with Saudi Arabia. Expecting too much, not expecting anything from the other team. I think that's a big one. So you have to respect your rival. And what have you learned about Argentina so far? Oh, so many things. We've gotten to travel there a few times since we've been together. The food, the culture, of course, the football is a big part of it. Is this bigger than when the Chiefs or the Royals win? Oh, yeah. I mean, for Kansas City, it might feel the same size, but the world is not watching when the Chiefs win, and the world is watching. for this game.

40:49Well, enjoy the game. Have fun. And back to you, Jake. The world is not watching when the Chiefs won. Well said. Elizabeth Perez in Kansas City. Appreciate it. Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, world leaders are in France tonight, where sources say there are frank conversations happening about the U.S. agreement with Iran, an agreement we should note that even some key allies have not seen the text of. Are we getting any closer to learning the actual details here? Plus, an American who was exposed to Hantavirus on that cruise ship says she is being forced to stay in that Nebraska quarantine facility against her will, even though she's tested negative.

41:30Angela Perryman says she's negative for the virus. Other passengers have been allowed to finish their quarantine periods at home. But Perryman says that HHS Secretary RFK Jr. personally signed an order to stop her personally from leaving. She's going to join us from her room inside the National Quarantine Unit ahead. Also, it's election night in America as voters in multiple states in Washington, D.C. head to the polls. Will President Trump's last-minute 1 a.m. endorsement in that Georgia Republican Senate primary have an impact? Will the nation's capital select a mayor who is ready to battle with the White House?

42:04We're tracking all the key races tonight. And a surprise announcement thrilling in the sports world. Venus and Serena Williams are teaming up to make a return to Wimbledon. what we're learning about their preparations ahead of one of the most iconic tournaments.

42:21The lead tonight, the U.S. agreement with Iran, dominating discussions with world leaders at the G7 summit in France of world superpowers. Details about what's actually in the deal, an opening of the Strait of Hormuz, an investment fund for Iran, the future of Iran's nuclear program. That's all still murky ahead of the signing ceremony set for Friday in Switzerland. President Trump fielded questions about plans to release the text ahead of Friday during the G-Semite summit today. I will. Why not release it before Friday? Well, because I'd like to get a formal setting first before we do that. But I have no problem with that.

42:58It's a good document. Here's what it says. Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. CNN's Caitlin Collins is just over the border in Geneva, Switzerland, monitoring the latest. Caitlin? Yeah, Jake, there's obviously a lot of skepticism back at home over this deal, given the fact that it has not been released still by the administration, despite multiple questions to senior administration officials about where the text of this memorandum of understanding is from the Iranians and from the Americans. But here at the G7 summit, a lot of the world leaders that the president has been meeting with in front of the cameras and behind closed doors are happy that there is at least some movement on this, that the president has announced this.

43:38because they all want to see this war come to an end, Jake. I mean, they've been stuck in this awkward position for the last several months where the president has basically lashed out at every single world leader that he's meeting with here in the G7 for not helping out more with this war that he did not coordinate with them on before starting it. They've been stuck in between dealing with that and also populations that are against this war. And so for the president to come to the summit to announce that they are taking a step that he believes will bring the United States closer to ending the war in Iran is certainly something that is being welcomed by the leaders here.

44:10And so the president himself has said that soon he believes this war could be put in the rearview mirror as there are still so many questions facing the administration, not just about this text alone, Jake, but about also the sanctions relief that Iran is expected to get as a result of this, the potential unfreezing of their assets that they want as part of any deal that they are going to strike. In terms of also what the president has been touting, which is what they are doing with the highly enriched uranium and what's going to happen with the prospect of a future nuclear deal. All of that is still unknown as the president has been meeting with these world leaders here, Jake.

44:44And so all that remains to be seen. I will note that we went up to the G7 today in France, and we actually sat down with the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, earlier today. He is actually someone who has seen the text of this agreement. So we did an interview with him. We talked about this agreement. He is on board with it, he says, in terms of how it's structured and what it looks like. And he confirmed what the vice president told you yesterday. It's about a page and a half long in terms of not an extended kind of an agreement. But, Jake, just because these other world leaders have seen it, it's still notable that here we are 24 hours since we were last talking about this.

45:20And still the administration is declining to release the text of this and now indicating that they are going to wait until that signing ceremony that happens on Friday. with the vice president repeatedly citing the Qataris and the Pakistani mediators as the reason for not releasing that text yet. Even though he acknowledged himself, he doesn't fully understand why they're not releasing it yet. All right, Caitlin Collins in Geneva, thanks so much. And of course, don't miss Caitlin on our show, The Source with Caitlin Collins. As you just heard, she interviewed the Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney at the G7.

45:50And Prime Minister Carney has seen this MOU and is going to talk about it with Caitlin. That's tonight at 9 Eastern on CNN. My panel's here, former Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary under President Biden, Sabrina Singh, former National Security Council official for every president that I've ever heard of, Brett McGurk. Brett, we haven't yet seen any text of this deal, but based on everything that you have heard, what are your initial thoughts? It seems from what we're seeing that we are paying a lot and making massive concessions of things that Iran has always wanted to solve a problem that was not a problem before the war started.

46:23I mean, that's basically the baseline. So what is what the Wall Street Journal is reporting to and others is that we're agreeing to waive all sanctions on banking and oil trade and all sorts of things, which will be if you do back of the envelope math, billion dollars a week or so for Iran. So they will be receiving an influx of funds, which I think you got to then ask yourself, how is it then possible to try to maintain the leverage to get this the nuclear commitments in this 60 day period? because so far, as we haven't seen this text, there's really no commitments from Iran, as I understand, other than perhaps for 60 days to let ships pass through the strait.

47:07And even there, I think what is also troubling is it's unclear whether your return is a status quo antebellum, meaning before the war, and this is an international passageway, or if Iran is now asserting basically its sovereign domain over the strait, and that it'll charge fees as the 60-day period ends. So a lot of questions, but bottom line, I think I had said that we had a stalemate in the strait. There were three options. You could concede, basically the cave to Iran's demands. You could try to endure the situation and endure the macroeconomic pressure, or you could militarily try to re-seize the strait, which was risky.

47:42It appears that the president made the decision to basically concede. And declare victory. Yeah. Sabrina, Vice President Vance was on the show yesterday and I started asking him, is there anything in this agreement to restrain Iran's ballistic missile capability and production or their funding of groups that the U.S. considers terrorist, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis? The short answer is no. But I guess the agreement says that we expect Iran to comport itself in a manner befitting the community of nations and a regional stability. Is that going to be enough, though? Well, I mean, what's interesting is the objectives that were stated at the beginning of this war, which we know changed sort of over time, one of them was the ballistic missile capabilities that Iran retains and, of course, their support for proxy groups.

48:29And now that's sort of fallen off. I mean, this agreement that's 14 points, a page and a half, I mean, I think I have grocery lists that are longer than that, really is trying to return the Strait of Hormuz to what the status quo was before the war. And that was something that was never even a factor when this war started. I also thought what was interesting in your interview with J.D. Vance was that he said this is a general document. Brett has talked and all of us have talked, you know, so much about how good Iran is at negotiating. They want to draw this out. And so a general document, when you're not going through the painstaking details of who's going to get the highly enriched uranium when it comes to their nuclear program, all of those details, and then, of course, the proxy groups, the ballistic missile program, and that's going to be negotiated over 60 days.

49:14I mean, that's quite aspirational. And so So I just don't see how that gets done without really going through the details. And we just don't have them yet. And our excellent Pentagon reporter Zach Cohen was on earlier talking about how the intelligence agencies think now Iran knows that they have this card to play in shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. Before it was always theoretical. You guys would war game it out. And it would be like, well, they might do this. Now they know we can do it. It doesn't cost that much to do. We just need a few drones and a few missiles. I asked Vice President Vance about this, about what makes you think that now that, you know, that Iran, having rebuilt their military, will not do this even while they're doing this now with a decimated military.

49:57Here's what he had to say. One of the reasons why they made this agreement is because they recognize they're losing that leverage over the Strait of Hormuz. That's a card they can play. They played it once, but you can't play it every day indefinitely or you start to lose it. And I think they saw that that leverage point was getting weaker and weaker, which is why we've been able to strike this agreement. Brett? Well, look, great respect for anyone trying to do a deal with Iran is hard. This is really hard work. But if that was true, you do a we'll lift our blockade and we'll let traffic go through the strait.

50:30You don't have all these other upfront benefits which appear to be in the deal. What I also find troubling about some of the things the Vice President is saying is that he seems to be saying that we are transforming our relationship after 47 years, that Iran is turning a page in their relationship with us. I have to say, I study what Iranian officials are saying, what their state media is saying. There is zero indication of that. And so I think what we're likely to have here is the Islamic Republic will maintain their ideological direction led by the Revolutionary Guard, and they will take the resources they gain from this deal and reestablish their missile network and their proxy network.

51:06Again, what they've done, this isn't just a problem for President Trump. It's a problem for every president. It's really hard. That's why it's such a horrible, wicked problem. But that's what I expect we'll see. And that's why I think this is not likely to succeed, frankly. This will probably fall apart. And I know you're hoping the opposite, but yeah. And then, of course, the question is, if this is entirely focused on the nuclear component, how are we going to make sure that they're abiding by their agreements? What about the inspections of the nuclear dust underneath all that rubble? Sean Hannity asked Vance about that last night.

51:37Take a listen. Let's talk about any place, anywhere, anytime U.S. inspectors. That's part of the deal. Yeah, that's that's absolutely something that we are negotiating over, Sean. That's one of the final details that's going to be figured out here. Seems like a pretty important detail that has not been agreed to. When your entire mission for the start of this war was to address the nuclear program, and you can't answer the question of how you're going to address the nuclear program and whether that means U.S. boots on the ground, I think that's a real problem. And I think that's why you're seeing on both sides of the aisle, people saying, we need to see the text.

52:14And it's interesting that Mark Carney has seen the text before some of our members of Congress have. Yeah, exactly. Sabrina Singh, Brett McGurk, thanks to both of you. President Trump says he's going to send the new Iran agreement to Congress for review. Okay, if the text is being kept from members of Congress, some allies, what are the odds that every lawmaker is going to get to see it before it's released to the public? Well, I'll ask the first Iranian-American Democrat ever elected to the House next.

52:48I never even thought about it, but I will. I will send it to Congress. I like the idea. I like the idea. Send it to Congress, please. All right. Back in the world lead, President Trump this morning at the G7 summit of world superpowers committed to sending the text of the U.S. agreement with Iran to Congress for review, though he did admit that the idea was not the first thing on his mind. Joining us now, Congresswoman Yasemin Ansari, Democrat of Arizona. She's the very first Iranian-American Democrat ever elected to the House. Congresswoman, thanks for joining us. So President Trump says he's committed to sending the deal your way to Congress.

53:21Do you think you're going to get to see a copy of the text before the deal is signed on Friday? I don't know, Jake. I mean, no part of this war has been has gone through Congress whatsoever. This has been an illegal war. It's been catastrophic from day one when Trump started it in February. And he has bypassed Congress at every turn. And now he is desperate and stuck in this situation. And even the Senate majority leader says that he has not seen anything about this deal yet. So, of course, now he wants to send, you know, potentially send this part of it to Congress. But I think that ultimately he has taken on this war by himself.

54:04And this the blame for all of it is on Donald Trump. What what do you wish were in this deal that you haven't heard is? the issue is that this war never should have happened to begin with none of the objectives that donald trump tried to lay out he changed the objective many times as you know as did marco rubio as did jd vance whether it be destroying the nuclear program whether it be regime change whether it be the missile program none of those alleged objectives have been reached We literally have a more combative, more hardline, younger regime in Iran. The nuclear program is not destroyed. What this deal is, at least what we have heard from what's been leaked, is that there is a deal to then talk about a nuclear deal.

54:54The other piece that is blatantly missing in this deal is anything that has to do with human rights for Iranians. As I've talked about many times, back in January, thousands of Iranians were massacred. Donald Trump claimed, quote unquote, help is on the way. He actually said that many times. And people believed him. And not one thing in this deal has to do with releasing political prisoners. There's U.S. citizens in Iran's most notorious prisons. They are still conducting political executions. There's really no guardrails on stopping the funding of terrorist organizations. I think it's abysmal, but I want to be clear.

55:35This war needs to end. We need to cut our losses. It's been catastrophic from the beginning, and it's really destroyed the U.S.'s reputation on the world stage. I want to get your reaction to something President Trump said today. and then after that clip from today, I'm going to run something that he said on the night when he announced the military operation against Iran. So here are those two bites back to back.

56:04Now, you talk about regime change. I never cared about regime change. It's never a part, but I guess you have regime change. To the great, proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand. When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations. So he says today that regime change, he never cared about it. It was never a part. But I guess you have it because I guess it's a new regime in the sense that, you know, as you noted, they're younger and they're more hard line. What's your take on all that?

56:45my take is that trump just doesn't know anything about any of the countries that he gets himself involved in i don't think he understands anything about iranian history domestic politics who even as part of this regime he literally doesn't understand or know anything about it so it is a massive slap in the face when you know he again made all these claims help is on the way take over your government, et cetera, et cetera. It was always bullshit. But also weeks later, he said there's a new regime because he doesn't understand how the regime in Iran is entrenched within the military and the economy and the rest.

57:23He just doesn't know. He doesn't know anything about foreign policy. It's really devastating the outcome for Iranian people. Thousands of people were senselessly killed, 13 American service members for what? There's truly zero benefit that anybody has gotten out of all of this. I think and I hope that anyone who may have ever believed that an ounce of truth comes out of this guy's mouth knows now that he is a pathological liar who cannot be trusted. Arizona Democratic Congresswoman Yasemin Ansari, thank you so much for joining us, appreciate it. My next guest was on the Hantavirus-stricken cruise ship and says she's being forced to stay in the National Quarantine Center, despite testing negative and despite other passengers being allowed to quarantine at home.

58:13Stick with us.

58:19Our health lead now, quarantined Hantavirus cruise passenger Angela Perryman, just wants to go home. But Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. says despite Angela testing negative and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention saying she's good to go, RFK Jr. says she needs to stay in a Nebraska quarantine facility until next week. This new order, signed on Monday, was first reported by the New York Times. And Angela Perryman joins us now. Angela, first of all, we're so glad that you're doing okay. We've been hearing about all of this with horror in recent weeks. Other passengers have been allowed to leave for at-home monitoring.

59:01RFK Jr. says the state of Florida will not comply with the quarantine guidance. So what do you make of all this? And how did you find out that you had to stay for at least another week? Well, you know, what I make of this is the CDC is asking something that's not public health policy. They monitored 19 people that returned less than two weeks before us the entire time under home monitoring with no guard. Therefore, they demonstrated that that is not necessary, that you don't need a guard. They used the protocol that Florida wants to use for monitoring those 19 people. So their new requirements now are arbitrary, and they're not in line with good public health practice.

59:47Seems to be the consensus. So what's your message to RFK Jr.? I mean, if you were watching right now, what would you say to him? What would I say? I would ask him why he's doing this, why he's not listening to the doctors in the CDC that say that home monitoring is appropriate. Why is he overriding the doctors that are professionals and do this for a living? That doesn't make any sense to me. I would ask him why. They've given you no reason for this. They've just they just did this arbitrarily and with no adherence to how other patients patients have been treated. They have not. The medical reviewers report laid out a multi-page justification for for home monitoring and why that adequately supported public health.

1:00:39And RFK Jr.'s half page response ordering me to stay here addressed none of that. It simply said stay. What has been what has quarantine been like for you? How are you passing the time? It's like being in a prison. This facility, the National Quarantine Unit, is essentially just an administrative prison for the federal government. It's a place to put people under administrative orders. We're not sick. We're receiving no medical care. The extent of our screening is somebody looks at the display on a thermometer twice a day when we take our temperature and delivers us feels. I'm not sure what your opinion of RFK Jr.

1:01:25is, but this is somebody who for decades now has been ignoring the advice of medical experts and health professionals. Do you see his decision regarding you in the same light as his general behavior when it comes to scientists and doctors, how he ignores them? You know, I see it actually as exactly the opposite of his normal position. His position always seems to be that the federal government should not be intruding on the health issues of individuals, that the federal government should not be imposing mandates on individuals or states. Yet in this case, that's exactly what he's doing. Fascinating.

1:02:11So it seems hypocritical. Well, I'm so sorry you're going through this. And we're all sending you our best. And we're glad you're healthy. Angela Perryman, thank you so much. Thank you. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services tells us in a statement, Secretary Kennedy specifically considered the medical recommendation before deciding to continue the current order consistent with Director Bhattacharya. The Andes virus has a 40 % fatality rate, 40 times that of COVID-19 in a known incubation period of up to 42 days, during which anyone exposed to this disease can become symptomatic and transmitted to others.

1:02:48In the absence of proper home monitoring by state authorities, the administration's quarantine order is necessary to ensure both Ms. Perryman's and her community's well-being, unquote. Vice President J.D. Vance appeared on The View earlier today. He fielded questions not only on the Iran deal, but on inflation and the Epstein files. One of the ladies of The View who questioned Vance will join us next.

1:03:17In our politics lead, while President Trump is away at the G7 summit in France with world superpowers, Vice President J.D. Vance remains stateside, embarking on a media tour for his new memoir. Vance's media push began this week with back-to-back interviews, including an appearance here on The Lead, where we focused on the Iran deal. This morning, the vice president made his highly anticipated debut at the Hot Topics table, joining the ladies of The View on ABC. We inherited an affordability problem. We're doing a lot to make it better. I was a critic of Donald Trump back in 2015 and 2016 in the Trump administration.

1:03:54Well, Joy, a little humility, actually. I don't know what the documents you're talking about, but I'm telling you. Let me go to break. Let me go to break. Let me go to break. Just a little taste there. Here to discuss is one of the co-hosts of The View, our good friend Alyssa Farrah Griffin. Alyssa, thanks for joining us. So I think it's fair to say President Trump has a contentious relationship with ABC and The View specifically. Vance called today's appearance on The View entering the lion's den, which underscores just how striking it was that this interview even happened. As a host, what stood out to you the most, do you think?

1:04:30Listen, it was actually my first time meeting J.D. Vance, which is kind of incredible because I worked for Mike Pence, Trump's former VP, for most of his first term. I was I was curious to see which J.D. Vance was going to show up. Was he coming to try to own the libs and get viral moments or was he coming to reach a daytime audience of mostly women that skews the political spectrum? And I think we got the latter. He was there to answer hard questions. He went multiple rounds on Epstein, on the economy, on immigration. And I think that it stands out to me as we're starting to think about 2028.

1:05:04He clearly has ambitions. He needs to be able to distinguish himself from Donald Trump without disagreeing with Donald Trump. So I think today was sort of a preview of that, where he's trying to soften the tone. He's walking back some of his own comments, like the cat lady's comment, to show that, yes, while he supports MAGA, he's going to defend the president. he's a softer touch on Donald Trump. Interesting to see if that's going to work, but I was overall very impressed with him stylistically. The vice president also tried to explain away the president's, shall we say, puzzling comments about how he loves inflation.

1:05:40Let's run that clip. You know what I really love? I love the inflation. He said he loves the inflation. What he said, Anna, what he said is that he loves the fact that the inflation is going to come down when this war is over. That's what he said. That's not what he said. That wasn't a direct answer. Are you his interpreter or are you his vice president? So what he actually said, the president, was, I love the inflation. I love that it's going to come down afterwards. But he did say he loved the inflation. What did you make of the vice president's answer? Listen, so I started by asking about the economy, which led to that question.

1:06:17And he acknowledged that people are hurting. He acknowledged that the economy is lagging, that inflation is too high right now, though he pointed to the fact that it was higher under the Biden administration or for much of the Biden administration. But even that is a break with President Trump, who really does not acknowledge any economic suffering that the American people are feeling. So I think that, you know, was smart of him as a move to be to acknowledge, you know, with the background that he came from, that people are hurting. He danced around, you know, answers on solutions a bit other than gas prices.

1:06:49But I did think that was a noticeable break. And then on Epstein, I mean, a huge story that we know this White House has been very concerned about. He did not call it a hoax. He did not dismiss it the way President Trump has. He said he even called himself a conspiracy theorist when it comes to Epstein and leaned into saying he wants maximum transparency. I thought that was notable as well. And on that topic of Epstein, Vance confirmed the reporting by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan in The New York Times that White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles privately described Vance as a conspiracy theorist.

1:07:21Here's that clip. I love Susie, but absolutely she thinks I'm a conspiracy theorist on the Epstein stuff because I think that it's crazy that you had this guy who is clearly a sex predator who is hanging out with a lot of very wealthy and powerful people. Like, that really bothered me. It sounds like you believed that there would be men in the files who would be held accountable. Why haven't we seen the release of over 2.5 million additional Epstein file documents. It seems like you are someone that is on the right side of history on this. We're not holding anything back. Some of those things are like the courts have to order you to release them.

1:08:00That exchange, do you think, do you think it further highlights tension and push and pull inside the White House over the handling of the Epstein files? Because what the vice president is saying there is not what the president would be saying facing those same questions. 100 percent. The president's called it a hoax. J.D. Vance is very in tuned with the base and he understands that there's a massive rip within the MAGA base over Epstein and feeling like this White House has not handled it properly. So I think he leaned into the fact that he does think it's very real, though he created distance between Donald Trump and allegations.

1:08:34He did seem to call for transparency. And there's there's a part at the end of this exchange that I think you could miss it if you weren't paying attention closely. But I asked him about some of this reporting that there may have been White House Situation Room tapes that were potentially leaked to The New York Times and led to this reporting by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan about this meeting. And I said, are you concerned that these tapes may have leaked to press? And he said, yes, he is concerned. Alyssa Farah Griffin, thank you so much. Good to see you. Thank you. Voters in four states and Washington, D.C.

1:09:09are casting their primary ballots today. Today our panel's here next to break down the key races and see what kind of impact President Trump will have on the results. Stay with us.

1:09:26I don't even have to call for the election jam anymore. It just plays. It's time for our Politics Lead Now. Voters in Alabama, in California, in Georgia, and Oklahoma, and right here in the nation's Capitol Washington, D.C. are headed to the polls today, serving as yet another test of President Trump's influence on the Republican Party. He has endorsed seven Republicans competing up and down the ballots. The major contest we're watching right now is the Georgia Senate Republican runoff, a race that the president was late to get into. He eventually threw a last minute endorsement, 1 a.m., to Congressman Mike Collins, a fierce MAGA loyalist who's running against former college football coach Derek Dooley, who's backed by Republican Governor Brian Kemp.

1:10:06Georgia, of course, a rather touchy subject for President Trump. Here he was yesterday talking about Dooley at a tele-rally for Collins. He didn't vote in 2020 and he didn't vote in 2016. Well, those were big votes for me. He didn't vote in 2020 or 2016. And he said what lost Georgia, that he said that when we had all the proof and all the evidence and everything we have right now, and it's coming out on a daily basis. He said he didn't think I won the election in 2020, and I won it by a lot. Just a quick fact check. Dooley's right. He didn't win. Trump didn't win. Just again, Trump didn't win.

1:10:49Let's talk about all this with Jeff Duncan, former Georgia lieutenant governor, a Republican who ran for governor in the Democratic ticket, did not win. Jeff Duncan, Congressman Collins, plagued with controversy. He falsely claims Trump won Georgia in 2020. He's been accused of posting racist and anti-Semitic content on X or Twitter. He's under investigation by the Ethics Committee for possible misuse of taxpayer funds. If he prevails as the winner tonight, what does that tell you about Trump's grip on the Republican Party? Well, I got to go back to that endorsement by Trump. The good old truth seems to poke its head up again about that 2020 election.

1:11:30Yeah, look, it tells a lot. I mean, the goal here for Republicans is to beat John Ossoff, and they've got to make sure they've got the right candidate, the right message. John Ossoff has done a good job. He's stayed out of kind of the partisan fray. He's been a constituent services master. He's been a great communicator. So they've got to make sure they've got their best hand forward. And they're handing on a silver platter a tremendous amount of talking points in that election in November if Mike Collins is the nominee. It's also surprising to see how much effort Brian Kemp has put in to supporting Derek Dooley.

1:12:02He's literally been on the road with him for months, almost a full year traveling the state. In the House race for New York's 13th congressional district, there is a progressive PAC out with a new ad attacking the candidate who New York Mayor Zoran Mamdani has backed. Take a look. It will take all of us, one team, to win. But Daria Lisa, she's not with us. She doesn't say f**k ice. She says f**k Kamala Harris. She doesn't attack sexual abuser Trump. She calls Joe Biden one. So if Daria Lisa's not playing with us, who's she passing the ball to? So this gets at the dynamic that some of these candidates are so far left, they attack Democrats more than they attack Republicans.

1:12:52And this is a progressive PAC that's basically saying it's cool to say F. ICE, but this woman said F. Kamala Harris. And it's cool to say Donald Trump is such and such, but this woman said it about Joe Biden. It's kind of an interesting push and pull in the Democratic Party. What do you make of it? Yeah, I think both sides are structurally broken, right? I've got the unique angle. I've run as a Republican, I've run as a Democrat, and I see the same structural break. They can't get out of their own way in these primary processes, right? They want to just be purists in the primary, and knowing that the end game is to win the actual election.

1:13:31And certainly, I think there's another interesting data point out there. There's so many people that resonate or identify as independence. And the mistake I've made over the years, certainly learning from those mistakes, is that those independents don't necessarily mean they're moderates. They're still ideologically strong in one camp or the other. They just might be one or two issues away from being a purist. And so trying to figure out how to navigate this. And I don't know what the answer is. I feel like both parties are just running the definition of insanity out over and over again. Also joining us now is Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report.

1:14:02And Dave, We are seeing some warning signs emerge for Democrats, even with Trump remarkably unpopular. And when you look at recent polls, the Democratic Party is shy of their generic ballot benchmark in past midterm years when a Republican was in the White House in 2006. Generic Democrat was up 11 points over generic Republican. 2018, up 10 points. Now it's only up five points. And this should be even more of a red flag, giving all the redistricting that's happening in favor of Republicans. Why is this happening, do you think? Jake, in the historical context, the race for the House should not even be competitive when you have a president who's underwater in his approval by 20 points, according to our tracker.

1:14:48But Trump's lead or Trump's deficit in terms of his approval has fallen by more than Democrats' lead in the generic congressional ballot has widened. And Democrats on average have a lead of about six points. If you gave Democrats every House seat that either voted for Kamala Harris or voted for Donald Trump by six points or less in 2024, they'd only end up with 220 seats, which is just two over the magic line of 218 when you factor in all the redistricting that has benefited Republicans. So this race for control of the House is genuinely competitive, although I still give Democrats an advantage.

1:15:25A new CNN poll shows an increasing number of Americans dissatisfied with the two major political parties. 47 % of the electorate consider themselves independent. That's nearly half the country. What do you make of that, Dave? Well, we've seen a rise in the share of Americans who call themselves independents for many years now. Some of it is that Democrats are frustrated with their own party and Democrats only have about a 30 % favorability. So there are a lot of left-leaning voters who dislike Donald Trump who don't want to call themselves Democrats. But the key is when you look at these congressional polls, Democrats have a lead of somewhere in the range of 48 to 42.

1:16:05And that means that there are still about 10 % of voters who, even though they've made up their mind on Donald Trump, they haven't been sold on Democrats as the alternative yet. And even though that group of undecideds on the congressional ballot, they dislike the president on average, they still need convincing by Democrats. And that's where candidate quality in these Senate and House races is going to be so important. The race is on to define the challengers on the Democratic side. And Republicans are in stronger financial position than they were eight years ago. Dave Wasserman and Jeff Duncan, thanks so much.

1:16:41One of the greatest duos ever will be making a surprise return to the biggest stage in tennis. We're talking about Venus and Serena next.

1:16:52A dream team reunion. Venus and Serena Williams headed back to Wimbledon. The tennis icons have accepted a wild card into the doubles draw, marking their first Wimbledon appearance as a team in 10 years. Winners of six Wimbledon doubles titles, the sisters have not played in the tournament together since winning it all. in 2016. Let's bring in CNN sports analyst Christine Brennan. And Christine, last week you predicted Serena would return to Wimbledon in singles. Are you surprised that she's returning in doubles and with her sister? Not surprised about the doubles part because that just makes more sense since she has been doing a few doubles matches.

1:17:27I guess there's still one wild card left in singles, but she said today, no, not doing that. A little bit surprised about that they're doing this. But then again, you think about it, Jake, it makes sense. Venus has kept playing. She's had wild cards and singles over the last few years. Venus actually turns 46 tomorrow. Unbelievable. Serena is 44, added up 90 years old together. It's truly a remarkable story. So, you know, they've had great success. 14 Grand Slam titles together in doubles, six of them, as you said, at Wimbledon. This is the place they love the most. Serena's won seven Wimbledon singles titles.

1:18:06Venus has won five Wimbledon singles titles. This is home. It's a home game for them, home court. And they will just, of course, the rafters will bring it down when they show up on the court. How significant do you think it is for Wimbledon to grant a wild card to two of the most decorated players in the sport, even if they are in their 40s? Yeah. Oh, it's a no-brainer. I mean, as you know. They're a huge draw. Yeah, well, here, We're talking about them, right? I mean, they are the biggest names in tennis. The moment that they are showing up out there, it's a great boon for Wimbledon. It's a no-brainer.

1:18:40The TV numbers, the attendance, the tickets, scalping, whatever will happen to be able to watch them play, to be able to take your kids and say, hey, we saw Serena, we saw Venus. And, of course, one of the great parts of the story is Serena's 8-year-old daughter, Olympia, is the one who said, Mom, go and play with Venus. I want to watch you play. And she's 8 now. So she gets it. She understands. She wants to watch her mom and her aunt play. So you've convinced us all this was a brilliant move and a no-brainer by Wimbledon. Obviously, people are going to flock to the games. They're going to love it.

1:19:13It's going to be a fan favorite. Here's the big question. Is it going to be competitive? How much can they actually contend against the players in their teens and 20s? Right. The women who grew up idolizing the Wimbledon sisters and wanting to be them. someday, I think they could win a match maybe or two in terms of contending. No, I think early rounds, you know, if you, if you want to watch them get there early, uh, I think a round or two, even if they were to lose in the first round, just showing up, I think is, is a wonderful thing. The way people sometimes look at older golfers and want to see them play on a senior tour.

1:19:49So I think they can be competitive. As I said, maybe win one or two, Jake, I do not see them winning the tournament or even getting close to winning the tournament. So is this about letting her eight-year-old daughter see them play live? Is this about a final chapter? Is this opening the door to more appearances as a team? What does this signify? I think Serena is testing the waters to see if she really does want to come back as a singles player. Not necessarily to win, but as we talked last week, 116 mile per hour serve. I mean, she was sitting on the couch bored, and now she's able to do this.

1:20:24She feels like she's playing better in the doubles that they lost today, she and a partner. So I think it's a test for her to see if she can be competitive moving forward this year and into next year. So quick to shift gears, transfer quarterback Brendan Sorsby is not going to play for Texas Tech this fall. After all, he's going to enter the NFL supplemental draft instead. This is after, of course, this unprecedented legal fight over his eligibility because he acknowledged a gambling addiction. He bet on pro and college sports. He I think he bet on himself to win, but still. What do you make of all of that?

1:21:01Yeah, what a mess. This is the Wild West. This is what happens when the NCAA doesn't have any control, and the void is filled, Jake, with everyone else, and the money is extraordinary. Gambling now allowed in sports. You've got young men, young women, but especially young men. Over 1 ,000 bets, well over 1 ,000, that he bet on three different teams when he was playing for Indiana, Cincinnati, and then Texas Tech. Now it's the NFL's problem to decide. At least he's gone from college sports. But this is the future, it's sad to say, of college football. Christine Brennan, thanks so much. You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, Blue Sky, Accent on TikTok at Jake Tapper.

1:21:39You can follow the show on X on Instagram at The Lead CNN. If you ever miss an episode of The Lead, you can watch the show on the CNN app. Aaron Bernanette out front starts now.

1:21:53From the descendants of history makers involved in the Louisiana Purchase to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, discover the untold stories of American expansion in the CNN original series, This Land. Now streaming on the CNN app.