Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

CNN To Hold First Interview With Harris And Walz; Special Counsel Files Reworked Indictment Against Donald Trump In January 6 Case; Prosecutors Rework Indictment Against Trump To Comply With Supreme Court Decision On Immunity; Franklin Graham Claims His Late Father Bill Graham Supported Trump Despite Other Graham Family Members Saying Otherwise; Trump Sits For Interview With Dr. Phil; Israeli Military Rescues 52-Year-Old Hostage Held By Hamas In Gaza. Aired 8-9P ET

Aired August 27, 2024 - 20:00   ET

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

JOHN SULLIVAN, FORMER US AMBASSADOR TO RUSSIA: You know, the sexism in Russia is notorious. I saw it, I was upfront and close witness to it while in Moscow, but I think from Putin's perspective, it's really her experience.

He wouldn't want a Margaret Thatcher in the Oval Office and he doesn't know what he's going to get with a President Harris. So, it's an interesting question though.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: All right, Ambassador Sullivan, I really appreciate your time. Thank you. And to remind everybody your new book, "Midnight in Moscow: A Memoir from the Frontlines of Russia's War against the West" is available now. Thanks to you and all of you of course, for joining us.

Anderson starts now.

[20:00:42]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST "AC360": Tonight on 360, now, they're talking. Vice President Harris and Tim Walz agree to their first formal interview as presidential ticket and it's happening here on CNN. The latest on how it came to be, what it will look like and the stakes involved.

Also tonight, Jack Smith's surprise new indictment of the former president and how he slimmed down the election interference case to a standing Supreme Court scrutiny and what it means for when the trial might happen.

And later, his brother says, God wrote him another life. An Israeli father of 11 rescued from a tunnel and reunited with his family after more than 300 days held captive in Gaza.

Good evening. Thanks for joining us. We begin with Vice President Harris meeting a deadline she said two-and-a-half weeks ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KAMALA HARRIS (D) VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I've talked to my team. I want us to get an interview scheduled before the end of the month.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: In the 19 days since she said that, she's talked informally and briefly with reporters, but not done a formal sit-down interview despite calls, not just from her opponents, but also Democratic leaning pundits.

In fact, "New York" Magazine's Jonathan Chait has a column just out today titled: "Why Kamala Harris is safer giving more interviews." Whether that's true or not remains to be seen and maybe seen because she is sitting down tomorrow along with her running mate with CNN's Dana Bash. The interview will air Thursday night here on CNN.

The former president did not immediately respond to that news, erupting instead online with a string of posts about Jack Smith's new election interference its indictment, which will have a lot on later tonight. He also made this online announcement.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: By popular demand, I'm doing a new series of Trump digital trading cards. Purchase 15 or more of my Trump digital trading cards and we'll mail you a beautiful physical trading card. It's really, I think quite something.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: It is quite something indeed. By the way, he says the physical card would include a piece of the suit he wore to his debate with President Biden, the garment, he said people were calling his knockout suit.

He also posted this about his upcoming debate with Vice President Harris quoting him now, "I have reached an agreement with the radical left Democrats for a debate with Comrade Kamala Harris. It'll be broadcast live on ABC fake news by far the nastiest and most unfair newscaster in the business."

Things may not be quite so cut and dry though from the Harris camp and we'll have more reporting on all of that shortly. A lot to unpack tonight, let's start with the Harris-Walz CNN interview. Our political director David Chalian has more.

So, David, how did this come about? What can we expect on Thursday?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: Well, as you noted, Anderson, this is something that Vice President Harris sort of set out as something that she was going to do by the end of the month. And it is pretty remarkable when you think about the six weeks that she's had.

I mean, she unexpectedly became the nominee and since then, coalesced the Democratic Party behind her, raised a ton of money, had a shortened vetting period for her VP candidate selected, Tim Walz is that candidate, went through battleground state tour to roll him out and then into her convention.

But all of that that I just described, which was a pretty astonishing month or so in American politics, was all sort of scripted.

So, now this is the opportunity that voters are going to have to sort of hear her respond to questions about her plans as president and how she's addressing the concerns that are top of mind for voters as we head into this final 10-week stretch.

And I think it's a good opportunity for voters to see how she thinks through some of the toughest, most pressing problems in an unscripted format.

COOPER: Yes. I mean, obviously, the campaign -- the candidates have come under criticism for not doing unscripted events off a teleprompter. What's at stake for her?

CHALIAN: Well, I think what's at stake is that she doesn't want to do anything to halt the momentum that she's built in this race thus far. So, she doesn't want to have a stumble and we've seen some examples in the past where she hasn't knocked it out of the park, right?

She had a pretty bad interview with Lester Holt at NBC at the beginning of her tenure as vice president. That's still an interview that Republicans play back and use against her when sort of framing her immigration record, they point to that interview.

But listen, I think it's unlikely that there's going to be some huge dramatic moment the way we saw Joe Biden on the debate stage. She has done interviews in bunch, but I think what is important here is that voters get a sense of her thinking through this stuff and getting a little more meat on the bones.

We just haven't heard a ton about her plans of what she is going to try and pursue as president. And I think an interview like this, both in terms of domestic and foreign policy, will give voters some very important insight into her thinking.

[20:05:30]

COOPER: All right, David Chalian, thanks very much.

More now, on this September 10th debate and the as yet unfinalized details of it. CNN's Kristen Holmes joins us now. She's been talking to sources.

There are still questions about what this debate will look like. What are you hearing from both campaigns?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, every day there appears to be something new and just when we thought it was settled, it might not actually be. So, as you read that statement from Donald Trump, he got out there today saying that he had reached an agreement with Kamala Harris, that he had reached an agreement with ABC and that the rules were going to be the same as that CNN debate.

Just a reminder, we had learned that the two campaigns had come to somewhat of an impasse over one specific rule, which was the unmuting or muting of the mics when the other candidate is talking.

In our CNN debate, those mics were muted when the other candidate was talking. However, the Harris campaign, they said they wanted them unmuted. That became a point of contention.

Then you have Donald Trump going out there saying that it was agreed upon that they were going to move forward with those same CNN rules. Now, he didn't mention the muted mics, but he did say it was going to be a stand-up debate. They wouldn't be sitting down. That wouldn't have any crib notes.

But when I reached out to a senior advisor specifically, they said yes, they had reached an agreement with ABC that the mics would be muted while the other candidate was speaking.

However, it appears that may be that agreement was not reached on the Harris side because moments later, we got a statement from the Harris side essentially saying both candidates have publicly made clear their willingness to debate with unmuted mics for the duration of the debate to fully allow for substantive exchanges between the candidates. But it appears Donald Trump is letting his handlers overwhelm him or overrule him, sad.

Now, not specific that they've agreed to anything, but also leaving it very vague, so questions now as to what exactly is going to happen.

Anderson, there is still a lot of concern among Republicans and among Donald Trump's team themselves, that Trump will decide not to appear on that stage if the rules are not the same as the CNN debate.

Obviously, his team thought that went well for him, so they want to mimic those exact results. It's a new candidate though, so mimicking that seems unlikely.

COOPER: All right, Kristen Holmes, thanks very much.

Joining us now, CNN political commentators from the right and left respectively, Scott Jennings, Maria Cardona, also CNN political analyst and "New York Times" national political reporter, Astead Herndon.

First of all, let's talk about the sit-down interview.

Scott, it's the first time the vice president going to be sitting down for an interview. She's doing it with her vice-presidential candidate, Tim Walz. Do you think that blunts attacks from Republicans or is the line now going to be, well, why isn't she doing it by yourself?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, I do think people are going to bring that up.

Look, I have great confidence and Dana and CNN to do this. I think it's incredibly weak, weak sauce to show up with your running mate. The fact that they don't have enough confidence in her to let her sit herself the actual top of the ticket and do a single interview.

In fact, I think the handwringing and the gyrations over this over the last month show troubling lack of confidence in her political ability, which also makes you wonder as a voter, well, what kind of president would you be if this kind of a small time decision can we do an interview or not -- what does that look like for your decision-making process and so on?

So yes, I think Republicans are going to think it's pretty weak to show up with effectively someone to take up half the time.

COOPER: Maria, I mean, why not do it solo?

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, Scott's assertions are just incredibly weak, speaking about weak and just not true.

But look, Republicans are going to continue to try to throw everything at her because nothing has stuck and she will do interviews by herself, Anderson. Let's remember that she is the nominee for all of maybe a month and some days.

And so, this compressed time-frame, I think doing an interview with her, alongside her vice presidential nominee is going to give voters the chance that they want, I believe, to not just listen to her, but to listen to the vice presidential nominee. And what will they do as a team?

I think that this is going to be a great forum for the vice president and for her nominee for vice president to be able to offer, continue to talk about what they're going to do for middle-class voters, working class voters, making sure that they understand that their history -- the vice president's history and Tim Walz's history mirror theirs.

They grew up in middle class, working class environments. Everything that they're going to do is going to be fighting for them in contrast to somebody like Donald Trump, who has never done anything in his life that is not self-serving or for himself.

And I think that Dana is going to focus on questions that will let them bring that out.

[20:10:26]

COOPER: Astead, why do you think they're doing it together, not by herself?

ASTEAD HERNDON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I don't think it's a secret. Democrats over the last couple of years have increasingly thought that they can go directly to their voters. And I think they have frankly been fairly slow to coming around to doing mainstream traditional interviews.

We've heard the Biden campaign now turned the Harris campaign complained repeatedly about reporters trying to ask those type of questions, have stayed away good for more traditional media interviews as they've tried to go to influencers, try to go to a podcast, to the more friendly venues for them and they found real success with that.

I think what is coming and happening now though, is there's an onus on Harris and Walz to differentiate themselves from the Biden ticket, as open questions about what their vision would be, what their legislative priorities would be and while the Democratic convention was an advertisement for the party writ large, a lot of the things people are saying on stage could have been just the same if it was President Biden as the nominee, rather than Kamala Harris.

What an interview does is put the onus on her not just for the mastery of issues and kind of command of issues, but to lay out a vision. That is something that of Kamala Harris has been fairly uncomfortable with.

Speaking as someone who has interviewed her, that is not necessarily where she likes to be. She often says, I'm not someone who's good at speeches. I'm someone who gets things done. Now we know as president, as a big core part of the job is to lay out that kind of vision.

COOPER: Obviously, when you have a two-person interview and you have a limited amount of time. It does limit the interviewer's ability --

HERNDON: I don't think this isn't going to be the last we hear from her though, this is going to be the first but I do think that question of can she do it alone will loom and they will have to be able to put her out in spaces where she is answering confrontational questions and laying out her vision by herself.

If this is all we get in terms of her along with Walz, I do think those questions will ring out further.

COOPER: Scott, in terms of the debate do you think --Trump had gone out, though people in his campaign were apparently saying they want the mics muted. He, the other day, yesterday, I think it was, said he'd be fine -- he'd prefer it if the mics weren't muted, but you talked about the rules are the rules.

Should the mics be muted if you're a Trump supporter?

JENNINGS: Look, I think all this is such a tedious baloney, and it's just, you know, no one's going to care about this and --

COOPER: That's what people said about the first debate and it became pretty monumental, so --

JENNINGS: -- well but it wasn't the rules that caused Joe Biden to malfunction and destroy his career on live television. I mean, look, I think it's fine if they're muted, I think its fine if they're not.

Based on our reporting, I can't tell what's been agreed to or not. Trump seems to think we're having the same rules, but it doesn't matter because they both have to do something.

He has to really get her floundering around on flip-flops and her record with Biden. She has to stand up to a test, right. I mean, people expect their presidential candidates to be tested. They both have reason to be there. I think the rules are secondary and I'm with Trump. I'll just say, if I were him, I would say the same thing. I don't care. Turn them on, turn them off. I'll be ready.

COOPER: Maria, what do you think?

CORDOVA: I think that it's smart of the Harris campaign to try to push for unmuted mics because we know that every time that Donald Trump speaks, he lies. And if the moderators are not going to be fact checkers, because that would be a gargantuan feat because of exactly that then I think that the vice president should be free to be able to factcheck on the spot.

And also, we also know that this is an opportunity if the mics are unmuted that Donald Trump is going to become unhinged. He's going to become Donald Trump. He doesn't know how to confront somebody like Kamala Harris, a strong competent woman, a woman of color, a daughter of immigrants. Everything that Donald Trump has seeked to demean and degrade.

When he is on the stage with her, I think that he's not going to know how to confront that. And that is going to come out if the mics are unmuted.

And again, if he blurts something out, if he tries to interrupt her than she's going to have the ability to fight back essentially.

And so, think it's smart for them to push it, but at the end of the day, if it doesn't become something that is, you know, mics are unmuted that's fine, too. I think that she's going to demonstrate that she's a prosecutor and he's the 34 times convicted felon.

COOPER: You know, Astead, no one knows howe they're going to respond in a debate where the pressure is just so incredibly intense on that stage, whether there's an audience or not, no one really knows how you're going to respond in real time when someone is constantly sniping or inserting things and trying to get at you.

She might respond great, it might bring out some fire in her or it might also, you know, it might totally derail her? I mean, as it would with anybody.

[20:15:05]

HERNDON: Yes, I do think that we have not seen her in this. I think we haven't seen her up against Donald Trump.

We've got to remember for a lot of Democrats they had been salivating at the idea of Kamala Harris across the stage from Donald Trump all the way back since 2019.

There are understandably high expectations for her coming into this partially because they're pitching her as someone who can prosecute the case against Donald Trump, as the perfect foil for someone like him. So, I do think that there will be a sense of pressure on her coming in, not just to show a command of issues or defend the administration's record but to lay out the case that a lot of Democrats have won with someone like her to take to him directly.

As I frankly heard a couple of Harris people at the DNC say they're worried the expectations are too high for her coming in, but I don't think that somebody that can really hold water because what we are hearing from them as they reason why she's best suited is exactly for reasons on that debate stage.

So, I think that that's something that she has to come in and actualize.

COOPER: Although, I will say those rules like a two-minute one minute- one minute, it does limit the ability to go back and forth with each other in a long thing sort of that, in which --

HERNDON: They want those interactions. Remember her on the Senate hearing stage, she likes those confrontational spaces. I've had some of those with her, she frankly enjoys some of those.

COOPER: Which is why the rules do matter because it can really limit that or encourage that.

Everybody stick around. As we mentioned, Vice President Harris and Tim Walz's interview with Dana Bash going to air Thursday night, 9:00 PM Eastern here on CNN.

Much more to talk about, next Special Counsel Jack Smith's new election interference indictment of the former president. What he changed from the first to try to pass Supreme Court muster and what it means for the timing of a trial if there is one.

And later, how the fight for evangelical voters, this presidential campaign is playing out in the divided family of the late Pastor Billy Graham, who's final presidential vote is part of the dispute.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:21:11]

COOPER: We mentioned at the top of the program, Donald Trump is erupting tonight online over todays revamped set of charges from Special Counsel Jack Smith.

His most concise posting reads in all caps, persecution of a political opponent. He's referring to the superseding indictment that Smith filed today, designed to retool the election interference case to meet the Supreme Court's broad new interpretation of presidential immunity.

Now, more on what is in this new indictment from CNN's Katelyn Polantz, who joins us now. So how has this indictment been rewritten and how is it different than the original?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Anderson, there's about 13 fewer pages here than there were in the original charges against Donald Trump. Four counts, still the same, but all of the facts that back up those counts have been clipped or nipped a little bit in this newer version.

The way that it's been done is the Justice Department has had to observe what the Supreme Court told them to for a bubble of protection around the presidency. They're cutting out things now in this indictment that they had had before.

They wanted to talk to a jury about Donald Trump's interactions with the Justice Department, with the top person there named Jeffrey Clark, who he was trying to help use spread the idea of election fraud. Thats out.

They also wanted initially to talk to the jury about things that Trump was saying or hearing inside the White House's president, intel briefings he was getting, things he was saying to aides in the Oval Office. That's not here anymore.

And then crucially, Anderson, the other thing that's missing is a bunch of things about Mike Pence, but not everything. There still is a lot about Mike Pence in this document and it still is something that puts Pence at the center of looking at immunity around the presidency going forward.

COOPER: So, what happens next?

POLANTZ: Well, Anderson, next, there is going to be a filing on Friday where the Justice Department says this is what we want to do, how we want to figure this out, because there is stuff in this indictment that the judge is still going to look at potentially appeals courts will look at as well.

There's a hearing planned for next Thursday and back to Mike Pence again as vice president, what they're trying to do here is say, we kept everything in this indictment that says Mike Pence was acting as the president of the Senate on January 6th.

That is something that judges, courts are going to be looking very closely at. It could mean more hearings. It could even mean witnesses being called to the stand well before a trial would ever take place, witnesses up to and including the former vice president himself -- Anderson.

COOPER: All right, Katelyn Polantz, thanks.

Joining us now to drill down further is former federal prosecutor investigating Supreme Court biographer, Jeffrey Toobin and CNN legal analyst, Norm Eisen, who wrote in the wake of the immunity decision by the Supreme Court that Jack Smith would have to follow what he then called a slim to win strategy to preserve his chances of prevailing in the case.

Joining us as well, CNN senior political commentator, former January 6 Select Committee member Adam Kinzinger.

Jeff, what's your reaction this revised indictment, does it make sense?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, he had to do it. The old indictment, which just didn't pass muster at the Supreme Court. And the key distinction here is the Supreme Court said that official conduct for the president by the president can't be the subject of a prosecution. It can only be unofficial conduct

So, the indictment tries to portray Trump as candidate Trump much more than President Trump.

Now, the distinction between official and unofficial is not all that clear. And I think that's going to be something that comes up a lot. But the real theme of what Jack Smith did today was to try to make this an indictment of Donald Trump for his unofficial acts.

Thats what the parties are going to be fighting about in court starting next week.

COOPER: Norm, what additions in this indictment stand out to you?

[20:25:02]

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Anderson, the subtractions stand out more than the additions. We've gone from 130 paragraphs to106, from 45 pages to 36 pages, but there are -- he's mostly removed allegations about the interactions of Donald Trump with DOJ, whatever you think of this Supreme Court's opinion, there are few things that are more official than a president talking to his Department of Justice. But there are important additions.

It starts on the first page, it used to say, the defendant disseminated falsehoods. Now, it says the defendant used his campaign to disseminate falsehoods.

And you see those modifications on page after page where they're adding those phrases to narrow as Jeff notes, the scope here, tightening it down.

I don't think that you can quibble with Smith's effort to slim this indictment down. I do think he has a strong hand and he is playing it.

COOPER: Congressman Kinzinger, I mean, as a former member of the January 6 House Select Committee, how do you look at this revised indictment?

ADAM KINZINGER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, just like the others, I mean, it had to be done. Not a surprise, I guess I'm fairly pleased that none of the charges were dropped. None of the actual charges just kind of had to change what was backing it up.

But I mean, the crazy thing about all this is first off, if you think about the Supreme Court decision, they did not really go into much specificity about what is unofficial or official acts. What I can see -- and the lawyers here would be smarter than me on this, but I can see this basically every charge in essence, almost having to go up to the Supreme Court because they did not do their job, except that the Chief Justice said to the outer limits, whatever that means.

I mean, that's another thing up for interpretation. Amy Coney Barrett, kind of gave a little specificity when she said the fake elector scheme wouldn't count, but it just -- you know, for a Supreme Court to have created such a big precedent and not put any meat on those bones, this is going to drag out I think the bottom line here, Anderson is November.

I mean, it's all about November. If Donald Trump wins, obviously there is no way this goes forward under his Justice Department. If he loses, then we have to go through a bunch of more hoops, but justice will be had.

But it'll be nice by the way, someday, whenever that is, maybe it's, like months, maybe its years when former presidents quit using Twitter or Truth Social to emote every day about their anger and just maybe go back to using statements again, like adults do.

COOPER: Jeff, what about the Congressman's points? What does this actually mean in terms of, does this go back to the Supreme Court for each of these things?

TOOBIN: Well, this is an absolutely critical issue that the parties are going to fight about. The usual rule in criminal cases is you only get to appeal after a conviction. You can't appeal before the case is over in the district court.

On this issue of presidential immunity, Trump was allowed to appeal to the DC Circuit and then to the Supreme Court. That's why this indictment is 13 months old and there is no trial in sight.

The big issue upcoming is presumably Judge Chutkan, she's the district court judge, is going to say that some version of this case can proceed.

The key question which is unresolved is, will Trump be allowed to appeal before the trial again? Because if he is, that could mean another six months or even more of delay. If he's not allowed to appeal, there could be a trial in early 2025. Of course, that depends -- that will only happen if Harris wins the election --

COOPER: And who decides if he can appeal or not?

TOOBIN: Sorry.

COOPER: Who decides whether Trump can appeal or not?

TOOBIN: The courts themselves. I mean, the issue will be --

COOPER: I mean, is it Judge Chutkan?

TOOBIN: Well, first, it will be Judge Chutkan, but then that decision of whether he can appeal will be appealed itself. So, this again, the defense lawyers have done a very good job of putting this case on a slow boat to nowhere. And for the moment that's where it remains.

COOPER: Norm, what do you make of how prosecutors have reframed Vice President Pence in this indictment?

EISEN: Well, historically, Anderson, the vice president is also the president of the Senate. That is spelled out in the Constitution and backed up by long practice. It's not -- he's not an official executive branch actor if he is in conversations or taking action on behalf of another branch of government. So, I think it's legally sound.

If it fits into their larger strategy here, they are signaling that they continue to have a strong case to the Congressman's point, this now goes to the court of public opinion. We will have proceedings, we will have attention on this, but ultimately the American people, because the Supreme Court took so long to decide and because their decision was so bad, it is now up to the American people whether or not Donald Trump is going to face a jury on this very strong complaint.

And I think by -- no wonder Donald Trump is mad, Anderson, by doing a superseder they put that question to the jury of the American people.

[20:31:01]

COOPER: Yes. Norm Eisen, Jeffrey Toobin, Adam Kinzinger, thanks very much.

Coming up, the former president tries a little talk therapy with a Dr. Phil. His attempt to refine some of his most controversial statements next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:35:30]

COOPER: The former president has touted himself as the person who was, quote, "able to kill Roe v. Wade," but more recently, he's also been claiming he'd be, quote, "great for women and their reproductive rights." Trump has had widespread support among evangelical voters for years, but a group calling itself Evangelicals for Harris now counts the granddaughter of the late Reverend Billy Graham as a supporter.

Graham's son, Franklin, who spoke at the recent Republican convention in support of Trump, recently pushed back on Evangelicals for Harris. He posted this message saying they developed a political ad using his father's image and that Billy Graham appreciated Trump's, quote, "conservative values and policies."

In 2019, Franklin Graham tweeted that his father knew Trump and, quote, "believed in him and voted for him." That's not what he said in 2016, just a couple of weeks before the election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FRANKLIN GRAHAM, SON OF BILLY GRAHAM: Again, my father's not involved in this election. He hasn't supported or come out to endorse anybody. At 98, as I told you earlier, he's just happy to wake up in the morning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Our Randi Kaye spoke with some of the Graham family to get the bottom -- to get to the bottom of the disagreement.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What is your relationship with your uncle Franklin Graham?

JERUSHAH DUFORD, GRANDDAUGHTER OF EVANGELICAL LEADER BILLY GRAHAM: About an awkward hug at Thanksgiving. That's about it.

KAYE (voice-over): An awkward hug because Jerushah Duford has made it clear she's skeptical of her uncle Franklin Graham's claim that her grandfather, the late evangelist Billy Graham, voted for Donald Trump in 2016.

KAYE: Your uncle Franklin Graham has said that your grandfather, Billy Graham, voted for Donald Trump.

DUFORD: I think back to that election, and I know the state that my grandfather was in, in his health. And to believe that he voted for anybody with sound mind just seems unlikely. I believe it was absolutely politically motivated to come out after my grandfather died, and announced to the world that he had voted for Donald Trump.

KAYE: Have you spoken to him after he made that claim?

DUFORD: No. I don't even have, like, his number in my phone.

KAYE (voice-over): Jerushah's brother, Aram Tchvidjian, doesn't believe his uncle's claims either. He called it blatant baloney when Franklin Graham said it in 2019. In response to his uncle's assertion, Aram posted this very sarcastic tweet.

"I'll never forget that day in 2016 when my grandfather, Billy Graham, shrugged off the symptoms of Parkinson's and hydrocephalus, got up out of bed for the first time in a year, drove down to the polling station and cast his vote. What a glorious memory."

One person commented asking Franklin Graham, is your nephew calling you a liar? Aram now regrets his public comments and declined our request for an on-camera interview. But he told me by phone, "I find it hard to believe my grandfather at that point in his life wasn't voting for anybody, knowing my grandfather's state at the time, I'm not even totally sure he knew the election was coming up."

In the past, Franklin Graham has shown support for Trump.

GRAHAM: I believe Donald Trump is a good man, and I believe he's president of the United States for a reason. I think God put him there.

KAYE (voice-over): He even spoke this year at the Republican National Convention.

GRAHAM: For as long as I've known President Trump, I've found him to be a man of his word. Things that he said he'll do, he did.

KAYE (voice-over): Billy Graham died in 2018. Jerushah told me her grandfather exhibited love, patience, and kindness, things she says Donald Trump does not. And she doesn't think her grandfather ever would have supported someone like that.

DUFORD: There's a quote from my grandfather back in the early 80s. He said that "I don't want to see religious bigotry in any form. It would disturb me if there was a wedding between the religious fundamentalists and the political right. The hard right has no interest in religion except simply to manipulate it."

KAYE: What do you think he meant by that quote?

DUFORD: That it's easy to use faith to manipulate politics to get what we want.

KAYE (voice-over): Still, Jerushah is leaning on her faith as a guide and a reason to get involved. Even as an Evangelical Christian, she wants Vice President Kamala Harris to become the next president. She recorded this video for the group Evangelicals for Harris.

DUFORD: Voting Kamala for me is so much greater than policies. It's a vote against another four years of faith leaders justifying the actions of a man who destroys the message Jesus came to spread. And that is why I get involved in politics.

KAYE (voice-over): Jerushah sees more hope in the Harris campaign.

DUFORD: Hope that our country can go back to being a welcoming country. People that have freedoms to live how they want, to love who they want, is not something that I feel like we've had the freedom to do. I don't believe that Trump's presidency created that.

[20:40:05]

KAYE (voice-over): She doesn't believe Trump's words and actions line up with the views of Jesus and what the Bible teaches.

DUFORD: I think Trump's presidency maybe gave people permission to be hateful, and it emboldened them, and I think that's what really scared me.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KAYE (on-camera): And, Anderson, we did reach out to Franklin Graham for a comment, not only asking about the split in the family, but also asking whether or not he did stand by that claim that he made back in 2019, that his father, Billy Graham, did vote for Donald Trump back in 2016.

We got a response from him this evening, and this is what he wrote. "My father and I had many conversations about Donald Trump. He knew President Trump for a number of years and appreciated many of his policies, those leadership abilities, and his vision for the future of this country. Even though I have family that may disagree with me and my father, I still love them, and he did as well."

And, Anderson, I'm sure you noticed in that statement that Franklin Graham did not respond to our very specific question about whether or not he stood by the claim that his father, Billy Graham, voted for Donald Trump in 2016. He simply did not address that.

We also, Anderson, reached out to the Trump campaign to get a response on all of this. The Trump campaign spokesman directed us to the Franklin Graham statement, and nothing beyond that. Anderson?

COOPER: All right. Randi Kaye, thanks very much.

Coming up next, what the former president told Dr. Phil McGraw he really meant by some of his recent controversial statements, including that Evangelical Christians won't have to vote again after voting for him in November.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:45:52]

COOPER: ?The former president has a newly released interview tonight with TV's Dr. Phil McGraw, who's shown himself to be quite the sympathetic interviewer when it comes to Donald Trump. It's billed as part one of a two-part interview. Tomorrow's will be with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Here's the former president trying to correct the record as he sees it on a comment he made about voting four years from now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. PHIL MCGRAW, TV PSYCHOLOGIST: They demonize you a lot. They make a big deal out of the fact that you said you're only going to have to vote one time.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Yes.

MCGRAW: You, like me, you're only going to have to vote one time ever or whatever your quote was.

TRUMP: You won't have to vote anymore my beautiful Christians. I love you Christians. I'm a Christian. I love you. Get out. You got to get out and vote. In four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed. So good. You're not going to have to vote.

You know why that was. I said -- and with a smile, Christians for whatever reason don't vote very much, you know, proportionately NRA people and people that feel very strongly about the Second Amendment. They're not voters.

I don't know why, maybe it's a rebellious streak. And I said to the Christians, we got to win this election. If we win this election, I'll straighten everything out in less than four years by a lot. Then you don't have to -- it doesn't matter -- in other words, I'm saying, you don't have to vote. Doesn't mean we're not going to have elections, you're going to have elections but you have to vote this time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Back now with CNN's Senior Political Commentator, Scott Jennings, and Adam Kinzinger. Congressman Kinzinger, I mean, if someone was concerned before about the former president telling Christians they'd never have to vote again if they voted for him on election day, is this new explanation going to put their minds at ease?

KINZINGER: Probably not. I mean, I thought that they were kind of picking up on Trump saying that was a bit of a overkill for some folks. I mean, I think it was pretty obvious in listening to Trump. He was saying basically just vote for me. I'll fix everything, which he won't, by the way. But anyway, that was his point.

So I never thought this was a big deal. And but, you know, sitting down with Dr. Phil probably will put some people at ease. But I think if folks were concerned about it -- I mean, let's keep in mind, he did say he'll be a dictator for a day. Even if he was joking there too, this -- he put this all together and it brings some concern. But I think on this specific comment, it was a bit of an overkill for people to say, he's saying there's never going to be an election again.

COOPER: Well, funny you mentioned the dictator on day one, because he also talked about that with Dr. Phil in this interview. I want to -- let's play that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: But what they use a lot was, I'll be a dictator. And I said jokingly on Sean Hannity, he's a great guy, I said, no, Sean, I want to be a dictator for one day. Because I'm going to get going with Drill Baby Drill, and I'm going to strengthen the borders to a level like you've never seen. I only want to be -- and after that I'll never be a dictator.

So, I said it nicely, I said -- and I said, one day, because I want to do the energy, and I want to strengthen the border, one day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Scott, the thing about that is that Sean Hannity actually did try to get -- Sean Hannity was being -- trying to be very helpful with Trump in that initial interview and sort of was clarifying, like, hey, I just want to make sure, like, you know, you're not really going to be a dictator. And his response was, well, just on day one.

So he didn't actually help himself all that much. Do you think this clears it up?

JENNINGS: Yes, look, I always thought this was overblown, too. I agree with Adam, by the way, on his first comment. I thought the thing about -- that Adam -- I thought Adam was exactly right. So, this dictator thing, when I watched it, I thought he was sort of half joking, but also just trying to make a point. Like, if I could, I would change these policies right now because it would make the United States better. What's sort of amazing about it is this whole dictator thing, it has become the basic underpinning of the entire Democratic campaign. I mean, every speech, every surrogate, every set of talking points they send out to people, you hear -- I mean, you've heard it on this show --

COOPER: Well, he does have a thing for dictator. I mean, he does have a thing for strongman. H.R. McMaster in his new book, I had him on last night, writes about this and McMaster was flummoxed and concerned. He told his wife, you know, toward the end of his year there, like, I can't understand the hole that Putin has on this guy, Duterte.

[20:50:06]

And finally, H.R. McMaster's came around to, at the end of his book, writing, that he thinks -- and this is from memory, so I don't want to misquote him, but basically that, you know, that by getting the admiration of strong men, of dictators, that Trump -- it'll make Trump feel like he himself is a strong man.

JENNINGS: Look, I -- you know, I've never served in the Oval Office with Trump, so I can't speak to McMaster's and his impressions of it. I just know that on this particular comment and the way it's been construed by the Democrats, I think has been completely, like a lot of comments, you know, like the bloodbath thing, that's also been blown out of proportion.

Trump does occasionally say things that then are like little crevices where you can get a foothold and start, you know, climbing what I think is an untrue wall. And Democrats have really blown these comments up. Now, whether people actually believe it or not, I don't know. I mean, you know, he was president for four years.

He was not a dictator. He was constantly flummoxed by Congress on occasion. So he pretty much operated like a president does.

COOPER: Scott, do you think he's dictator curious?

KINZINGER: Adam.

COOPER: Oh, sorry, Adam. So what did I say? Sorry. Adam, sorry.

KINZINGER: Yes. I think he is dictator curious. I mean, look, I -- you know to my friend, Scott, I agree with a lot of -- look, I think the broader context is about the dictator. It's not focusing on just the one comment. But let's keep in mind, he would have stayed in office on January 6th if law enforcement would have allowed it because he tried to overturn a free and fair election.

So that kind of stuff comes into play with all these comments. But I agree, if you're going to just focus on that one or two things he said, there's broader issues. And I think actually the Democrats are in need to do a better job of bringing that big, you know, around and a bigger point. COOPER: Adam Kinzinger, Scott Jennings, thank you again. Appreciate it. Sorry about messing up your name. I don't know why I did that.

Coming up next, kidnapped on October 7th. This is really hostage family thought he was dead. How he was rescued next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:56:39]

COOPER: An Israeli man thought dead by his family is now the eighth hostage to be rescued alive in Gaza more than 10 months after the October 7th terror attack. Family members say the husband and father of 11 is expected to return home tomorrow. CNN's Nic Robertson has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR (voice-over): The moments after his rescue, the first to be recovered live from a tunnel, 52-year-old Kaid Farhan Al-Qadi, a Muslim Bedouin Israeli, surrounded by Israeli Special Forces, quickly rushed to a helicopter, much thinner than he was when Hamas snatched him as he guarded a packing facility in a kibbutz near Gaza almost 11 months ago.

His family's agonizing wait almost over, rushing through the hospital to greet his helicopter. Soldiers and medics carefully stretchering him towards doctors and the hospital and his family.

The look on both brothers faces saying it all. The rescued hostage gaunt but smiling. His elder brother beaming ear to ear.

KHATEM AL-QADI, BROTHER OF FARHAN AL-QADI (through translator): I can't explain these feelings. It's like being born again. God bless. And we say thank you to everyone.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): The IDF describing the troops involved in his rescue as daring and courageous, saying Al-Qadi was found alone without his captors.

REAR ADM. DANIEL HAGARI, ISRAELI MILITARY SPOKESPERSON: We cannot go into many details of this special operation, but I can share that Israeli commandos rescued Kaid Farhan Al-Qadi from an underground tunnel, following accurate intelligence.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): At the hospital, the first readout from doctors, Al-Qadi is doing well.

PROFESSOR SHIOMI CODISH, SOROKA MEDICAL CENTER CEO: He appears to be in general good condition, but will require another day or two of medical tests to make sure he is still OK.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): In the desert, his Bedouin tribe readying for that moment. Home fires lit, traditional coffee brewing, the extended family all coming to celebrate what they and he believed might never happen. ROBERTSON: Did your brother think he was going to survive?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE, BROTHER OF FARHAN AL-QADI (through translator): God wrote him another life. He himself doesn't believe that he is back alive. He told me when I saw him that my wish was to see you and say hello to you and then I can die.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): His younger brother telling me Al-Qadi and the family's road back to full recovery could be a long one.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): It is impossible to erase the memories that he saw there. I personally will not go back to who I was before. I am completely changed.

ROBERTSON (voice-over): As they await Al-Qadi's return, they pray. Grateful, they say, no blood was spilt in his rescue. That the war and the suffering may end. And all the hostages come home.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON (on-camera): And it really is a strange feeling being there with that family. Absolutely, they have that feeling of celebration. But what's really coming through to me, at least when I was there, is the reality for them of what this loss means, of how much they've suffered and really how long that road to recovery is.

And then you think of the 104 other October 7th hostages, 34 of them believed to be dead. But that's another 70 families who are hoping to have moments like this. But they are, as we've seen, so bittersweet. The hard reality of all that pain and suffering. Anderson?

COOPER: Yes. Nic Robertson, thank you.

A quick reminder, before we hand things over to The Source, Vice President Harris and her running mate Tim Walz sit down tomorrow with CNN's Dana Bash. The exclusive interview, their first as the Democratic presidential ticket, airs Thursday night at 9:00 Eastern Time right here on CNN.

The news continues right now. The Source starts now. See you tomorrow.