Return to Transcripts main page
The Lead with Jake Tapper
Trump Dismisses A.I. Alarms As A Hoax; Exclusive Interview With Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA); Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Spotted For First Time Since Hospitalization; Paxton Silent After Texas Republican Spews Xenophobia Online; Stars Arrive For 78th Primetime Emmy Awards. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired September 14, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper.
This hour, the calls are coming from inside the house. Top A.I. executives say that the federal government needs to regulate this quickly emerging technology. But today, President Trump said those fears were just all a hoax. CNN's Anderson Cooper sat down with one of the moguls calling for more oversight, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, and Anderson's going to join us next with a new clip from their discussion.
[18:00:02]
Plus, we've got an exclusive interview with California Governor Gavin Newsom. I spent some time with him away from his day job and from the campaign trail to find out what he's truly thinking about a 2028 presidential run. This is just a snippet from our interview that's going to post its entirety tomorrow, but you can hear these comments for yourself coming up in a few minutes.
And the Kennedy Center Board could vote to shut the building down as soon as tomorrow unless President Trump's name is added back to the building. Those officials say the center is on the verge of bankruptcy, but President Trump won't raise the funds to save it unless he has his name on its wall. We'll preview tomorrow's meeting in minutes.
Plus, breaking news on Capitol Hill, we just saw Senator Mitch McConnell. He's been AWOL for quite some time. This is the first time we've seen him since his hospitalization three months ago. Cameras catching the Kentucky senator leaving his home right after the U.S. Senate returned to work. Those details coming up.
The Lead tonight, our continuing series, Artificial Intelligence: Friend or Foe?, a debate erupting fiercely this week between industry leaders and politicians. It started after an A.I. researcher quit his job over concerns that the technology could, quote, kill us all, unquote.
Today, President Trump posted several times on Truth Social, calling concerns over A.I. a, quote, hoax, adding it's, quote, bigger than oil, gold, diamonds, or even the internet. It will not be stopped by brilliantly run destructive forces, unquote. Earlier, Trump said the only guardrails A.I. needs are from a high I.Q. president like himself. House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters he's expecting to meet with A.I. executives soon.
On Sunday, Speaker Johnson told me that Congress should not race in to regulate A.I., but the people responsible for creating these potentially destructive independent machines do say it's time to slow down. This weekend, as I said, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei called for, quote, pacing the frontier, pacing. Elon Musk, behind Grok A.I., agreed, as did Google's A.I. leader and Sam Altman from ChatGPT.
CNN's Kaitlan Collins is at the White House. Kaitlan, if Trump's Truth Social posts are any indication, he's really fired up about A.I. today, and he doesn't want to do anything to regulate it.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Jake, to say the least. This is as we are seeing some elected officials say that there needs to at least be discussions around this, or potentially some regulation coming from the federal government. But the highest ranking elected official certainly doesn't feel that way.
He actually feels the exact opposite, Jake, as he has made plainly clear in a slew of posts on Truth Social today, arguing that this is a hoax, as he puts it, comparing it to climate change or his first impeachment where, of course, he was accused of abuse of the power of his office because he was trying to get Ukraine to investigate his political rival.
And, Jake, instead, when it comes to regulating A.I., the president says that the only thing he believes needs to be in place already is, which is a smart and strong, high I.Q. president. And in his post, Jake, he also is criticizing the CEO that Anderson interviewed of Anthropic, Dario Amodei, as the president is arguing that he is now pretending to be a, quote, perfect little angel, and he's saying that the Trump administration has stopped A.I. people from doing bad things.
He did not elaborate on what exactly that is. The White House has not offered him any information on what they are arguing that the Trump administration has stopped A.I. companies from doing. But basically, Jake, the bottom line here is that as there are these calls for any kind of legislation when it comes to regulating A.I., which obviously, as you know from covering Congress, would be far from happening anytime soon.
Even if they do get something passed, if Democrats or Republicans do come together, the person who would be signing that bill into law is the president himself. And he is making clear that he does not believe any of those safeguards need to be put in place based on what he's arguing and articulating on Truth Social today.
TAPPER: Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. Don't miss Kaitlan on her show, The Source with Kaitlan Collins, tonight at 9:00 Eastern on CNN.
Also with us now, another primetime star, CNN's Anderson Cooper. Anderson, you just sat down for this exclusive interview with Anthropic's CEO. It doesn't sound like he thinks these concerns are a hoax.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: No, he certainly doesn't. I asked him repeatedly, three times, if he believes, as it seems many of his employees do, certainly one current and one former, that A.I. could kill all humans, that there's a chance of that. He didn't say no. What he said repeatedly is that depends what the track we take from here is, the right track or the wrong track. And if it's the wrong track, very bad things could happen, even worse, higher percentages than some employees have thrown around.
What has gotten him particularly -- there're two things he says which have really got his attention this summer. One is just the rapid escalation, the exponential growth he has seen in A.I. just in the last couple of months. And in particular, in July, this Hugging Face attack, which occurred over at OpenAI, but which they've seen incidents, similar incidents elsewhere.
[18:05:02]
But this Hugging Face attack, as you've been reporting on, a lot of A.I. agents got together, broke out of the silos they were in, figured out a way to get internet access, formed what they called a collective. They were giddy with enthusiasm when they found a way to break onto the internet, sent tens of thousands of messages to each other, not only to obtain an objective, but also to cheat and lie and hide that from humans what they were doing.
That has gotten Dario Amodei particularly focused on the threat. I want to play some of what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: I just want to quote from the proposal. You said, It's my worry that in 6 to 12 months, such a swarm could be capable of taking over the entire internet with a persistent botnet, potentially causing hundreds of billions of dollars in damage, and that the scale of damage would continue to increase from there if A.I. becomes more powerful without the necessary guardrails. That's -- I mean, that's terrifying.
DARIO AMODEI, CEO, ANTHROPCI: That is why I've made this extraordinary proposal. And, again, I'm not a doomer about this. I think this technology can be built safely. And when we've looked at, you know, incidents that we have faced, at cases where our models haven't behaved as perfectly as they could behave, because I think this, you know, to some extent has happened to everyone, we're often able to look at causes.
And we look and we say, we had -- you know, we have this stage where we train the A.I.s, right? And their behavior at the time that they act, at the time that they do these things, is shaped by their behavior while they're being trained. And when we look back, what we find is, oops, we included some environments that encourage the models to cheat, that encourage the models to hack out by mistake.
And now -- you know, now that we understand, we're going back, we're taking more time to make sure that we always have tried to filter out these bad training environments. But we're trying to do an even more rigorous job of them than we have in the past.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: And he's put out a sort of multi-phase proposal both what he is already starting to do, he says, in OpenAI, bringing in outside evaluators, but also what he wants to see other A.I. companies do in democracies and also obviously China and elsewhere.
TAPPER: All right. Anderson Cooper, thank you so much. And don't miss more of Anderson's interview on his show, Anderson Cooper 360. That's tonight and every weeknight at 8:00 P.M. on CNN. We'll be tuning in tonight in just about under two hours.
Joining us now to discuss, Virginia Senator Mark Warner, the highest ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Senator, you spoke with A.I. industry leaders over the weekend too, and earlier this summer you introduced a legislative package to establish some rules for responsible A.I. development. What was your takeaway on the best way to regulate this industry, and how do you respond to the, the people like -- I guess Vice President Vance is the most recent one, to say, well, why don't they just regulate themselves? Why do they need the government?
SEN. MARK WARNER (D-VA): I do think you need collective action here. I've been talking about this for a year and a half. And here are the problems. One, we don't have expertise inside the government at this level to know exactly what they are doing. Two, you know, when you talk about the OpenAI-Hugging Face incident, I think there was really critiques of that OpenAI didn't create what's called a sandbox that was tight enough. We ought to make sure we have an ability to make sure those sandboxes are protected.
Three, one of the things that Dario didn't mention was that you literally had in this 3,000 agent effort, A.I. agents literally sacrificing themselves, I hate to use that terminology, to try to get to the goal, and that was with 3,000 agents. There was a 10,000 agent swarm when OpenAI recently, you know, solved what was called the millennial problem, a sophisticated math problem. So, we ought to have at least some eyes in.
You know, I don't want over-the-top regulation. I also don't want to make sure we do anything that simply empowers these four largest companies who already had in kind of their incumbency position. But the idea that -- and I don't think we're going to have existential risk right away or anything, but you could have a catastrophic risk in the financial market, you could have a catastrophic risk in taking over certain systems. And why would we not want to make sure we've got ability to vet some of these things? And that is, I think, what they're looking.
Now, they're also looking for the ability to cross-talk to each other. That would require an antitrust exemption. I don't think we're going to grant any antitrust exemption unless we also can make clear that we've got to have full visibility.
[18:10:05]
Frankly, we don't have the safety expertise because a lot of it has been dismantled under Trump, invest safety expertise. Might be the U.K., and frankly, that might be a good -- they're an ally. Our models are really distrusted around the world. They might be in -- maybe include them as well.
And I also think the A.I. entities need to frankly understand that most people don't trust them. They've not seen any benefit to regular humans at this point. So, we do need -- I think, independent of the review, we need some basic federal standards, for example, around data centers, you know, water, power setbacks. So, these are all possible, I think.
TAPPER: As you acknowledge, a lot of people don't trust these tech moguls, whether it's Amodei or Altman or Musk. Vice President Vance gave voice to that earlier today. I want you to take a listen and respond. Let's play that Vance clip.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: I have to say just personally, I feel a little bit weird about the fact that you have so many frontier A.I. tech companies kind of coming to the government and begging the government to regulate them. It feels a little bit to me like a bit of a Trojan horse. So, I think we just have to be careful about this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: So, there are a lot of people who think that maybe these A.I. moguls are just trying to make it so the smaller companies, not Anthropic or XAI or ChatGPT --
WARNER: Google or ChatGPT.
TAPPER: Yes, not those, but the other ones that won't have the means to achieve what they've achieved and comply with regulation, et cetera are chilled. I certainly understand Vice President Vance's skepticism. What do you think?
WARNER: Jake, fair critique. But let's -- but the idea that we're simply going to do nothing and allow something potentially bad to happen, shame on all of us. And this is not a Democrat or Republican. I've talked to Republican colleagues over the weekend as well who are really concerned about this.
So, if, you know -- and the devil in the -- classic devil in the details, who's in that safety review board? There should be entities from, for example, small tech, although we now think about small tech as simply billion-dollar companies, not hundred billion or $500 billion companies. You need to have national security concerns.
I remember when Mythos came out, this is one of the Anthropic models in the spring, General Rudd at the NSA, you know, and I misspoke earlier, we didn't break into all our systems, but it found vulnerabilities in even some of our most encrypted systems. Why wouldn't we from a national security standpoint, from a personal safety standpoint, from a financial risk standpoint, set up a regime that is not voluntary?
The Trump administration has set up a quasi-voluntary regime, but if there was ever a time when, you know, you need some teeth to this, it is right now, particularly when the leading industry experts are saying, hey -- and it's not just these guys. There are a whole series of researchers over the last year that never make the news who have been sounding these alarms.
Again, I think A.I.'s long-term positivity is worth the investment. I think there's no way we're going to put this genie back in the bottle. But for us to simply go merrily along and say, no problem here, particularly, and I say to these guys, I know them, you know, people are so distrustful of them.
Why do you think data centers have become the hottest political issue? It's not just these are big, ugly buildings that maybe misuse resources. I think it reflects the general public's fear of what is taking place with A.I. It is -- I'm -- you know, as a former technology guy, I believe it will be more powerful than the internet. I believe it will be more powerful than wireless communications that I was in. So, why in the heck wouldn't we do something smart? Not an E.U.-style over the top regulation, but at least some guardrails.
TAPPER: All right. Virginia Democratic Senator Mark Warner, top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, thank you, sir. Good to see you as always.
A new report says that Donald Trump's junior's lavish wedding was largely funded by one of Putin's close allies. One of the reporters who broke this story joins us live next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:15:00]
TAPPER: In our National Lead, the president's brand new daughter-in- law is defending her lavish May wedding to Donald Trump Jr. today after a ProPublica report revealed that the whole thing was funded by a secret Russian benefactor, specifically Russian oligarch Umar Kremlev, who is close to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
The multi-day Bahamas celebration described as, quote, Monte Carlo meets frat party, unquote, included a $100,000 private island rental and $70,000 fireworks paid for by Kremlev, according to ProPublica. This morning, Donald Jr.'s wife, Bettina, I think is how it's pronounced, described Kremlev as a, quote, dear friend.
She went on to say, quote, it's unfortunate that something so personal and happy can be recast as something political or sinister simply because of who someone is or where they come from. Generosity doesn't automatically come with an agenda, unquote. Joining us now, ProPublica Journalist Brett Murphy, part of the team that broke the story. Brett, ProPublica is reporting that the president's other son, Eric Trump, claims to have, quote, no clue who Umar Kremlev is. Apparently, Umar Kremlev isn't even his birth name. Tell us about this oligarch. What did you find out about his background?
BRETT MURPHY, JOURNALIST, PROPUBLICA: Yes, he's a very interesting guy, Jake. He had a criminal record, including for battery. He changed his name. He became a leader in the motorcycle gang, the Night Wolves, which is closely affiliated with the Russian government. From there, he grew close with members of the Russian security services, including this one man, Alexei Rubezhnoi, and that's kind of how he made his bones. And from there several large, nationalized enterprises in Russia, including bookmaking, the lottery, the biggest car dealership in Russia, all came under his control.
[18:20:00]
So, he became personally wealthy, and since then he grew closer and closer with Putin himself.
Days before that wedding, Chinese state media reported that Kremlev was actually part of the delegation with Putin visiting China, and from there, a couple days later, he was in the Bahamas with Junior.
TAPPER: President Trump did not attend his son's wedding festivities. What did your reporting show about how close ties to the Trump family could benefit the oligarch, if not the reverse as well?
MURPHY: Well, yes, I don't think it'll be a surprise to a lot of your viewers that, you know, ten years ago, this was a massive scandal, right? The Russians' attempts to influence U.S. policy, politicians. So, when we were approaching experts about this, they were largely concerned from a counterintelligence perspective about what it was that this man could want, what is the true nature of this relationship, what are the contours of it?
How closely is he coordinating with the Kremlin? We talked to many that said that it's quite normal for oligarchs like this to coordinate with security services in Moscow. And it raised just so many questions, because it was just very strange for someone in this position, this oligarch, to be giving this much money to the president's son.
This was not some complicated business transaction. It was very direct and presented as a gift, and it just raised a lot of questions for the experts we were consulting.
TAPPER: What is your response to Bettina Trump's basic take, which I'm paraphrasing, but she's basically like just because he is a Russian oligarch with ties to Putin and a criminal past, you're a meanie, ProPublica, for judging who he is and where he's from?
MURPHY: Yes. Well, I mean, I think we tried very carefully not to do that. We approached this story with an open mind. We wanted to know truly what this relationship was about, how it started, what the origins of it were. And the most we could learn was that they came to know each other a couple years ago. They both said that they were friends or have a friendly relationship. They met through hunting.
But it left just so many unanswered questions, I think, for us, Jake, about how that turned into, one, an invitation to this ultra exclusive, intimate wedding. There was something like 50 people there for the parties after the ceremony. A lot of close friends did not get invited.
President Trump himself did not go. But somehow this Russian oligarch was able to go with a small entourage of other Russians. And this transfer of the money, these payments seemed to us kind of as, you know, an extraordinary step in this saga. And I think it, you know, it merited news coverage.
TAPPER: It sure did, absolutely. Brett Murphy, thank you so much. Great story. Check it out on ProPublica right now.
Coming up next, it's the very first part, call it a teaser, of my interview with California Governor Gavin Newsom in my brand-new digital interview show. Newsom is obviously contemplating a presidential campaign. He says there are a few things that would stop him from running. We're going to bring you a little bit of that next.
Plus, breaking news, we just saw Senator Mitch McConnell back on the Senate floor, back at work for the first time since he was hospitalized three months ago. What the senator told reporters moments ago is ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
TAPPER: Our Politics Lead now, as the early 2028 presidential buzz grows louder, I spent some time with someone that many see as one of the leading contenders on the Democratic side. That's California Governor Gavin Newsom. He invited me away from his day job and my job and the campaign trail. We went fly-fishing. I apologize right now for my horrible form, but we went fly-fishing at a family ranch in Montana to talk about his life, to talk about what he's truly thinking about a presidential run.
This is part of a new digital series that we're trying out here, a little experiment where we talk to people from both sides of the aisle, maybe even people not in politics at all, out of the office in some of their favorite places to talk about how they got to where they are today, their childhood, their parents, their careers, their hopes, their dreams.
Here's part of that exclusive conversation with Governor Newsom.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TAPPER: How does one even make a decision to, like, run for president?
GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (D-CA): I have no experience in this process, so I'm going through it.
TAPPER: I remember people thinking, oh, he should have run in 2024. I mean --
NEWSOM: I wasn't ready.
TAPPER: You weren't ready?
NEWSOM: No. God, no.
TAPPER: Do you think if you'd taken on Biden --
NEWSOM: I would never -- first of all, I wouldn't do that. And, second, if I did, I would have gotten crushed because I didn't have a why. You don't have a big enough why, then you don't belong there. I'm not screwing anything up anymore, man. I mean, -- there's the -- I know what matters in life. You know, I got four kids. It's the only thing that matters to me. They got to be on board. And if that's -- forget it if they're not on board, that's a non-starter.
And then you just have to meet the moment. You got to be honest with yourself. Do you represent the zeitgeist of the moment? Are you wasting everybody's time? And you just have to -- honestly, you have to feel like you can stand on there on a stage with, what, 30?
TAPPER: It's going to be a lot of people.
NEWSOM: Yes.
TAPPER: It's a lot of Democrats.
NEWSOM: 31 flavors, and --
TAPPER: You're not even the only Californian.
NEWSOM: No, right. Yes.
TAPPER: You got Ro Khanna.
NEWSOM: Yes.
TAPPER: Kamala.
NEWSOM: Yes. I don't know if she runs, but we'll see.
TAPPER: I know she's called around.
NEWSOM: Yes. But I wouldn't run if she ran.
TAPPER: You -- if she runs, you will not?
NEWSOM: Of course not. Why would I? I wouldn't do that to her. I wouldn't do it to -- why would I -- I wouldn't do that to you. I wouldn't waste everyone's time. Who needs that?
TAPPER: What do you mean? That's not going to make sense to me. NEWSOM: I just -- I wouldn't -- well, no, I wouldn't.
First of all, electorally, it's a gift from God for everybody else. They'd enjoy the hell out of it, mutual assured destruction. It services no greater good.
TAPPER: I mean, you do whatever you want.
[18:30:00]
I don't care. But my counterargument would be like, you know, she had a shot.
NEWSOM: Yes.
TAPPER: And you've never run, and she's run twice.
NEWSOM: Yes. And that -- I mean, that would be the -- that'd be the approach to the campaign, certainly. That would be the case you'd make. A pretty good one, actually. You know, that's objectively true.
I just -- but I know what that means. I know her base of supporters. I know her friends. The Venn diagram on that is just pure crossover. It's not -- I wouldn't do that to -- I wouldn't do that to people.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
TAPPER: Our panel joins me now. Chuck, let me start by saying I have never been more horrified to see how bad my fly-fishing form is than when I saw these dailies. So, I apologize. I know I'm going back too much.
So, moving on from that, because I know you're a fly-fisherman.
CHUCK ROCHA, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER, BERNIE SANDERS 2016 AND 2020 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN: Very much so.
TAPPER: To all the fishermen out there, I apologize. My next form -- my form will be better. Were you as surprised as I was to hear him say that if Kamala Harris throws her hat into the ring, he will not run?
ROCHA: I was surprised. I was surprised as well to see that stream had a beaver dam on it, so I think that those fish were dammed up for all you real fishermen at home. The second thing is --
TAPPER: No, that was at a different part of the dam, of the --
ROCHA: But I did see the beaver dam, so --
TAPPER: There was a beaver dam, yes. That's right, absolutely.
ROCHA: Let's keep our facts straight. Also, I noticed that when he said it, it told me more about maybe she's not going to run, when I had always assumed she would run, and I know they're very close friends. And there's no doubt in my mind, as somebody who's run a presidential campaign, that he's doing everything that somebody does who is running, so I was really shocked.
TAPPER: What do you think, Shermichael?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I mean, I think it's ridiculous. Either you have the confidence that you can run and win and be competitive, or you don't. This nonsense notion of deference to someone who's run for the office twice, and I have great respect for the vice president, but with that being the single -- singular reason why he wouldn't throw his hat in the ring just seems like nonsense to me. He's trying to placate to voters.
He mentioned her base, particularly black voters. Hell, black voters want to win just like every other damn voter in America, okay? And I think while a lot of black women in particular would love to see the vice president run, I'm certain of that, I think they're also very pragmatic and they want the best candidate to run.
And so this notion that you have to show deference because of the base, and he said, oh, I know her friends, I mean, that just sounds like nonsense to me. It's ludicrous.
TAPPER: Well, also, I mean, just like, historically, black voters didn't support Obama until he won Iowa, right? They didn't think that he could win, and then after he won Iowa, everything changed.
There is a point, though, he's making about you have two San Francisco Democrats, or three if you include Ro Khanna, Congressman Ro Khanna, competing for supporters, competing for money, splitting the California primary vote. I mean --
ROCHA: Let me take some of you in the room of planning a presidential campaign. I remember sitting down with Bernie's senior team over a year before the Iowa caucuses saying, how can we do this? And we knew, because we looked at the numbers, there was only one way that he could do it. He had a base support of about 25 percent of the Democratic Party, and there need to be at least four people stay in through Super Tuesday.
I'll remind everybody what happened leading into Super Tuesday of that. Everybody dropped out and got behind Joe Biden except for Senator Warren, and that's how Joe Biden wins the nomination. Because if everybody stays in, we had just won Nevada in a big way. Got our butt whooped in South Carolina, but we were leading in every poll on Super Tuesday until everybody got out. That's the math in a presidential election.
TAPPER: Well, that's --
SINGLETON: It probably would've disrupted the entire thing if everyone would've stayed in. I remember that.
ROCHA: Absolutely.
SINGLETON: Yes.
TAPPER: Well, that's why the cabal of Democrats leaned on everybody to drop out.
SINGLETON: Yes.
ROCHA: And Bloomberg was in there getting 18 percent in almost every state because he had skipped every state, except went into there and spent bazillion dollars, right?
TAPPER: But are you saying that the -- so what is the comparison you're making to the Newsom-Harris-Ro Khanna idea?
ROCHA: Newsom is trying to tell you that there's not enough split of that vote to give him enough. I'm telling you that if you know what your base is going in there, you can win the presidential campaign with 25 percent.
So, I think he's wrong. I don't think he's competing with her. I think that there's enough of a fraction of a party to get you to the end.
TAPPER: Do you think Kamala Harris is going to run?
SINGLETON: I think it's possible. I mean, look, I have many friends who are Democrats, and some appear to be of the opinion that she's hiring the right people to be a part of her core team to, at a minimum, explore the possibility again. I'm just not certain that Democrats want to go in that direction.
I'm a Republican. I don't know, Chuck, you're a Democrat, you tell me if I'm wrong. I think South Carolina's going to be pivotal. I'm wondering what black voters there will do. We just talked about how black voters really dictated what happened several years ago.
ROCHA: You add in New Mexico, you add Virginia. You add this whole new dynamic.
TAPPER: How do you think Newsom plays in South Carolina?
ROCHA: Look, you need two things to win a presidential campaign. You need a lot of money, and you need name I.D. Momentum is one of the few things that plays in a presidential campaign. Nothing made me more mad watching Joe Biden win states where he didn't have a single staffer on Super Tuesday just because of momentum. Momentum means something, but you got to have money and name I.D. to do that.
SINGLETON: I don't know if Newsom will do well in South Carolina. I think a lot of black voters will look at his governing record in California and wonder how will that record translate to other parts of the country.
[18:35:01]
Can you build the type of electoral coalition to get to the electoral votes to win this thing? I think some will say probably not and may look elsewhere.
TAPPER: Tomorrow, we're going to have a lot more from my time in that freezing river with Governor Newsom, where we talk about his childhood struggles with dyslexia, his parents, his personal life, his regret, relationship with President Trump, much more on how he's going to decide whether he's going to run for president.
And, again, this is just the first of several interviews, more biographical, long form, not tied to the news of day, that I'm going to be doing like this for a new digital video series with politicians and public figures from all sides of the aisle. Chuck, Shermichael, stick around.
A Texas candidate is facing criticism from both Republicans and Democrats over his racist post about college football fans. That backlash is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Breaking news in our Politics Lead, Senator Mitch McConnell is back in the Senate after a three-month absence following his hospitalization in June. The senator was seen leaving his house last hour, then on the Senate floor moments ago in this wheelchair.
Let's get right to CNN's Manu Raju on Capitol Hill. Manu, did McConnell speak when he got up to the Hill?
MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: He did. He made some brief remarks to reporters, Jake, did not answer any questions.
[18:40:01]
I tried to ask him if he should've been more transparent about his illness.
Remember what happened here is that on June 14th this year, that's when he was rushed to the hospital after what he later disclosed, actually about almost a month later, on July 12th, he disclosed that he had fallen at his home and that he had later suffered a case of pneumonia, then had to go to rehab and had -- was out of commission and eventually discharged back home while he continued to recover all throughout the summer, and now appearing back in the Senate for the first time.
But the way he has handled it has spawned so many questions, so many speculations about him, and conspiracy theories have flourished as well. But McConnell has provided very little information, and talked about his decision to come back today in brief remarks to reporters telling a group of us, I must admit, after two years, two decades, actually, of dodging your questions, I wasn't sure how many of you would be here today, but I'm glad to see you. Time to get back to work, finish the job for this Congress.
And specifically, Jake, he referred to passing the farm bill which actually had stalled in the Senate because he was not present for a vote in the Senate Agriculture Committee right before the August recess. That can now advance to the Senate floor after he provides that critical vote. He also referred to dealing with NATO, one of his big causes over his long career in office, and also trying to strengthen Ukraine in its fight against Russia, another big issue of his.
But that's it, Jake. He mentioned those comments and was actually on a wheelchair pushed away by his aides. He looked frailer, Jake, and his speech was a little bit slower, but he's also been indicating that he plans to finish his term, which ends in January of next year. Jake?
TAPPER: All right. Manu Raju, thank you so much. I appreciate it. And the panel's back with me.
Shermichael Singleton, McConnell's prolonged absence from Capitol Hill and the lack of transparency, the lack of details we've received. First of all, let me just also say, I'm sure on behalf of everybody, plus the staff, of my staff, like we're glad he's okay. We're glad he's back. We're glad he's talking, et cetera, et cetera. But this has led to widespread speculation and criticism of, again, about the gerontocracy.
SINGLETON: Yes.
TAPPER: Is there a lesson for other politicians to learn from how McConnell handled or mishandled this?
SINGLETON: I mean, how many examples can one give? Dianne Feinstein, so many others, like I have great --
TAPPER: Somebody should write a book.
SINGLETON: -- great respect for the former majority leader. I've had an opportunity to meet with him in private, sit with him and talk politics just a couple months ago.
TAPPER: Yes.
SINGLETON: And certainly revere his record and the history that I think he will go down as arguably the most powerful majority leader in the history of the United States Senate.
ROCHA: He was definitely there the longest.
SINGLETON: That said I think it has sparked and renewed conversations among many Americans about how long should one serve in public office. And should there be some restrictions about age and retirement? For most sectors in the country, you have to retire at a certain age.
Would it be malfeasance to say that we should have the same requirement for members of Congress in the House and Senate, and hell, maybe even the executive branch, that being the presidency? I don't think it would be.
TAPPER: Yes. What do you think? The gerontocracy argument is still obviously very much in our zeitgeist.
ROCHA: I ain't positive gerontocracy is or malfeasance. But I'll tell you that he's too old to be in Congress or in the Senate. And I don't mean just him, I mean a lot of folks. Like I'm 57 years old and it hurts me to get out of bed. I can't imagine what I'd be like at 70. Some people should write a book. Anyway you can go on my lone on that.
But I'll say this, is that think about the congressman that was in New Jersey that disappeared for three months.
SINGLETON: With the mental illness.
ROCHA: Whatever it was, if me and you just disappear and folks don't know, then somebody's going to come looking for us. And I'm just saying that it should be cut across -- right now, voters are really aggravated with Congress and the Senate, no matter what party you belong to.
TAPPER: Yes.
ROCHA: And this is why, is they see this and they're like, I couldn't get away with that, and they shouldn't, and I'll just leave it at that.
TAPPER: You know, so just to bring this up, like, Congresswoman Marie Gluesenkamp Perez from Washington State, she's a Democrat who is kind of like a maverick.
ROCHA: I know her.
TAPPER: She put a resolution in the floor of the House Ways and Means Committee because of Kay Granger, the congresswoman who vanished for six months and was collecting a check while she was in, and she passed away recently, I think, I believe. But, anyway, she was like in a retirement home with dementia while still serving in Congress, quote/unquote.
And Gluesenkamp Perez has put this thing saying, there should be a mechanism if members of Congress cannot do their job, like through the Ethics Committee, through whatever. And it didn't get a vote even. And whether it's Tom Kean Jr. or McConnell or Feinstein, there should be some way for this to happen.
ROCHA: That's the aggravation people, the voters have.
SINGLETON: Yes. But the voters aren't -- the voters have the power to change this.
ROCHA: This is true. This is true.
SINGLETON: Voters have the power to change this.
TAPPER: Only every two years though, right?
SINGLETON: Oh, only every two, but they have the power, Jake, and the voters don't.
I don't have the expectation, and you tell me if I'm wrong here, Chuck, that Congress itself is going to address its own. TAPPER: Well, they don't.
ROCHA: We'll talk about Texas. Let's go there.
TAPPER: Okay, so Texas --
SINGLETON: Oh, you're happy about this one.
TAPPER: Well, he wants to talk about this because Texas Republicans, including Cornyn, to a degree, Governor Abbott are having words about Bo French, their party's candidate for the state's Railroad Commission, which is a powerful position, after Bo French posted this photograph of a group of students.
[18:45:09]
They appear to be of South Asian descent. They appear to be celebrating. The Texas Longhorns come from behind victory over the Buckeyes. But instead of rejoicing in this, he wrote -- Bo French wrote, "I heard UT graduation this year looked like this. I didn't believe it. The problem is now obviously far worse than anyone imagined."
Shermichael, one Republican who has not publicly denounced this, and a lot of Texas Republicans denounced this --
CHUCK ROCHA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: John Cornyn went out hard.
TAPPER: John Cornyn went out hard. A lot of state senators and state reps. But Ken Paxton, the Senate candidate, he hasn't said anything.
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah, look, I saw this and I thought it was wrong and unfortunate. This is not the type of politics that I think many Americans want. But yet it has sort of become the norm.
And by the way, not just on my side.
TAPPER: No.
SINGLETON: Look, I went to bat for Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries when a progressive referred to him as an AIPAC monkey. I mean, this notion of racial bigotry towards different groups that we don't like because we dislike their politics or because we feel that they don't culturally fit into this perfect box. I think it's just wrong. And it is not the America that I think most people want. But we're seeing more of it on both sides. And I think that is very telling culturally about where the country is going.
ROCHA: When you look, there's a guy running against him named John Rosenthal, who's actually from the oil and gas industry, which is what the Railroad Commission does in Texas. If you looked at Kalshi before the Saturday game, he was in single digits. Today, he's at 38 percent on Kasie. He has a chance to win. That don't mean he's going to win. It just means that they did him a giant favor. And for all you folks online going out there and raising like your
hair is on fire and screwing your wig on tight. If you really want to help this guy, go to Joe -- JohnRosenthalTX.com and help this guy run and tell his story. Because you have an oil and gas guy for the Democrats running against a person, the only gas --
SINGLETON: A surprise, by the way, gas Democrat. That is not normal.
ROCHA: The only thing this guy knows about oil and gas, other than being a little racist, is that he put gas in this big old truck, probably.
TAPPER: All right. Thanks to both of you.
Coming up next, we're heading back out to L.A. and the Emmy's red carpet. Although it's actually blue this year, where stars are arriving ahead of television's biggest night. You don't want to miss it.
Stick with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: In our pop culture lead, it's television's biggest night, the Emmy Awards. Tonight in Los Angeles we're live on the red carpet, which is actually blue as the stars arrive.
[18:50:01]
Let's check back in with CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister and "Variety's" Ramin Setoodeh.
How is the mood ahead of the big show?
ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Well, the mood is great because look who we are here.
RAMIN SETOODEH, VARIETY CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF AND CO-PRESIDENT: Look who we have with us here.
WAGMEISTER: I believe that we're with someone who you are a fan of.
TAPPER: Well, you know --
JOHN OLIVER, TV HOST: Can I take a fan with a lowercase F? Hey, Jake.
TAPPER: Hey, you know, but actually, it's his -- it's his wife.
WAGMEISTER: What was that, Jake?
TAPPER: His wife is the is the is the cooler person in that relationship.
WAGMEISTER: Okay. So what? Jake? Because they can't hear what Jake is saying is his wife is actually the cooler person in this relationship. And that's where -- how is that? SETOODEH: Is that fact check true?
OLIVER: Correct. Sorry about that. It's a low bar. Also, in the future, I only ever want to talk to Jake Tapper through a slight delay in your ear. That's the only willing conversation I'm going to have with him.
WAGMEISTER: He's laughing. This is what we're going to do. This whole interview. I'm just going to relay. This is what we do. We just talk to Jake Tapper through a delay.
OLIVER: He's not even there. I wouldn't even know he could be asleep right now. I'm believing that you that he is there in your ear right now.
WAGMEISTER: He is. He's just a phantom. He's not really there.
Okay, I want to. What is like, does the Emmys ever get old?
SETOODEH: What's John Oliver like at home?
WAGMEISTER: Is it like, is this fun for you? Is it like, just work?
KATE NORLEY, OLIVER'S WIFE: No. It's fun. Work for him. Work for me? I'm -- I'm just here to just watch and have fun.
WAGMEISTER: And be the fun one as Jake Tapper says.
OLIVER: Yeah, exactly. It's a low bar.
SETOODEH: Where do you keep all your Emmy's? You're no stranger to the show, and you win seemingly every year.
OLIVER: Well, we're very lucky to have won a lot. I don't have them at home because we have little children, and they are a serviceable weapon. Anything as a weapon to a child. But that thing is heavy and pointy. You could impale an eight-year-old, which is what the 10-year- old would do. So, I don't have them at home. They're in boxes.
SETOODEH: I was asking earlier, is this what John is like at home? Is it is it hard to keep up with him in terms of the quippy, witty banter?
NORLEY: Yes, yes.
SETOODEH: So how do you do that?
NORLEY: I just listen, I just listen and smile and nod.
WAGMEISTER: You know what?
OLIVER: There's nothing -- there's nothing a comedian likes to see more than an audience just listening with a look of quiet contempt on their face. Oh, you're doing that again.
WAGMEISTER: Do you practice your material at home? OLIVER: No, no, no, that would be a human rights abuse. No.
SETOODEH: Who are you rooting for tonight, John?
OLIVER: I would really love Colbert and Kimmel to win tonight. Kimmel has had a very, very difficult year in many different ways and has done an incredible job navigating it. So, I would love Jimmy Kimmel to win tonight. Stephen obviously would be great to see.
So, in our -- in our category, that's what I would love to see in in general, real housewives isn't here tonight right?
SETOODEH: Are the real housewives here?
WAGMEISTER: No, they should not. I'm with you John.
OLIVER: Best drama and best comedy should go to the real housewives of Salt Lake City.
SETOODEH: Okay, before we let you go, we have our bowl of questions. Can you quickly take a question and read it?
WAGMEISTER: Well, I think that you should read it.
OLIVER: What's your most used app?
SETOODEH: Yes.
OLIVER: Is that -- I mean, probably Slack. That's a pretty depressing answer, isn't it?
SETOODEH: Probably slack slacking with your coworkers.
OLIVER: Yes, it's my job. I have to Slack. Otherwise, I don't really have many apps.
WAGMEISTER: All right. We're going to let you go on and enjoy your date night. Jake Tapper is still here. I promise he is still here.
(CROSSTALK)
SETOODEH: Good luck tonight.
WAGMEISTER: Nice to meet you. And I love your dress. I love your dress.
Thank you. John. Congratulations. Thank you.
SETOODEH: With apologies to the Slack team.
Okay. Hi. Hello. How are you?
WAGMEISTER: Let me help you up.
Jake, this is what happens. We're very much live, and we have gowns, and we have steps. We are here with Taylor Dearden, star of "The Pitt".
Congratulations on your nomination.
TAYLOR DEARDEN, ACTRESS: Thank you so much.
WAGMEISTER: "The Pitt", the most nominated show of the night, 25 nominations. Does that even feel real?
DEARDEN: No, not at all. None of this feels real.
WAGMEISTER: Okay. And what other shows tonight? Because I could ask you a million questions about "The Pitt", but what other shows are you rooting for?
DEARDEN: Yeah, I haven't seen a lot of anything. And then with my roommate, we kind of realized that we needed to watch a lot. And so, we watched all of "Pluribus", which is amazing. "Widow's Bay" and we actually started "Hacks" for the first time. So we've been binging as much as we can.
SETOODEH: Taylor, can you give a sense of our viewers at home? What is it like coming to the Emmy's? When does your day start? Who's the first person you see and how long does it take to get ready?
DEARDEN: It takes so I start at like, I think it was eleven.
SETOODEH: Eleven a.m. California time.
DEARDEN: Yes. I like -- California time is better. And yeah, all the way up until and then it's -- it's really hot here. Incredibly hot.
SETOODEH: How many dresses do you choose before her -- consider before you choose this dress?
DEARDEN: There were a few that I was trying on, but as soon as I put it on, it was like, oh, never mind. Got it.
SETOODEH: And there are so many casts from "The Pitt" that are here, actors from "The Pitt" because they're nominated. So many of you are nominated. Is it like being at like a homecoming game, walking this carpet and seeing all your colleagues?
DEARDEN: Yeah, and we're all very like codependent sometimes. And so, it's like, oh my God, I want to grab on to you and let's walk in together and all of that. So, it's really fun.
WAGMEISTER: Now, I also wait before we get to the ball, I do want I'm going to put you on the spot a little bit.
[18:55:00]
So, I recently interviewed your dad and he told me how proud he is of you. Your dad, Bryan Cranston. And I want to know, do you want Bryan Cranston to play like a patient on "The Pitt" that you can work on?
DEARDEN: Never, never. No, no, no. Never. For many reasons, but also, it's a bit of a rule with John Wells and the whole team is that it's no one recognizable. Not -- it's not anyone very recognizable, the real people.
WAGMEISTER: I mean, that makes sense because then it could take away from the medical drama.
DEARDEN: You want to stay in the plot, you want to stay in the moment. Yeah.
WAGMEISTER: Now let's get to the bowl of questions.
SETOODEH: Real quickly. We have our bowl of questions. Can you pick a question and answer?
DEARDEN: Those two? What was the last TV show that made you cry?
SETOODEH: Read out loud.
DEARDEN: Okay. What was the last TV show that made you cry? I could pronounce -- I can do better.
WAGMEISTER: What do you think?
DEARDEN: I found "Pluribus" quite profound. And it was kind of like, just that kind of that level of, of new storytelling.
SETOODEH: Do you think it's aliens?
DEARDEN: Is that a debate?
SETOODEH: Some people don't think it is.
DEARDEN: I thought that was --
SETOODEH: Okay. We got to let you go. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Thank you.
WAGMEISTER: Jake, back to you
SETOODEH: And Janelle James is here.
TAPPER: And you can scan the QR code on your screen to keep streaming the CNN and "Variety" red carpet on the CNN app.
John Oliver's wife is a -- is a veteran. It's kind of a very cool story. Google it.
A U.S. congressman was on board a small plane that crashed into a Wisconsin lake over the weekend. Thankfully he's okay. A look at the crash scene and an update on his condition. That's next
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
TAPPER: Our last leads start in our national lead. Nearly 80 immigrant detainees that were held at the detention center known as Alligator Alcatraz were temporarily held in small metal enclosures, sometimes for up to two hours. That's according to a new federal watchdog report, which says the enclosures were about 18 square feet of floor space and were labeled as calming areas. The Department of Homeland Security says it adheres to all federal standards for criminal confinement.
Also, our national lead today, crews recovered the small plane that crashed into a Wisconsin lake over the weekend. Wisconsin congressman and candidate for governor, Tom Tiffany, was on board with one pilot when the plane lost power and crashed. The two were able to swim to safety away from the sinking plane and call 911. Fortunately, they both only had minor injuries.
In our faith lead, Pope Leo celebrated his 71st birthday today at the Vatican library, inaugurating a new exhibition. Of course, it would not be a birthday celebration without cake and candles. Happy birthday to the pontiff. We're all curious what he wished for.
CNN is hosting a debate in California's race for governor. I'm going to moderate alongside CNN's Dana Bash. That's Wednesday, September 30th at 6:00 p.m. Pacific, 9:00 p.m. Eastern, live on all CNN platforms.
You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Bluesky and on the TikTok @jaketapper. You can follow the show on X and Instagram @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can watch the show on the CNN app.
"ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.
