Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Orders Renaming of Lake Ontario; Trump Administration Threatens to Demolish Kennedy Center; Bill Gates Issues Warning on A.I.; Deliberations Begin in Lindsay Clancy Trial; Deadly Flooding in China and Nepal. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired August 27, 2026 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:42]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: A wall of water, mud, and debris. More than 1,300 people are missing after catastrophic flooding in China and Nepal, and officials are warning of another possible disaster.

And it's up to the jury. Deliberations beginning in the trial of Lindsay Clancy. Jurors to decide if she's innocent or guilty of murder or manslaughter after she killed her three children.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: And an ominous warning: why Bill Gates is calling on A.I. companies to pump the brakes on that technology. What he's warning will happen if they don't.

We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

KEILAR: First to our breaking news. There are intense search efforts happening right now along the Nepal-China border after powerful floods overwhelmed villages, covering them in mud and debris.

The State Department, the U.S. State Department, now say 90 Americans are among the more than 1,300 people who are still missing at this point. Officials say more than 350 people were killed when a wall of water rushed down from mountain rivers, crushing everything in its path.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, my God. Oh, my God.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: So you can see what it was like here as people were just running for their lives, if they were able to make it. One expert says the sudden flood loaded with silt with gravel and boulders hit areas with twice the force of water. And many critical bridges and roads were washed away, or they were

covered in thick cement-like mud. And that has put search-and-rescue teams under enormous pressure, with time running out as they're trying to find possible survivors here.

And there are some new warnings that we're tracking about a possible second surge, as rescuers are bracing for monsoon-like rain here in the coming hours.

CNN's Hanako Montgomery is on the ground in Nepal and filed this report.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

HANAKO MONTGOMERY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm walking down one of the main roads in Nepal and this entire place used to be covered in mud. They have cleared part of it now.

And I want to show you some of the damage that we have been seeing. This house, I mean, its first floor is completely submerged in floodwater. You can see some of the windows and doors just caked in mud. This house over here, I mean, its walls have completely collapsed. It's unlivable.

And down here is a gas station, and, again, just completely inaccessible and totally destroyed by this floodwater and the mud and debris that are brought with it. Now, the Nepali government has said that several hundred people have been confirmed dead, several hundred more still missing.

And they are afraid that the death toll could tick up in the coming hours and days as they are still trying to find any remaining survivors. And this village that we're currently in is actually several dozen kilometers away from the worst of the damage.

So you can imagine, if you get higher up in the Himalayan Mountains, just how many people have lost their homes, their livelihoods, and their loved ones, and now they're left with very little, trying to find any remnants of hope, any remnants of their family members as they try to pick up the pieces of their lives now.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KEILAR: Yes, so, at this point, the death toll standing at 350, as 1,300 people at least are still missing. We're going to be continuing our coverage of this story a little later -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: We're also following breaking news in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial.

A Massachusetts jury is now in deliberation. Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, is charged with three counts of first-degree murder. There is no dispute over whether she fatally strangled her kids, Cora, Dawson and Callan, all under the age of 6.

But Clancy's defense contends that she was experiencing postpartum psychosis and extreme mental illness. They say she was a dedicated mom until her doctors began overprescribing her medications. Here is part of the defense's closing argument.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN REDDINGTON, ATTORNEY FOR LINDSAY CLANCY: How does this turn into this? How? Because of the damn medicine and the lousy medical care that she got. This young lady is not guilty of the killing of her children because she was suffering from a disease and defect, as His Honor instructed you.

[13:05:14]

And they're not going to be able to prove otherwise. And it's their burden, not ours.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Now, prosecutors argue that Clancy knew the difference between right and wrong at the time of the killings and challenged the defense's portrayal of Clancy being overmedicated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JENNIFER SPRAGUE, PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MASSACHUSETTS, DISTRICT ATTORNEY: She had more access to treatment and care and support than a lot of people do. This wasn't a woman suffering from a lack of care, a lack of resources. She had an abundance of help, an abundance of care. She had all of that and more.

So why did she specifically do it? She was depressed. She was exhausted. She was done. She didn't want to try anymore. She felt damaged.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: We're joined now by Mark Eiglarsh. He's a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

Mark, thanks so much for being with us.

So the prosecution says her medical providers could only treat Clancy based on her self-reported condition, and that she wasn't always honest. They claim that she didn't tell any of her health care providers about her thoughts to harm her kids, because they're mandated reporters. The police might have had to take the kids away.

She did tell Patrick and her mom, though. What do you make of that argument from the prosecution?

MARK EIGLARSH, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: There might be some validity to it, but this isn't the civil trial over whether she was properly treated and whether she was candid with them.

The issue in this case -- and the prosecutor spent half of her argument on that subject matter, but really the issue is whether at the time of the offense whether she legally should be held responsible. And, on that, I think the defense had a more compelling argument.

SANCHEZ: Expand on that. Explain why.

EIGLARSH: Because you have got two sets of experts, one on the prosecution side, saying, no, she should be held criminally responsible, and then, on the other side, no way. This is waxing and waning. One minute, you could be OK. The next minute, you could be absolutely out of your mind.

So who do you believe? And if both parties have theories that are equally consistent with guilt and/or innocence, then you go to the burden of proof. And the burden of proof, as the defense argued, lies exclusively in the hands of the prosecutors.

And if you're not certain beyond a reasonable doubt, then you have to vote in favor of the defense.

SANCHEZ: The prosecutor said the fact that Lindsay's suicide attempt didn't succeed shows that there was no hallucinatory voice in her head compelling her to act. You might recall she claimed that she heard a male voice telling her at that time to kill her kids.

The prosecutor argues that the pills that she took were not at a lethal level, that her cut wounds were superficial, and that the fall left her only partially paralyzed. How do you think the failed suicide attempt factors into the jury's thinking?

EIGLARSH: She tried to kill herself. The prosecutors at the beginning tried to minimize that. Oh, they were superficial wounds. Ultimately, their own experts conceded this was a serious suicide attempt.

So who does that? Who tries to kill themselves after killing their precious offspring, who she loved dearly? Not a single person said anything other than what an extraordinary mother she was. Only someone suffering from a mental defect or disease, which is what the prosecution's expert gave us.

And then the question is whether she knew right from wrong. And since both parties' experts seem to be split on that, number one, it shows us this forensic psychology stuff ain't so scientific. But, secondly, it shows that there's a reason to doubt. One party thinks she belongs in prison. The other experts think that she shouldn't be held responsible, like you wouldn't hold someone who's got like Parkinson's responsible for shaking.

So, which one is it? And if you don't know, that's reasonable doubt.

SANCHEZ: The prosecution talked about the phone call that Lindsay had with her husband that night. The commonwealth's attorney said -- quote -- "She has to explain away the phone call because her behavior and her ability to have the phone call don't make sense if she's being compelled by a voice, if she's not in control."

And you -- further on that, you have the phone. Help us understand the significance of that phone call of her asking her husband to go out and run these errands as she was in that state and did the unthinkable.

EIGLARSH: All of those facts are colossal for the state. They are huge points.

When we think of somebody who's in psychosis, you're talking about someone you think is cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs, right? How is she able to have a civil conversation with her husband, so much so where the husband thought she was bathing the kids? He thought everything was normal. How was she able to do all that planning without clearly being responsible?

[13:10:05]

But then you had Dr. Resnick and other experts for the defense to say that that's not inconsistent with someone going through postpartum psychosis, that they can, like waves in the ocean, come and go, sometimes be normal, and sometimes be completely not responsible for their actions.

SANCHEZ: So the whole jury that's been listening up -- that has been listening to this trial is 12 women and six men. I wonder if you think the gender breakdown of this jury might impact the outcome.

EIGLARSH: Well, ultimately, we don't know which 12 are going to go back and deliberate. They don't tell them which ones are the alternate.

So the question becomes, are we going to have 12 women? And, ultimately, I don't think it matters. I really don't. I think I could see it cutting both ways. I think it matters what's in their hearts, their minds, and their souls.

And if they came in here truly with an open mind, and they really don't know much about psychology or psychiatry, and they shouldn't, or else they shouldn't be on this jury, then they're listening to the experts. And the experts, all reasonable, all credible, maybe some more believable than others, but ultimately none of them were impeached.

So all their testimony is at play. You really just don't know which one is right. That's reasonable doubt. It means the state didn't meet their very high burden.

SANCHEZ: Wow, so you think she's going to be acquitted?

EIGLARSH: That, I don't know. See, that's the million-dollar question. I don't know what's in the hearts, minds, souls of these individual jurors.

I do know, legally, legally, as tragic as this was, as abhorrent as her actions were, legally, it's the only decision that speaks the truth.

SANCHEZ: Mark Eiglarsh, we will leave the conversation there. Look forward to more coming soon.

EIGLARSH: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still to come, we have some new reporting on the administration's threats to demolish the Kennedy Center if renovations aren't allowed.

Plus, thousands of sailors preparing for a seven-month deployment to the Middle East, but we're told they have already been warned they could be there even longer.

And, later: Is the president profiting off the war that he started? Trump just disclosed 1,000 additional stock trades, including in companies directly impacted by the fight with Iran.

The details when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:39]

KEILAR: Next hour, the fight to keep President Trump's name off the Kennedy Center heads back to court with a federal judge set to hear arguments over an emergency order request.

The Democratic lawmaker leading the charge, Ohio Congresswoman Joyce Beatty, has called Trump's plans a childish gambit and a breathtaking act of defiance. Just days ago, Trump officials say -- they said they would demolish the building if renovations don't happen.

CNN Sunlen Serfaty is with us now to talk about this.

What are we expecting in this hearing?

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, this is certainly a high-stakes moment for the Kennedy Center. And really one of the most contentious and drama-filled elements of this is whether President Trump, Donald Trump's name should be on the side of that building.

And we saw some of that drama, of course, play out over the course of this summer when the judge ruled that they needed to bring down his name, and that's when we saw those Trump -- those tarps go up in front of the building. They have remained there ever since.

So what we saw earlier this month is a Kennedy Center Board, which, of course, is stacked with Trump loyalists, vote to find essentially a work-around that order, and they have proposed to inscribe on the side instead saying "Renovated and Restored by President Donald Trump."

That, of course, prompted Democrats to become up in arms and file this emergency motion to have the judge block that from happening, saying essentially a name is a name, whether it's on the side or not, inscribed or in letters.

So we will see what the judge has to say in this hearing that's starting in about an hour, certainly a huge moment, not only about the name on the side, but, of course, the two-year plan renovations. But, today, we will essentially potentially see what the judge feels about this work-around that the board came up with.

KEILAR: So this scaffolding is up. Is his name down behind it?

SERFATY: We do know that his name is down behind it.

KEILAR: Is down.

SERFATY: And, before, the name was above Kennedy's name.

KEILAR: That's right.

SERFATY: Now the proposal is to inscribe it, actually etch it into the marble that -- there on the side, so, of course, would be a permanent move by part of the board.

KEILAR: Yes, unless you replace the marble. So, what happens next here?

SERFATY: Well, next, the big thing to watch is, of course, if we pick up anything, what the judge will do today. Will they -- will he block it? Will he rule from the bench day, or say I need a few more days to think about it?

So we will see what the judge does. The Kennedy Center has agreed to not make any move until September 8, after Labor Day. They say they will not put the name up. So that will be the next date on the calendar. But, of course, the big thing there, in addition to that, is whether they will be able to close or not.

That still is arguments that the judge is considering, so we will continue following that.

KEILAR: All right, we will keep our eye on it. Sunlen, thank you so much for that.

One of the richest men in the world says we need to be prepared to tax robots. Hear Bill Gates' warnings about the A.I. era and why he thinks we're about to experience one of the most turbulent times in human history.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:24:07]

SANCHEZ: Bill Gates is putting out a warning about the future of A.I., especially if critical safety steps are not taken now.

In a 6,000-word essay, Gates writes that the turbulent A.I. era is here. He says significant limits on the technology are needed, and even suggests imposing taxes and setting jobs aside for humans.

CNN's Anderson Cooper recently spoke with the Microsoft co-founder about his concerns. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL GATES, CO-CHAIR, BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION: Another problem will be the job market change, which has not happened yet, but because the A.I.s are getting so reliable now, they can be used for a variety of well-defined jobs.

And that would be a tough thing to adjust to. And, finally, just the psychosocial effect that a kid might have all their friends being A.I.s and not be pushed to deal with real humans and all the learnings and joy you get by being engaged socially.

[13:25:10]

And so, every one of those things, I'm very concerned. And I want to slow down or eliminate those negative effects.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN tech reporter Clare Duffy is here with more.

So, Clare, why is Gates sounding the alarm now?

CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: Well, Boris, he's speaking out because he says essentially there is no plan for how to ease into the A.I. era and address these risks.

He says that a plan is needed, significant limits on this technology are needed. Otherwise, the harm to people might outweigh any potential good that could come from this technology. And, of course, this is a stark warning from the man who became one of the richest and most powerful people in the world during the last tech revolution.

Now, he does have some suggestions, as you said, for how to address these risks. He says that there needs to be both national and international plans for how to address the downsides of artificial intelligence. He said that he would be willing to sign on to support a global plan for how to slow down A.I. advancement, although he acknowledges that that may be unlikely in this current state of A.I. competition.

He also suggested that we should be taxing A.I. workers or robots that replace human jobs so that we continue the government, continues to get tax revenue that could support social services for people who lose their livelihoods because of this technology.

And then, finally, he does want to set aside some jobs to be done only by humans, and not by A.I. workers or robots -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Clare Duffy, thank you so much for that.

We do want to go straight to the White House, where President Trump appears to have signed an executive order amid his trade war with Canada, renaming Lake Ontario to Lake America.

Here's the president.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: ... and anything else is, we're going to be changing the name of Lake Ontario effective immediately to Lake America.

That's going to take place right now as I signed the order. Do you have anything to say about it, Ben?

BENJAMIN MOSS, DEPUTY WHITE HOUSE STAFF SECRETARY: Yes, sir.

So this is a straightforward, but important executive order. It directs Secretary Burgum and the Department of the Interior to update the Geographic Names Information service to reflect that the lake once known as Lake Ontario will from this day forward be known as Lake America.

This is a lake that has most of its volume in the United States. The deepest parts of the lake sit in United States territory. So this will reflect that this is an American lake.

TRUMP: Good. Thank you.

OK. Thank you very much.

And we filed all the necessary papers, documents, everything else. We have notified all of the various people that we have to notify. So we have done everything that you have to do. And this is official effective immediately.

Do you have any questions, anybody?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Mr. President?

TRUMP: Yes.

QUESTION: That video you put up yesterday of you crossing out Lake Ontario and writing Lake America, it's been seen by the 30 million people, maybe more, across all the social media platforms. What message are you sending to Canada with this move today? And why was it such an important thing for you to do?

TRUMP: Well, it's an interesting question.

No message. As you know, Canada's been ripping us off for a long time on trade, very sadly, even the military. We defend Canada for nothing. We don't get anything. They don't pay us to defend Canada, but we defend Canada. And they understand that.

As an example, we bought icebreakers. They would like to use them. We have 11 brand-new icebreakers coming in. They'd like to use the icebreakers. They don't pay for anything. And they want to be treated like a state, but they're not a state. But they want to be treated like they're a state. And so we just can't do that anymore. We lose on average over the last 15 years $60 billion a year carrying Canada. So we just can't do it anymore. We love the people of Canada. I don't think their representatives do an appropriate job. Maybe they will change. I really don't know. And it doesn't make much difference.

But we can't let -- the whole Canadian thing has been going on for decades. And it has to come to a stop. So we're going to be doing tariffs on their cars that are coming at a substantial level, because we want to make the cars here. We don't want -- they can make their own cars if they want, and they can continue to make their cars for Canada.

But we don't want to make -- we don't want them to make cars for the United States of America. It's very simple, likewise many other products. So, the lake change, Lake of America, was something I have been thinking about for a long time, actually. As you know, we took something called the Gulf of Mexico.