Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Jurors In Day Three Of Deliberations Of Lindsay Clancy Trial; Deliberations Resume in Triple-Murder Trial of Lindsay Clancy; Two Dead, 15 Others may be Missing in Grand Canyon Flash Flood; U.S. and Iran Trade Attacks in First Major Escalation in a Month; Trump Unveils New Prescription Drug Pricing Deals; WAPO: Pentagon Secretly Installs Military Influencers in Civilian Roles. Aired 3-3:30p ET

Aired August 31, 2026 - 15:00   ET

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

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: And then, also of course just general food safety tips, making sure to wash your hands, not cross contaminating things with raw poultry, all of those lessons we've learned about how to stay safe in the kitchen remain today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Our thanks to Meg Tirrell for that report.

A new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Once again, trading strikes, the U.S. and Iran launching attacks after weeks of relative calm, the new fighting raising the cost of oil, also lowering hopes of a diplomatic solution to the conflict.

And waiting for a verdict, jurors in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial are deciding her fate. But with each passing hour, there are questions about whether the nine women and three men can even agree on a verdict.

KEILAR: And a new tool to find what one scientist calls the weird, the rare, and the unusual. How NASA's new telescope could function as a, quote, "discovery machine." We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

Here at any moment, a verdict could come in a case that has consumed much of the nation. That is the Lindsay Clancy murder trial. The nine women and three men who are on the jury have been deliberating for about 16 hours now. Clancy could be convicted of first degree murder for strangling her three young children three years ago in their Massachusetts home. Her defense says she is not criminally responsible, though, and that she acted in the throes of postpartum psychosis, saying a voice told her to kill her kids, five-year-old Cora, three-year-old Dawson, and eight-month-old Callan.

The case has drawn national attention to the mental health of mothers and postpartum challenges. Listen to some of Clancy's supporters outside of court today.

(Begin VT) UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This trial never should have happened. She should

have been not guilty by criminal responsibility. I think it's a travesty of the Massachusetts trial system.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Putting this woman behind bars, it's not going to -- it's just going to cause more suffering. And it's not going to bring the children back.

KEILAR: As we wait for the jury's decision, let's speak with jury consultant Alan Tuerkheimer. Alan, I just wonder, with all of the attention on this trial, people wearing, you know, pink to support Lindsay Clancy, they're inside of the courtroom, too, I think, sometimes wearing pink. I mean, is it realistic to think that jurors have completely missed this? Is that what you think's happened?

ALAN TUERKHEIMER, JURY CONSULTANT: Good to be here. Thanks for having me, Brianna.

The jurors, and according to the judge and all accounts, they are extremely diligent about their task. They're taking their time. They ask questions when they needed to ask questions. And once they get past the initial stage, I remember it took, I believe it was four days just to seat this jury. And questions were asked about their backgrounds, experiences with birth, postpartum depression. They were asked about psychosis, probably.

But these were -- these jurors were firmly vetted. And they knew from the beginning that this was going to be watched by the nation. And they're under scrutiny in the spotlight. So, I think as time went on, as they heard from the opening statements through all the witnesses, they were able to compartmentalize, put that aside and really focus on their task, which is look at the evidence and assess the witnesses and then look at the law and then render a decision.

So, I think they are able to do that. And I think they're in the process of that. It might be taking a little longer than some thought, but I think it's totally normal the way they're going about it.

KEILAR: So, -- okay, you think it's normal. Why do you think it's taking longer than some thought? And -- and what do you think that could be an indication of?

TUERKHEIMER: This wasn't just a question of, did she kill the children? She clearly did. There's more layers and more nuance that this jury has to look at. There's first degree murder, second degree murder, there's manslaughter, there's not guilty, not criminally responsible.

And so, the jurors are going through things that they're not familiar with. They had this competing testimony. They had experts on one side saying she was aware of what she was doing. They had experts on the other side saying she wasn't aware of what she's doing. And they have to sit through all of that. That's a gargantuan task. They have to look at the experts and decide, okay, who -- who met with -- which is the most credible expert? Who met with her 11 days after the killings? Who met with her for 35 hours? Or the expert who concluded that the -- the voices don't stop after the murder, so that's not credible.

They have all this to sort through, and there's 12 jurors that have different opinions. And then they have to look at the law very carefully, because there are distinctions certainly between murder one and murder two. And so they have to go about arriving at a conclusion, and they have to be unanimous, and I think they also want to be confident in their decision. And that certainly takes time.

[15:05:07]

KEILAR: So, talk about the dynamics here of a jury, what it's like as they're deliberating. And do you think that gender could play a role here, one, considering what the trial is about, and then also the fact that you have significantly more women than men on the jury?

TUERKHEIMER: It's interesting. It's probably more the personalities and experiences than just gender per se, but sometimes certain personalities and experiences are directly correlated to gender. So, it's -- it's an interesting question, nine women, three men on this jury, and they're certainly getting to know each other very well, and they're getting to know their positions, feeling maybe they're getting close to a verdict, or maybe they're not, maybe they're pretty far apart. Maybe you have some that are saying she's the devil, which you'd have to believe to convince her of murder one, that she planned everything, that she knew what she was doing, versus some on the other end that might be thinking she shouldn't be criminally responsible.

So it's -- it's stressful, and I'm sure there's alliances that are being formed. And it's interesting, the foreperson was designated by the judge, that doesn't always happen. And so there's a couple leaders on the jury, there's some more middle-of-the-road jurors, there's some followers. It's an interesting dynamic, and just takes time to get to the right decision.

KEILAR: Yes, and there's -- I mean, there is really a menu of conviction options that these jurors have to wade through. If you see them, I think maybe coalescing around a range they're comfortable with, maybe they're coalescing around second-degree murder and manslaughter, or maybe it's manslaughter and then some feeling not criminally responsible. How does a jury navigate that?

TUERKHEIMER: Yes. Well, that's really interesting. That's where the intensity of the beliefs comes into play, because if you think about it, and I -- I think that if you start to -- start something out, you'd rather have three leaders on your side that are going to argue on your behalf, and -- and nine against you that don't have those strong personalities versus the other way around.

So, it's so interesting to see what the dynamic is and how it's taking place. And I think they'll arrive at the right conclusion. It's -- it's at the point where one juror or two jurors says, look, this is how I feel, and nobody that -- nothing that anybody can say will change my mind. That's when jurors start to get frustrated. That's when you might get a note to the judge saying, look, there's a juror that's made up their mind. They're not staying open during the deliberations. That's when you start to have concerns about a hung jury, but we don't

have any indications that that's going on. Now, they're just working through it. They're talking with each other, trying to persuade others of their point of view, and they're just trying to build unanimity and trying to agree on a charge for this case and the fate of the defendant, Lindsay Clancy.

KEILAR: Yes. And they have lots of options here, but I think we're now almost two and a half days into deliberations, so they -- they have had a considerable amount of time at this point. Alan Tuerkheimer, thank you so much. Always great to speak with you.

TUERKHEIMER: Great being here. Thanks.

KEILAR: Boris?

SANCHEZ: Now to breaking news, the death toll is rising after flash floods ripped through Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona. Two people are now confirmed dead. As search and rescue teams race to find about 15 others still unaccounted for, dozens have been evacuated, many by helicopter, after they were stranded by rushing water, mud, and debris. The danger, though, not over yet. A flood watch remains in effect, with more rain possible across the area through this evening.

Let's discuss with Jason Pack. He's a former FEMA external affairs officer and EMT, also the author of "The Crisis Code."

Jason, thanks so much for being with us.

This is one of the most difficult areas in the country to try to conduct search and rescue. Help us understand why and what the biggest obstacles are that search and rescue crews face.

JASON PACK, FORMER FEMA EXTERNAL AFFAIRS OFFICER & EMT: Good evening, Boris.

It's a -- as we've talked before on these types of things, it's always good to put the humanity on it first. And certainly, those 15 people that are missing and presumed, you know, unaccounted for, that's a lot of families waiting for information. So, having said that, this is really difficult terrain to navigate because there are no roads. You could have, in the United States, we have the luxury of all kinds of resources with either the Arizona Department of Public Safety or whomever. You can't just drive into the canyon, though. It's only accessible by air, and the floodwaters, Boris, have just wiped this entire thing.

So, what used to be out -- the landmarks are probably not there. We've seen the video of the water moving things, so you're going to have to look downstream and other places, too, you may not really have to look at before.

SANCHEZ: Yes, officials have stressed that they're still hoping to find these 15 alive. Walk us through how rescue teams can do that when access across the canyon floor has been cut off or -- or swept away.

[15:09:58]

PACK: Well, the aviation units are really the key pieces of tools that they're using here, very critical.

Also, before we do that, though, the National Park Service and the park rangers, hours before, did a really good job of getting people out of harm's way. We could have had a lot more missing, so I know the rangers were there before telling folks to evacuate. And they've put out a -- a tip line for information for these remaining people that are missing or unaccounted for, which means they need to know who was in there.

So, importantly, they also need to know if you've heard from your family and, you know, you don't know where they are. So, hopefully, they're coordinating that. I know they put that information out, but just to be able to have air assets to get down in there is really going to be what this takes. The key tenant of emergency response is you don't want to get rescuers hurt either.

So, you could have more people, but that doesn't necessarily mean it'll be a quicker search.

SANCHEZ: Yes. What is the red line for these rescue teams? Because as -- as we noted a moment ago, the weather there is still pretty rough. There are flood warnings in effect. At what point do they have to decide between their own safety and trying to find some of these folks that aren't accounted for?

PACK: Well, the rescuers are going to do everything they can and probably take risks that they shouldn't in order to try to find these folks and -- and bring them back. So, you have to listen to your meteorologist, listen to your weather forecast, that incident command team that's operating and running this operation is in close coordination with the weather service.

So, they're going to know when these storms are approaching, and then you're going to have to have a plan and a plan to take shelter if that does happen. So, don't go up to the very last second. These are dedicated folks that want nothing more than to find answers for the families of the missing right now.

SANCHEZ: Yes. As -- as you said, we're hoping that there are survivors out there. Conditions obviously have been treacherous for the last 24 hours plus. What kind of conditions could these survivors be contending with right now?

PACK: Well, depending on if they have any of their gear with them or they're not, or if they got caught really fast, like the floods, we've seen some video of water filling up tents for people who were able to escape. So, they may not have anything or they may have some things. And so hopefully they're experienced hikers and they've been out before and have a survival plan. But they're -- you know, they have no way of contacting anybody. It's hot out there. The weather could be coming and there could be more flash floods. And then, being in maybe unfamiliar territory from when they were -- where they thought they were going doesn't help the situation either. SANCHEZ: Yes. Dangerous mission on -- on multiple fronts. We certainly

hope to hear some good news out of that area soon.

Jason Pack, thanks so much for the expertise.

PACK: Thanks, Morris.

Of course. Still to come, President Trump threatening more strikes after the U.S. and Iran traded attacks for the first time in a month.

Plus, an extremely low flyover by two passenger planes above a rugby stadium in South Africa, sparking a major debate. Was this worth the risk?

And later, NASA making history, launching its new powerful Roman space telescope. We'll discuss the mysteries it aims to unravel in the coming years when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:17:18]

SANCHEZ: President Trump is lashing out at Iran after the first major military escalation between the two nations in more than a month. Overnight, Tehran says it launched missile strikes targeting U.S. facilities in Jordan. The UAE also says it detected an Iranian drone over its territorial waters.

KEILAR: The attacks are in retaliation for what U.S. Central Command called limited precise strikes on Iranian rocket launchers on Sunday. In a social media post, President Trump calls Iran a failed nation whose leadership is in total disarray. CNN's Kristen Holmes is live for us at the White House. And Kristen, is the Trump administration preparing a potential military response to these latest Iranian strikes?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna and Boris, it certainly sounds like they are from what President Trump is saying. He has said they're going to hit them hard, there's going to be a response. And we also posted a video, an AI video, of the U.S. bombing Kharg Island.

Vice President J.D. Vance was asked specifically about this video, whether or not it was telegraphing something. He said that they weren't previewing any military actions through the press, but that President Trump was sending a message to the Iranians.

Obviously, this is coming at a time in which President Trump had just said that the Strait of Hormuz was completely open and mine-free. One of the things to keep in mind here is that CENTCOM has said, or Central Command has said, that this targeted precise strike was done because they saw these Iranian rocket launchers that were going to launch mines into the Strait of Hormuz.

It's also coming at a time in which the administration has been fully trying to move away from any kind of military operation and focus on this, quote-unquote, "Economic D-Day," this economic strangulation of Iran.

One thing to note, those global oil prices after this first back-and- forth already rose 3 percent. Likely they will raise even higher if this continues. This is not a place that this administration wants to be, and certainly not taking it out of the realm of them being able to say that these were limited and precise actions, which is what they have been calling these latest rounds of strikes.

SANCHEZ: Kristen, President Trump also announcing a new set of agreements with pharmaceutical companies today, part of his most favored nation policy. What are you hearing about those plans?

HOLMES: Yes, he's speaking right now. He just made this announcement. There's about nine pharmaceutical company CEOs standing behind him. This is all about lowering those drug prices. Our understanding from sources who are familiar with this announcement is that these companies are now going to offer a discount to state Medicaid programs, which would in turn lower the cost of drugs for those recipients.

On the other side, the exchange for that will be that the White House is going to exempt these companies from a new government pilot program, which are forcing various companies to lower prices for Medicaid.

[15:20:04]

Unclear exactly how this rollout would look, what exact -- what drugs it would impact, but that's basically what he's unveiling right now. Again, all part of the most favored nations, as you said, trying to lower the cost of prescription drugs.

SANCHEZ: And these are live images coming from the Oval Office right now as President Trump is signing this. We'll keep you posted if he answers reporters' questions. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thank you so much.

Still ahead, The Washington Post reporting that the Pentagon secretly hired several social media influencers in an effort to amplify Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's political agenda. We're going to speak with one of the reporters who broke the story when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:25:17]

KEILAR: New reporting from The Washington Post says the Pentagon has secretly installed several conservative military veterans with large online followings in government roles.

SANCHEZ: People familiar with the matter tell the Post that the so- called influencers quote, amplify Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's viewpoints and attack those who scrutinize the Trump administration.

Let's discuss with Dan Lamothe. He's a Pentagon reporter for The Washington Post, and also one of the two Post reporters behind this exclusive report.

Dan, thanks so much for being with us.

What did you find about these influencers? Who are they and -- and what are they saying?

DAN LAMOTHE, PENTAGON REPORTER, THE WASHINGTON POST: Yes, so there's -- there's three in particular that we highlighted in the story. There's Rob Maness, Kurt Schlichter, and Thomas Anderson. They're all retired military officers. They're all very kind of omnipresent on social media.

And -- and really, the -- the significant piece here is that as they've kind of been presenting themselves as independent truth- tellers, they've actually had a government role that neither they nor the Pentagon has been willing to disclose.

KEILAR: And so, what kinds of things have they been amplifying?

LAMOTHE: So, a variety of things. I mean, really leaning into Secretary Hegseth's efforts to kind of crack down on -- on senior military officers. Within the war colleges, there's been a number of efforts to kind of reshape the curriculum. They've amplified a lot of that. And -- and none of these things struck our source as -- as problematic but for the specific idea that they simply left out that they are actually government employees.

SANCHEZ: You report that this was secret, that DOD did not disclose their government roles, neither did these military veterans. What are the implications of this apparent lack of transparency?

LAMOTHE: Yes, I mean, it raises real questions about what the Pentagon's doing, how they're coordinating messaging. I think the specifics here is they weren't necessarily hired specifically to amplify the messages. They had policy roles where they were going to war colleges and asking questions of professors and students but -- but didn't disclose that publicly. And the Pentagon even asked point- blank, are these people special government employees or any other kind of employees, simply declined to comment last week.

KEILAR: Very interesting reporting that you've done. And Dan, we also want to talk to you about some other reporting that some of your colleagues at The Post have done about several U.S. military leaders, four-star commanders, who have privately warned Defense Secretary Hegseth that prolonged large-scale deployments of American troops in -- in Iran -- in the Iran war isn't sustainable, that it could weaken a U.S. response to threats in other places. Tell us more about those warnings. Who are they coming from? What are they saying?

LAMOTHE: Yes, it's a -- it's a number of -- of the military's most senior officers, including the top general in Europe, the top admiral in the Pacific, the top admiral running the Navy. And basically their concerns are that as this war stretches out in duration, the sustainability of it, the impact long-term on the force, is becoming more and more problematic. You know, and that very much cuts against sort of the public messaging

of this, which is that the United States has won, everything is going well, nothing to see here.

SANCHEZ: How typical are these non-concur assessments, these warnings, and what is the Pentagon saying about them?

LAMOTHE: It's not atypical to have a specific admiral or general non- concur. Often it occurs where you have a specific kind of weapon system that one general might need in his theater, so they move it from one to the other. I think what's noteworthy here is that it's multiple generals and admirals, and they're all basically saying the same thing, which is that the system is starting to blink red in a number of ways on what this means for the U.S. military long-term. There's a need to reset the force, in their eyes, in a number of ways.

SANCHEZ: Wow. Dan Lamothe, thanks so much for your reporting.

Still ahead, as Massachusetts voters head to the polls for primary day tomorrow, a first-time candidate for Congress is calling for generational change. We're going to speak with him when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)