Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Two More GOP Senators Could Decide SCOTUS Seat Before Election; GOP Senator Lamar Alexander Signals He's OK With Senate Vote On Trump Nominee; Coronavirus Vaccine Timeline; Russia Election Meddling; Socially Distant Ceremony During Emmys; Cycle Of Incarceration. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired September 20, 2020 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:26]

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Hello, on this Sunday. You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Thanks for joining me.

We begin with a fierce fight growing in Washington. A second Republican senator breaking ranks with her party this afternoon and publicly opposing taking up a Supreme Court nominee before election day. Now we have Senators Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins both now saying they believe any move to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg should come after November 3rd.

And here's why their public statements are important. If two more GOP senators join Murkowski and Collins, they could potentially delay the confirmation process. Important to note, Collins says the winner of the election should nominate Ginsburg's successor. Murkowski didn't go that far. And neither said specifically that they would oppose a Trump nominee in a lame-duck session if Joe Biden wins.

Biden, meanwhile, is calling on senators to honor Ginsburg's dying wish not to replace her until after the election and he's making an appeal to Republicans to, quote, "do what's right."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Look, I'm not being naive. I'm not speaking to President Trump who will do whatever he wants. I'm not speaking to Mitch McConnell who will do what he wants and he does. I'm speaking to those Republicans out there, Senate Republican, who know deep down what is right for the country and consistent with the Constitution.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell is already vowing to bring whoever the president nominates to the Senate floor for a vote. And at a rally last night, President Trump said he intends to fill Ginsburg's seat with a female justice and he plans to do so quickly.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So Article II of our Constitution says the president shall nominate justices of the Supreme Court.

Now, it says the president is supposed to fill the seat, right? And that's what we're going to do. We're going to fill the seat.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Democrats meantime are threatening retaliation if Republicans push through a nominee. Some say they'll push to expand the high court to allow for more justices if they take over the Senate majority in this year's election.

Let's head to the White House now because with two U.S. senators now publicly against moving forward on a new Supreme Court justice before election day, the president's plan to get a nominee approved, in his words, without delay is closer to beg in jeopardy.

CNN's White House correspondent John Harwood is joining us now.

So, John, let's be crystal clear here. Senator Murkowski is saying no on a Supreme Court nominee before election day. But what she is not saying is whether she would be OK with it afterwards, during a potential lame-duck session if Trump were to lose in November.

JOHN HARWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Exactly. And there's really no difference between a vote before the election and after the election except for politics. There's a question of what does a pending nomination, how does that affect both sides in the election? And then what is result in the election? How does that affect the way senators like Lisa Murkowski and others feel afterwards?

What Lisa Murkowski said in her statement was, "I did not support moving forward with the nomination in 2016 eight months before the election. We're now closer to the election than that. I think we should abide by the same standard."

So the question is going to be, can anyone else be recruited by the opponents of the nomination, by Democrats, among the potential senators and we do not have any firm indications that they're going to have success yet.

CABRERA: So, John, who else in the Senate are you and other analysts perhaps looking at as possible problems for the president's plan to get this third justice in place ASAP?

HARWOOD: Well, number one, on the suspect list is Mitt Romney. He's somebody who voted to convict the president on impeachment charges, but he has not said that he wants to withhold this nomination. So we do not know what he's going to do. He wasn't in the Senate in 2016 when that last fight took place.

Then you've got the question of Lamar Alexander. He's an institutionalist, somebody who is concerned about the proper functioning of the Senate, but he's also close to Mitch McConnell and he's tended to, when the chips are down, vote with McConnell. So not clear that he's going to go there. Then you've got a couple of senators who made pledges in 2016 not to

change their principle if there was a Republican president in office. One of them is Lindsey Graham. He's already publicly said he will change his view. Chuck Grassley was then the Judiciary chairman.

[16:05:02]

Don't know if he is also going to flip-flop, but he's pretty conservative and he represents a conservative state. So I don't think anyone is counting on Chuck Grassley sitting with the opponents here in trying to put this off.

CABRERA: We know both parties are fundraising off this Supreme Court vacancy. A Democrat fundraising group, ActBlue, announced it had raised at least $100 million in donations since the death of Justice Ginsburg. What's the word from the Trump campaign and Republican?

HARWOOD: Well, we haven't gotten competing fundraising figures. The conservative organizing groups that tend to activate for Supreme Court nominees say they will match what the Democrats do, and we have seen the Trump campaign $30 on their Web site a "Fill That Seat" tee and the president of course is going to hit this very hard at his rallies as he did yesterday, Ana.

CABRERA: OK. John Harwood, thank you.

Let me bring in now, former White House counsel to President Nixon, John Dean, and he has a new book, "Authoritarian Nightmare: Trump and His Followers."

John, good to have you with us. On Friday night after Justice Ginsburg's death, you tweeted this, "Joe Biden must announce that if the GOP rushes to pack the court, the Dems will expand the SCOTUS to 11 judges, and expand the lower federal courts by 70 to 100 new judgeships which have long been needed. In short, we will depoliticize the federal judiciary."

I think a lot of Americans recoil at the thought of expanding the courts. So explain how this proposal would be depoliticizing the courts.

JOHN DEAN, FORMER NIXON WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: Well, what's happened over the last four years is we've never seen a rush to politicize and pack the court like Mitch McConnell has done. Both the top court when there were two seats available, put on hard conservatives, and then in the lower courts. There has been a steady drumbeat. That's about the only thing the Senate has accomplished during the last 3 1/2 years, is to put judges on. They are politicizing the court.

It's long overdue, Ana, to expand the lower courts. There is no reason in the world if Mitch McConnell pushes a last-minute -- particularly to do it in a lame-duck or pre-election effort, to fill a vacancy on the high court, given the standards they set up for themselves. It's just a perfect time to expand the Supreme Court, which needs expanded. They need more justices. They have more work than they can handle. Justice Rehnquist as chief justice started tailoring back the

workload. And they don't need to tailor it back. They need to be taking on more work, in fact.

CABRERA: But how do you keep it from getting out of the hand where every time a party is in power, they just do what they want to do and they just keep adding more that they can appoint?

DEAN: Well, you know, that's been one of the arguments about the lower courts. And now the lower courts are not able to handle the business. If a good case is made that it is appropriate to expand the court because of the workload, we're in a different era than when that court went to nine. We're in a different era when we last upped the number of lower-court judgeships. A lot has happened. And we've got to keep up with the time.

So a very strong case can be made that this is a very legitimate thing to expand the court. It also is a very legitimate thing to smack Mitch McConnell back for taking this action to invite this kind of activity.

CABRERA: Here's what Joe Biden said about this brewing fight this afternoon. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: I believe voters are going to make it clear they'll not stand for this abuse of power. This constitutional abuse. There's no discussion about what happens if the Senate confirms on the eve of an election or in a lame duck after Donald Trump loses? A successor to Justice Ginsburg, what happens? But that discussion assumes that we lose this effort to prevent the grave wrong that Trump and McConnell are pursuing here. I'm not going to assume failure at this point.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: John, he thinks Democrats can prevent Trump from getting a nominee confirmed. What's your reaction?

DEAN: I'm not sure they can prevent it. If they're hellbent to do it and no Republicans are willing to break rank, then clearly the Democrats cannot prevail. The hope is that there are some Republicans who are institutionalists, as John Harwood mentioned. Several. There are several others who are up in states where they might pledge to withhold judgment until after the election, until after a new president is appointed. People like Corey Gardner who's hanging on by his teeth.

[16:10:02]

Because Trump is clearly going to put up somebody who's going to knock down Roe, probably overturn Obamacare, probably send the Dreamers who knows where. Biden hit all the key points in his speech as to the issues that these swing states and purple state senators who are up are going to be fighting with and have difficulty.

CABRERA: What about some of the other scenarios Democrats could use as retribution if they take the White House and the Senate, like the idea of eliminating the filibuster? Should they do that?

DEAN: Yes, they can. The filibuster has been eliminated for Supreme Court nominations. They're talking about eliminating it for legislative matters. You know, I've been on both sides of that issue and thought about it over the years. And I think I come down on the side that it has served its purpose and it no longer works as a super majority to get basic legislative functions done.

The Senate is going to be its own institution anyway, with six-year terms, and only a third of the Senate up at any time. It will move a little differently than the House. It can still be a tempering body, but right now it's an obstructionist body. So I think -- and the filibuster has been the reason for that. They did trim it back once and I think it's time to eliminate it.

CABRERA: Your book invokes authoritarianism. How strong is America's system of checks and balances right now?

DEAN: It's very weak right now. One of the reasons I did this book, Ana, is because I wanted to understand who are the people who support this weakening of democracy? Who tolerates Trump's norm-busting, anti- democratic behavior? And that's the core of the book, to uncover who these authoritarian followers are and how this country is headed towards and in fact is already in authoritarian mode.

CABRERA: John Dean, thank you very much for offering your perspective and expertise. I appreciate it.

DEAN: Thanks, Ana.

CABRERA: Joe Biden in a speech earlier today denouncing the games being played by the Trump administration and he explained why now is not the time to release his list of Supreme Court picks.

Stay with us, you're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:16:30]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

CABRERA: We have breaking news. Another key Republican senator weighing in right now about whether the Senate should take up the Supreme Court nominee before the election.

Let's get right to CNN's Lauren Fox, and Lauren, tell us what we are now hearing from Lamar Alexander.

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we had had our eyes on Lamar Alexander, a Republican from Tennessee who is retiring at the end of the year. He was a member who we thought might potentially side with Murkowski and Collins in saying that he was not comfortable with moving forward in an election year on President Trump's SCOTUS nominee. He is now saying in a statement, however, that he is comfortable

moving forward in an election year. And this is very significant. I'm going to get into what he said in just a moment. But I want to lay the table because why this matters so much is that Majority Leader Mitch McConnell could not lose more than three Republicans. And Democrats needed four Republicans to side with them on the issue of whether or not moving forward with this vacancy ahead of the election was appropriate or not.

We've been reporting all weekend that Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins both said they weren't comfortable moving ahead with the president's nominee ahead of the election. What we are now learning, though, is Lamar Alexander is comfortable moving forward. This is what he says in his statement, quote, "No one should be surprised that a Republican Senate majority would vote on a Republican president's Supreme Court nomination even during a presidential election year. The Constitution gives the senators the power to do it. The voters who elected them expect it.

"Going back to George Washington, the Senate has confirmed many nominees to the Supreme Court during a presidential election year. It has refused to confirm several when the president and the Senate majority were of different parties. Senator McConnell is only doing what Democratic leaders have said they would do if the shoe was on the other foot."

So this making it much harder for Democrats to find an additional two Republicans to side with them. We still haven't heard from Mitt Romney, a Republican from Utah who sided with Democrats on one article of impeachment earlier this year. But it becomes very hard to figure out who that fourth Republican would be now that Lamar Alexander has made it very clear he's on McConnell's side when it comes to moving ahead with this nomination -- Fredricka.

CABRERA: OK. Lauren Fox, thank you. Thank you very much. I'll take it from here.

Joining us now, Margaret Hoover, host of PBS' "Firing Line," and John Avlon, CNN senior political analyst.

Let me start with you, Margaret. As a conservative, what is your reaction to this news? Lamar Alexander now somebody that Democrats can't lean on.

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, Ana, I'm not surprised at all. I mean, this is really not so much a news flash as it is just a solidification and a reminder that if there is anything that unites the Republican Party, and the Republican Party has a degree of diversity right now in terms of its views of Trump, it's mostly solidly behind Trump, but there are even Republicans who, while they don't defend the president's tweets and they're uncomfortable with many things about the president, they support his top three priorities as long as those are, number one, judges, number two judges, and number three judges.

This unites the Republican Party like no other issue. And so it's no surprise that Lamar Alexander is going to fall in line. He and many others.

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: No. Particularly because he's so close with McConnell.

CABRERA: Is the fight over then, do you think, John?

AVLON: No, no, no. I mean, but Lamar Alexander -- it's important to confirm that that's the position, but Lamar Alexander was never the person you were going to go to.

[16:20:04]

He and McConnell are incredibly tight. We saw this dance around impeachment. You know, the real question is going to be, what does Mitt Romney do? What does Chuck Grassley, who in the past has said that this shouldn't go forward? Looking -- straining for some consistency, former chairman of the Judiciary Committee. And then looking at the Arizona Senate race between McSally and Kelly because that's a special election, and Kelly could be seated in November.

So I think that's breaking news. It's enormously significant, but I don't think it's surprising.

CABRERA: I'm looking at what Chuck Grassley said back in July that he would follow the Biden rule following what was established by the Biden rule in 1986, and then emphasized by him in 1992. He says you can't have one rule for Democratic presidents and another rule for Republican presidents. He has yet to weigh in since Ruth Bader Ginsburg died.

We also haven't heard from Romney. Are you surprised Romney hasn't made a statement yet?

HOOVER: I suspect Mitt Romney is seriously deliberating this. I mean, he has been very serious. He has, as you know, as we all know, taken very serious and important votes that he 00 you know, are matters of deep conscience for him, and so I would imagine that's what he's doing now. But it frankly won't surprise me if Mitt Romney were to support the furtherance of Mitch McConnell's agenda in this context because judges continue to be and the court continues to be something that does unify Republicans.

AVLON: Look, Margaret is right to the extent that judges are a security blanket for people who are afraid what's happening to their party under Donald Trump. It's an excuse and it's a very powerful one. It's a powerful motivator.

HOOVER: I resent that, but I will discuss that after. Go ahead and make your point.

AVLON: But I think the important point is -- Murkowski has opened the door to might appeal to a Mitt Romney. Let's do this and decide after the election. And then, look, if Donald Trump wins, then, you know, I don't think anybody wouldn't say it's completely free and clear.

CABRERA: Right. AVLON: If Biden wins, that's a different calculus. And that's one way

out of it. You could also see a bipartisan group of senators say, you know what, we shouldn't rush this through. We also shouldn't support packing the courts by a Democratic president. De-escalate and try to preserve our institutions, as opposed to this kind of hypocrisy and normalization --

CABRERA: Right.

AVLON: Weaponization of situational ethics we see under this president.

HOOVER: So a new Gang of Eight is what you're advocating?

AVLON: Yes. A new Gang of Four.

CABRERA: Well, perhaps that is what Mitt Romney is contemplating at this time, what precedent would this set. But let me ask you about this argument from Senator Ted Cruz. He says he can't wait until after the election because what if you need the Supreme Court to decide a contested election? Listen to his comments and then react.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): I think it is particularly important that the Senate take it up and confirm this nomination before the election. Because Joe Biden has been explicit. He has said if he doesn't win, he's going to challenge this election. He's going to go to court, he's going to challenge, he's already hired a big legal team. Hillary Clinton has told Joe Biden under no circumstances should you concede.

Given that, there is a serious risk of a constitutional crisis if Joe Biden is bringing litigation, like we had in Bush versus Gore but in five or 10 states --

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, ABC NEWS HOST: Senator, I have to stop you. As you know, it is President Trump who's been the one talking about rigged elections. Joe Biden has not explicitly said he's going to challenge the election. Of course they're going to have teams of lawyers as every campaign always does.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: John, go ahead.

HOOVER: I think -- wait, wait.

CABRERA: Or Margaret, go ahead.

HOOVER: What you just saw was like the United States' top college national debater from 1988 or whatever Ted Cruz was in college. You saw just a wonderful example of him taking an argument and making the opposite argument. I mean, on its face, we know it is ridiculous, OK? We know that this is going to -- look, this election may be very, very close, it may not be. But if it is very, very close, it is not only Joe Biden who will have lawyers looking at every ballot and litigating these states.

We already know there are at least 30-plus states where lawsuits -- where both sides have their legal teams in place and have organized. This is not just one side's fault. It's also not just Donald Trump's fault, OK? Democrats and Republicans are going to litigate this election if it is close, and that is going to happen state by state across the country.

AVLON: Of course we --

HOOVER: And it could be very ugly, which is why -- frankly, it is important that we have a court --

AVLON: Yes, but --

HOOVER: -- that is predisposed to be there if that is necessary.

AVLON: But no -- but the obvious problem, and the additional layer of hypocrisy upon Ted Cruz's, quote-unquote, "argument," is that he didn't have this problem with it being a 4-4 court at the last election when it was incredibly close. No Republicans did. So this is mock concern, crocodile tears and pearl clutching. This is just total nonsense.

And obviously as George Stephanopoulos pointed out, the president of the United States is consistent, talked about a rigged election and challenging, and so to try to project that on Democrats as you're increasingly seeing do is just simply more project and deflect but it does speak to the seriousness of the continued attack on our democratic institutions. But you can't say that last time 4-4 was fine because it was my interest, this time it's a great constitutional crisis.

CABRERA: Move along, thank you. Thank you, John Avlon and Margaret Hoover. Good to see you.

[16:25:02]

HOOVER: Ana, thank you.

CABRERA: I appreciate it. Talk to you soon.

Coming up, the president says we have turned the final corner on the coronavirus, but a turn for the worse in the case count tells us something different.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: The United States is fast approaching a milestone we hope we would never see. 200,000 lives lost from COVID-19. And when it comes to a vaccine the White House Coronavirus testing czar is now trying to reconcile these conflicting timelines from the president and the CDC director.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DR. ROBERT REDFIELD, CDC DIRECTOR: You're asking me when is it going to be generally available to the American public so we can begin to take advantage of vaccine to get back to our regular life, I think we're probably looking at third -- late second quarter, third quarter 2021.

[16:35:05]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The vaccine for the general public likely would not be available until probably next summer, maybe even early fall. Are you comfortable with that timeline?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: No, I think he made a mistake when he said that. It's just incorrection information. You know, we're ready to go immediately as the vaccine is announced. And it could be announced in October. It could be announced a little bit after.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How can the American people trust you on the pandemic, when you're contradicting the head of the CDC? And you're --

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Because of the great job that we've done.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: When asked about that this morning, here was the response from Admiral Brett Giroir.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ADM. BRETT GIROIR, WHITE HOUSE CORONAVIRUS TASK FORCE MEMBER: I think this has been misunderstood. I think Dr. Redfield's correct. The president is correct in the segment that he spoke about.

But what I do want to say is that, you know, a vaccine as early as possible, even in a few million doses will be a godsend, in terms of outcomes, hospitalizations, morbidity and deaths.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Dr. Celine Gounder joins us now. She's the former New York City health commissioner. Dr. Gounder, he says everybody's right, what we just heard from Giroir. What do you think?

DR. CELINE GOUNDER, CNN MEDICAL ANALYST: Well, I do think we will have a vaccine available probably December or so for first-line essential health care workers, first responders, doctors and nurses working at hospitals. But that is not the same as having a vaccine available to the general public.

Almost half of Americans under the age of 65 have preexisting conditions. Some of them are not diagnosed, like high blood pressure or diabetes, because not everybody goes to the doctor on -- regularly. But there's a huge proportion of Americans who are at risk who will not get access to the vaccine until much later than that. CABRERA: I want to play you something else Giroir said about how many

vaccine doses they need.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GIROIR: From my perspective, even a few million doses, in early November or December, if we have five percent or 10 percent of the population that we can vaccinate, we can get 80 percent or 90 percent of the benefit. For example, if we could vaccinate workers in nursing homes, we could protect the elderly and the vulnerable from disease. That would make an enormous impact on mortality.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Dr. Gounder, do you agree with those numbers, vaccinating 10 percent of the population gets us 90 percent of the benefit?

GOUNDER: Well, I suppose it depends on how you define 90 percent of the benefit. But, you know, as I was saying, if you look at such a large proportion of the U.S. population, being at risk for severe COVID if they get it, there's no way that the math works. Where five percent to 10 percent are getting people vaccinated will yield 80 percent to 90 percent reduction in transmission or 80 percent to 90 percent reduction in cases or deaths. That's -- that simply doesn't add up.

CABRERA: Giroir also said that testing every student each week is not necessary to bring children back to school. There is, obviously, a lot of discussion around what is best for back to school.

Instead, he's saying, you know, contact trace. You should have baseline testing around sick students. That's the way to go. Is there some realistic middle ground between being 100 percent proactive and 100 percent reactive?

GOUNDER: Well, the way we're controlling the Coronavirus is really layering all these imperfect interventions to try to control it. So, it really depends on what else they have in place. If you are returning to school with 30 kids in a classroom, that's a very different situation from if only the special needs' kids and youngest kids, for example, are returning to the classroom. So, it really is a question of trying to add up all of these imperfect measures together to control this as best as we can.

CABRERA: HHS secretary, Alex Azar, said this morning that masks are a bridge until you get a vaccine. But we have heard from Dr. Redfield and others, that even when we get a vaccine, masks will still be important. So, help us, in terms of setting our expectations.

GOUNDER: Well, I think they're both right. Masks are definitely a bridge to the time when we have a vaccine widely available. However, if the vaccine is only 50 percent to 70 percent effective, there is still a risk, even if you've been vaccinated for contracting COVID.

And so, in that situation, we may find ourselves lining up to get vaccines. But, at the same time, still wearing masks, at least during cough and cold flu season, to prevent being infected with Coronavirus.

CABRERA: OK, good information, as always. Dr. Celine Gounder, thank you for being here and thank you for all you do.

Coming up, political chaos on so many fronts. And Russia is watching from afar. They've got to be loving it. We will check in with former director of national intelligence, James Clapper. He will join us live right here in the CNN NEWSROOM on the security risks 44 days out from the election.

[16:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: Add a Supreme Court fight to an already a combustible year. A pandemic, historic unemployment, widespread protests, and a president attacking the integrity of the vote. Guess who's watching?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER WRAY, DIRECTOR, FBI: We certainly have seen very active, very active, efforts by the Russians to influence our election in 2020, through what I would call more in line with (ph) foreign influence side of things, social media, use of proxies, state media, online journals, to -- primarily to denigrate Vice President Biden. And what the Russians see as kind of an anti-Russian establishment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So, that was on Thursday. The president then goes on Twitter and says, quote, "But, Chris, you don't see any activity from China, even though it is a far greater threat than Russia, Russia, Russia." And then, he suggested he might consider replacing his hand-picked FBI director.

[16:40:03]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Christopher Wray, would you like to replace him, sir?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We're looking at a lot of different things, and I don't -- I did not like his answers yesterday, and I'm not sure he liked them either. And I'm sure that he probably would agree with me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Joining us now is former director of national intelligence, James Clapper. Director Clapper, thanks so much for joining us.

JAMES CLAPPER, FORMER DIRECTOR, U.S. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: Well, thanks, Ana, for having me.

CABRERA: What do you make of the president's very public disagreement and criticism of Christopher Wray's intelligence assessment?

CLAPPER: Well, if I may, first point is that Director Wray is right. The primary threat to our electoral system is from Russia. China poses another threat. And their interests in conveying misinformation has more to do with deflecting attention from Taiwan, Hong Kong, their response to the pandemic. In other words, trying to embellish their own image or deflect attention away from that which they believe is unfavorable to their image.

The Russians, on the other hand, are trying to interfere with an attempt to foster an outcome in our election, as director Wray has said. The other point, of course, I think would be hugely -- a huge loss for the country if Director Wray were replaced. He, among, you know, hardly anyone else, is willing to speak truth to power and tell the American public what the facts are.

CABRERA: And, yet, the president is saying he's wrong. And that's what he's telling the American public. So, I mean, Russia's got to be cheering right now.

CLAPPER: Oh, absolutely. I mean, Russia is up to their old tricks. The major difference, of course, is they are going to do all they can to hide their tracks and to make it harder for us to detect what they're doing. And it would appear that they are not doing the things, at least so far, attacking our infrastructure and that sort of thing.

But you're absolutely right. They're in a win-win situation, at this point, because they are sewing down discourse and distrust in our system and trying to influence the outcome towards a particular candidate.

CABRERA: The president was asked about this idea of not listening to the people advising him and listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JONATHAN KARL, CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT, ABC NEWS: Last night, you criticized what Christopher Wray told Congress, your FBI Director. You, obviously, said that the CDC director was flat wrong on a couple of things this week. How is it that you don't trust your own experts?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Oh, I do.

KARL: Do you feel like you know better?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes, in many cases, I do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Jonathan Karl asked him, do you think you know better than they do? And the president said, in many cases, I do. How dangerous is that?

CLAPPER: Well, for me, it's quite dangerous. When you ignore the advice and counsel of experts, subject matter experts, in some cases, that have devoted their lives, professional lives, to this sort of thing. And then, to just ignore it because, well, my gut is better than what they know. Well, from a national security standpoint, and certainly from a public health standpoint, I think this is -- this is very dangerous.

CABRERA: So, how does the intelligence community then get people to pay attention to what Russia is doing when the president won't? And, now, everybody is just, obviously, focused on the Supreme Court.

CLAPPER: Well, exactly. I mean, the Supreme Court drama, of course, is, to a certain extent, overtaking these other events. And that's -- given or collective attention span, that's not good, I think, from a national security standpoint, in trying to keep our eye on the ball, particularly with respect to the safety and security of this country.

CABRERA: The attorney general, William Barr, has been making a number of controversial comments about the election. Here's one this week.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

WILLIAM BARR, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: You know, liberals project, you know, the president is going to stay in office --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right. And fascism.

BARR: -- and seize power and all this bullshit. I've never heard of that crap. I mean, I'm the Attorney General. I would think I would have heard about that. I've never heard about it, OK. They're projecting. They are creating an incendiary situation where there's going to be loss of confidence in the vote. It'll be a close vote.

People will say, you know, someone -- the president won Nevada. Oh, wait a minute. We just discovered 100,000 ballots. Every vote must be counted. Yes, but we don't know where these freaking votes came from.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

CABRERA: So, he says this idea that President Trump would refuse to leave office if he loses is B.S. What do you think?

CLAPPER: Well, first, you know, it's unconventional.

[16:45:00]

CLAPPER: Many aspects of this administration is unconventional. To have the attorney general, you know, speak his opinion about the sanctity and security of the voting system. One would hope he would be making sure it works, rather than, sort of, attacking it and joining in a narrative that is shared by both the president, and the Russians for that matter. They're doing a lot to sow doubt about the efficacy and the safety and security of our voting system.

So, it's, as I say, very unconventional.

CABRERA: And, meantime, while the president is downplaying Russia's meddling and the threat to this upcoming election, his allies in the Senate are issuing depositions to dozens of officials from the Obama administration as part of their ongoing probe into the FBI's handling of the 2016 Russia investigation. I know you, yourself, received one of these subpoenas. What was your reaction, and will you comply with it?

CLAPPER: Well, there was -- well, there was no need for a subpoena, I don't believe. I have indicated, through my attorney, that, you know, I'm happy to appear for a deposition. I would prefer not to do a live hearing, given my age demographic, but either a virtual or a deposition. I'm good with that.

I -- you know, we don't have anything to hide or we didn't do anything wrong. I guess maybe they would have preferred that we ignored what the Russians were doing. That seems to be the message here.

CABRERA: Well, former director of national intelligence, James Clapper, I appreciate your time and expertise. Thanks for joining us.

CLAPPER: Thanks, Ana, for having me.

CABRERA: The most anticipated moment of the election is almost here. Donald Trump and Joe Biden face off in their first presidential event. You can watch it all play out live on CNN with special coverage starting Tuesday, September 29th, at 7:00 Eastern. We'll be right back.

[16:47:02]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CABRERA: The Emmys are tonight, but, like everything else during the pandemic, the show will look nothing even close to normal. There's no traditional red carpet and the stars are staying home. Here is CNN's Stephanie Elam.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You are the lady of the Emmys. Everyone's talking about you.

ELAM (voice-over): Gone is the red carpet and the audience of stars.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Things are going to be quite different.

ELAM: This year's Emmys are virtual with stars accepting awards from home.

RACHEL BROSNAHAN, ACTRESS, EMMY NOMINEE, "THE MARVELOUS MRS. MAISEL": Yes, I mean, I get to bring my dogs to the Emmys. How often will that happen?

ELAM: Jimmy Kimmel will host from Staples Center, a larger venue than normal.

JIMMY KIMMEL, ACTOR, HOST, EMMY AWARDS: This is what makes me feel comfortable. ELAM: Social distancing is planned for the crew. And star presenters,

like Morgan Freeman and Oprah Winfrey.

MARC MALKIN, SENIOR EDITOR, "VARIETY": I do think this is going to be a moment where people are going to address Black Lives Matter movement, climate change, politics. We have an election just weeks away.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: From 114 locations across 10 countries.

ELAM: To boost the fun factor, live cameras were sent to stars' homes.

SCOTT FEINBERG, AWARDS COLUMNIST, "THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER": We're hearing that the T.V. academy is trying to feel out with the major nominees, would they be comfortable having somebody, essentially in a hazmat suit, deliver an Emmy statuette to their door should they win.

ELAM (on camera): As for Emmy's fashion, "Variety" reports that Kimmel's producers told stars to, quote, "come as you are, but make an effort."

MALKIN: For some people, that means they're going to wear, you know, tuxedo pajamas. Other people -- I spoke to Tracee Ellis Ross, and she said that she doesn't care what's going on. She is dressing up. She is getting glam.

ELAM (voice-over): HBO's "The Watchmen" is among the front runners which also include pop network's "Schitt's Creek".

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who's excited, huh?

ELAM: Netflix giving the show a pandemic boost.

FEINBERG: People who are looking for things to watch have been binging past seasons.

ELAM: The Emmys are Sunday night on ABC. In Hollywood, I'm Stephanie Elam.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: In California, COVID is threatening the lives of inmates and creating barriers for offenders who have been released to reduce overcrowding to help end this vicious cycle of incarceration. In a state with one of the largest prison populations, three CNN heroes have now stepped up to safely help those who are struggling, in and out of prison, amid the crisis.

Here's Anderson Cooper with a brief update.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): As COVID-19 impacts those in and out of California prisons, three CNN heroes are providing lifelines to those in need.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I have my sister here, Joanne (ph). She just got out.

COOPER: Kim Carter (ph) is on call to pick women up the moment they're dropped off in the streets.

KIM CARTER: It's 12:00 in the afternoon or 11:00 at night. You know, so and so is out. She's down at the Greyhound bus station.

COOPER: Collette Carroll is still bringing virtual learning to men at San Quentin State Prison.

COLLETTE CARROLL: It's as close as we can get. And I believe it lets them know that they're not forgotten.

Hi, how are you doing?

COOPER: And Susan Burton just opened her 10th safe house for formerly incarcerated women.

[16:55:02]

SUSAN BURTON: If needed, we'll get another one and another one and another one. I mean, we're not just talking about people coming home. We're talking about people escaping a deadly virus.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: See Anderson's full story about these three remarkable heroes. Go to CNNHeroes.com right now. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)