Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump To Nominate Woman To Supreme Court; Growing Skepticism In U.S. Over Potential COVID-19 Vaccine; Taiwan's COVID-19 Success Story; Trump Says He Approved TikTok Purchase Deal; Ginsburg And Scalia: A Long Bipartisan Friendship. Aired 4-5a ET

Aired September 20, 2020 - 04:00   ET

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

[04:00:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

KIM BRUNHUBER, CNN HOST (voice-over): President Trump says he'll nominate someone next week to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court, setting up a political battle in Washington.

Also ahead, protests in London over possible new pandemic restrictions; while here in the United States, we're approaching a milestone in terms of deaths.

And the deal that could throw TikTok a lifeline in the U.S., just hours before a White House deadline that would ban it.

Live from CNN World Headquarters in Atlanta, welcome to you, our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Kim Brunhuber. This is CNN NEWSROOM.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BRUNHUBER: As Americans honor the life and legacy of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, president Donald Trump is pushing to replace the late Supreme Court justice, in his words, "without delay."

And with just 44 days before the presidential election, the race to fill the high court vacancy is turning into the next big political battle.

Ginsburg's granddaughter tells NPR that the late justice didn't want to be replaced until a new president is in office. If Mr. Trump knew about that dying wish, he paid it little heed Saturday in North Carolina. But he did pledge to keep the number of female justices intact.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman. It will be a woman.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: Makeshift memorials such as this one are paying tribute to Ginsburg. The Supreme Court said a private internment is set for Arlington National Cemetery but it is not clear when.

Well, the Republicans' push to quickly replace Ginsburg on the court is also reshaping the November election. CNN's Manu Raju explains what's at stake.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), SENATE MAJORITY LEADER: This decision ought to be made by the next president.

MANU RAJU, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): That was Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell then when Barack Obama was president in 2016 with a vacancy on the Supreme Court. But times have changed and so has the president.

MCCONNELL: We'd fill it.

RAJU (voice-over): Republican leaders applauding a full throated effort to fill justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat with the election just 45 days away, trying to make the argument, it's different now because Republicans control both the White House and the Senate.

Privately, McConnell and Trump speaking about potential nominees on Friday night. And the GOP leader, in a message to his colleagues, urging them to "keep your powder dry" and not take a position on whether the winner of the November election should be the one filling the vacancy left by the death of Ginsburg.

On Saturday senator Susan Collins of Maine, facing the toughest re- election of her career, breaking ranks, saying the decision of lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court should be made by the president who was elected on November 3rd.

But with a 53-47 majority Democrats need a total of four Republicans to vote no and stop the nomination. GOP senator Lisa Murkowski, before Ginsburg's death, made clear she did not want to move ahead on any vacancy before November.

And it's unclear if two other Republicans will agree. Privately, top Republicans are arguing that a Supreme Court fight will only boost their chances at holding the Senate majority in November.

And several Republicans in difficult races are indicating they'll vote to confirm Trump's nominee this year, even though some endangered Republicans, like North Carolina senator Thom Tillis, took the opposite position in 2016.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): We're going to let the American people speak.

RAJU (voice-over): Yet moving ahead before November could squeeze Republicans like Cory Gardner, running for re-election in Democratic leaning Colorado. Gardner's office did not respond to questions about whether the winner of November's elections should make the hugely consequential pick.

It typically takes between 2 to 3 months to confirm a Supreme Court nominee, meaning it would be much faster than usual to approve a replacement before November.

Yet if a vote slips there's another complication if Arizona's appointed senator Martha McSally loses in November.

That means the Democrat Mark Kelly could be sworn in by the end of that month, bringing the GOP majority down from 52-48. So McConnell has little margin for error and several senators are uncommitted, like Utah's Mitt Romney.

[04:05:00]

RAJU (voice-over): And some senators in the past have been wary about an election year confirmation, like senator Chuck Grassley, who as chairman of the Judiciary Committee, refused to hold hearings for Obama's nominee in 2016.

He told CNN in July:

SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY (R-IA): If I were chairman of the committee, I couldn't move forward with it.

RAJU (voice-over): On Saturday his office declined to say if that is still his position.

Others have clearly shifted theirs, including Lindsey Graham, who now chairs the Judiciary Committee and said this in 2016.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination and you could use my words against me.

RAJU: Now Lindsey Graham explains himself this way. He basically says that things have changed since 2018 in the aftermath of that vicious Supreme Court fight that got Brett Kavanaugh confirmed to the court. He says he views all this differently now.

But if the Republicans do move ahead, Senate Democrats have their own plans. They're talking about that right now. They had a conference call on Saturday afternoon in which Chuck Schumer told his caucus that all options are on the table if the Republicans do advance a nomination this fall.

And one of those options that Democrats are discussing, potentially expanding the Supreme Court, maybe going from nine justices to 11 justices or even more than that. They would need legislation to do that. And to pass legislation it would have to change the Senate filibuster rules.

And, to do that, they need to win the Senate majority first in the fall. So so much is on the line in this fall's election but Democrats have indicated they're not going to take this fight lying down -- Manu Raju, CNN, Capitol Hill.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BRUNHUBER: Well, as Manu mentioned, some Democrats suggest if a Trump nominee is confirmed, they would be open to expanding the Supreme Court and adding new seats. And one of the leading Democrats in the Senate told CNN that filling Ginsburg's seat is about more than politics.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL), DEMOCRATIC WHIP: This is just not a political squabble among the big shots in Washington. What's at stake here is the future of the Supreme Court on issues like health insurance covering pre-existing conditions.

One of the first cases the Supreme Court will take up, basic choice questions for women's rights, moving forward in the wake of losing one of the leaders in our history in terms of forcing the debate in America on women's rights.

So it goes way beyond differences between politicians. I can tell you we have a number of senators on both sides of the aisle who are up for re-election. They're going to hear it at home. This is going to change the conversation in many of these senatorial contests.

And some of them may have second thoughts about reversing and changing the very position that they were arguing for four years ago.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: But some Republicans say circumstances aren't the same as they were four years ago when they said a new justice shouldn't be picked until after the election. CNN political commentator Scott Jennings defended the change of heart to our Chris Cuomo.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You did have different parties in power so that voters in 2016 had delivered mixed messages. You had Democrats in charge of one institution and Republicans in charge of the other.

In this case Republicans, the voters awarded them control of both and reaffirmed that control in the Senate in 2018. And look, the Constitution does not give the president the power to nominate this and the Senate to just rubber stamp it. You have two coequal separate branches of government that both have a role to play.

And you're right about one thing: it is about power and the Republicans do have power in the Senate and they have a constitutional duty to exercise that power however they see fit. And that's what they're going to do here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: Joining me is Deborah Rhode, professor of law and director of The Center on the Legal Profession at Stanford University.

Thank you so much for joining us today. Before we look ahead to some of the pressing legal and constitutional issues that have been created with Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, I want to start with your thoughts on her passing. You knew her.

How are you remembering her today?

DEBORAH RHODE, PROFESSOR OF LAW, STANFORD UNIVERSITY: Well, it is a cliche, of course, to note that for someone of her small stature she was a towering intellect. But more than that, she was an incredibly insightful strategist and someone who really reshaped the landscape of American law with respect to gender.

Prior to coming onto the court, she headed The Women's Rights Project, which brought hundreds of cases alleging gender discrimination. She successfully argued five of them, which charted the path for the Supreme Court for the first time to declare that gender discrimination was a violation of the Constitution.

And that really reshaped the landscape of law for both sexes and for the better. She exposed how archaic stereotypes really restricted men as well as women.

[04:10:00]

RHODE: And she was insightful to include male plaintiffs as well as female plaintiffs in the early cases that she brought before the court, knowing that an all-male court would find that a sympathetic strategy.

BRUNHUBER: So as you say, you know, clearly she was a champion for women. Donald Trump said he will nominate a woman.

What are your thoughts on how adding potentially another female nominee might affect the court?

Obviously a woman who would clearly have very different views than the late justice.

RHODE: Well, putting a woman in a position of power does not necessarily empower all women. I clerked for justice Thurgood Marshall. And he would have been horrified to see who his replacement was in the so-called African American seat on the court.

His life was dedicated to the struggle for racial justice. And Clarence Thomas, who was appointed in his place, has mainly issued opinions that stand in the way of achieving that.

And so to put a conservative woman in Ruth Bader Ginsburg's place on the court, who will vote against everything that she stood for in term of gender equity, reproductive justice, the rights of underrepresented minorities, that's not an advance for women. And hopefully female voters will see through it.

BRUNHUBER: Well, presumably if the Republicans can push through a nominee, by hook or by crook, the process would be extremely contentious. We have seen some fractious, divisive nominations in the past.

What effect might this have on the Supreme Court, both in terms of the inner workings of the court itself and also for the public, the court's image and perception of, you know, of its legitimacy?

RHODE: Well, I think it will be very damaging for the court. There have been a whole series of cases that have called into question the justices' political independence. And even now only a bare majority of Americans approve of the way the Supreme Court is handling its business.

And to have one more example of a highly partisan, contentious nomination and confirmation battle and then have someone on the court who works against the legacy that Ginsburg fought so hard to achieve, I think, just reinforces the public cynicism that this is a partisan court. And then people vote their personal ideology rather than the rule of law.

BRUNHUBER: Thank you so much for your analysis, Deborah Rhode, we RAY: appreciate it.

RHODE: Thank you so much for having me.

BRUNHUBER: When we come back, the U.S. nears yet another sad milestone. The latest on the coronavirus pandemic. Plus the U.K. is bracing for the second wave of the pandemic. The prime minister says it is already here now. We'll go live to London for the latest coming up next. Stay with us.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[04:15:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BRUNHUBER: The U.S. is fast approaching the 200,000 mark when it comes to the lives lost to COVID-19. Several states are seeing a rise in cases, suggesting a post-Labor Day spike. Johns Hopkins is now reporting more than 6.7 million total cases.

Medical experts say they're worried about flu season and how coronavirus could make it even more dangerous.

U.S. president Donald Trump says all Americans will have access to a vaccine as early as April. But there is growing skepticism from the public about the safety of a vaccine. Dr. Anne Rimoin, a professor of epidemiology at the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, talked to CNN about the surrounding concerns.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANNE RIMOIN, EPIDEMIOLOGY PROFESSOR, UCLA FIELDING SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH: This is a huge problem. We are losing faith in all of our institutions that dictate public health care. We've lost a lot of confidence in the FDA with politicization.

Now CDC has also fallen prey to politics. And so it's not surprising that people who previously were not vaccinate hesitant or worried about vaccines are feeling worried. The polls are showing this very, very clearly.

You know, taking vaccines normally, under normal circumstances, we do have a do a lot of work at getting public confidence. We've had to do more and more over the years. But with all of the politicization and mixed messaging, we're going to have a tough time here.

Even if a vaccine is very effective, if less than half the population actually take it, we're not going to reach any kind of immunity and we're still going to run into problems. I should also mention that a vaccine is not a silver bullet.

So with the vaccine hesitancy, with a vaccine that is likely not going to be 100 percent effective, we're not going to see major protection here.

Getting people to trust a vaccine is going to need a lot of -- we're going to need transparency from the government. We're going to have to see all of the scientific experts being able to see the data, both in the government, people like Dr. Fauci, but scientists outside of the government.

Many of us who have been on television, who have been very vocal in the news, that have been really serving as watchdogs for science here. And I think that making these data available to the scientific community and having the scientific community being able to come out and say, yes, we have looked at these data, we agree this is going to be effective, is going to be very important.

And having important public figures taking the vaccine, we've seen this happen with polio vaccine, getting people that are well-known taking the vaccine, the Ebola vaccine, many vaccines. We've seen that using public figures to be able to really show people that this vaccine is worth taking is going to be very important.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[04:20:00]

BRUNHUBER: That was UCLA professor Anne Rimoin.

In London, anti-lockdown and anti-vaccination protests turned violent Saturday. Police arrested 32 people in Trafalgar Square. Officers say there were outbreaks of violence and emergency workers were assaulted.

Officials in the U.K. have been raising the possibility of adding new restrictions in recent days, now that COVID-19 cases are on the rise. So let's get now more from London with Cyril Vanier.

Cyril, more cases, more restrictions and, it seems, more backlash.

CYRIL VANIER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, absolutely. And there are probably going to be even more cases and even more restrictions as early as this week. Look, 4,000 -- upwards of 4,000 cases were announced yesterday. That's new daily infections and that is more than -- that's about four times what they had at the beginning of the month. So the government is seeing that things are not only trending in the

wrong direction, they're trending in the wrong direction fast. And they acted late at the beginning of the pandemic. They don't want to do that a second time. They want to get it on the ground early.

And that's why Boris Johnson today is weighing new restrictions. We have already seen tougher restrictions in many parts of the U.K., where people from different households are not allowed to mingle; where pubs, bars, restaurants are closed as of 10:00 pm.

So those are things that the capital city here, London, might also impose but the government is thinking of going even further because they are -- they see that a second wave is coming in, the words of Boris Johnson there, the prime minister.

And they want to avoid a second wave that would overwhelm the ability of their health system to treat the sick and the infected. So we might be seeing in the next few days, Kim, a new set of restrictions.

BRUNHUBER: Right. We saw from those protests there, there is so much anger now, imagine if there is a second full lockdown. We know Boris Johnson says, you know, that would be a disaster. But the government's contemplating a short-term national lockdown if things keep getting worse.

VANIER: Yes, they're calling it a circuit breaker. And there's speculation about that in the British press this morning. It is believed the prime minister is considering a two-week quasi-lockdown to just essentially bring down, reduce the number of infections. They were hoping to be able to wait for several weeks before they did it.

It is believed that, with the data worsening, they're now considering bringing up the date of a circuit breaker. Hasn't been announced yet, hasn't been decided. Just speculation on this at this stage.

What the government has done over the weekend is that they have announced a toughening of penalties for people who fail to respect the current rules.

So, for instance, until now, it was just a guideline that, if you tested positive, you had to self-isolate. Now it has become law. And you can be fined if you do not respect the restriction.

And the guidance on self-isolation, for instance, you can be fined a thousand pounds if egregious breeches and multiple breeches of this rule, you can be fined up to 10,000 pounds.

The government there trying to scare people into respecting and following existing rules, also trying to incentivize them, mind you. Some people will not be able or might not have the means to withstand another self- -- round of self-isolation.

Those people would be granted a 500 pound allotment of money to enable them, essentially, to respect the government guidelines.

BRUNHUBER: The old carrot and stick approach. All right, thank you so much, Cyril Vanier in London. Appreciate it.

Well, at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, most countries were pretty much doing the same thing, reacting slowly. But by that point many had been infected.

But not in Taiwan. It is a model for handling coronavirus and it has been praised and studied around the world. As CNN's Paula Hancocks shows us from Taipei, the reward has been a return to a mostly normal life.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Staying next to the midday sun seems more important than keeping six feet apart for these Taipei residents. The streets are busy, restaurants have lunchtime queues. Life during the pandemic seems fairly normal.

What strikes me is that even though there are an awful lot of people wearing masks in the street, there are still a significant number who aren't. I'm being told, a few months ago when there were still local transmission cases here, people wore masks without complaint.

But now there's more of a confidence in a way the government has handled this pandemic and they simply don't feel the need anymore.

Just one suspected case of local transmission since April. The rest are imported. Out of a population of 23 million, there have been around 500 confirmed cases and just seven deaths.

[04:25:00]

HANCOCKS (voice-over): Foreign minister Joseph Wu tells me they learned harsh lessons from the 2003 SARS outbreak.

JOSEPH WU, TAIWANESE FOREIGN MINISTER: At the time Taiwan was hit very hard and we started building up our capacity in dealing with a pandemic like this. So when we heard there was some secret pneumonia cases in China, the patients were treated in isolation, we knew that it was something similar.

HANCOCKS (voice-over): Early recognition of the crisis and suspicions that Beijing was not being transparent spurred the government to respond fast, setting up a command center.

Passengers from Wuhan China, were screened from the start of the year, weeks before other countries started to react. Early travel restrictions, a 14-day quarantine for arrivals, contact tracing and testing.

Mask rationing prevented panic buying and Taiwan increased production to the point it was able to donate 12 million masks to the United States, lifting their world standing. Sil Chen (ph) was a college student in Taiwan during the SARS epidemic and says the country learned social solidarity.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Very few people here will refuse to wear a mask. HANCOCKS (voice-over): She now runs a psychotherapy practice in New

York. She caught a mild form of the virus then mid-March, spending five weeks recovering in her apartment.

SIL CHEN, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: At the time I couldn't even get a test because the -- I remember I think the criteria was for you to have shortness of breath or difficulty breathing or some life-threatening situation.

HANCOCKS (voice-over): Chen came back to Taiwan in July to visit her sick grandmother and was shocked by the difference in realities.

CHEN: Life here is so surreal. It's basically like normal. Every so often, you have to remember to wear a mask and you'll have your temperature taken. But that's about it.

HANCOCKS (voice-over): A snapshot of normality in a world of uncertainty -- Paula Hancocks, CNN, Taipei, Taiwan.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BRUNHUBER: Well, it was already a tense election year. And the death of a Supreme Court justice is adding fuel to the fire. So what the loss of Ruth Bader Ginsburg means for the U.S. presidency and other top races. We'll have that ahead.

And later, TikTok is safe in the U.S. for now. How the trending social media app narrowly avoided a ban in the 11th hour. We'll have details of the agreement coming up. Stay with us.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[04:30:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BRUNHUBER: And welcome back to you, our viewers in the United States, Canada and around the world, I'm Kim Brunhuber. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM.

For a recap of our top story, U.S. president Donald Trump says he will nominate a woman to replace late Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. And the president told supporters in North Carolina his pick will be named next week, setting up a fight with Democrats ahead of November's election. CNN's Ryan Nobles has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT: President Trump making it clear to his supporters in Fayetteville, North Carolina, on Saturday night that he's not going to waste any time in picking a replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court.

Trump did have a lot of kind things to say about the former Supreme Court justice, calling her an inspiration. But he quickly pivoted to his plans to picking a replacement. The crowd responded, telling him to fill the seat and do it as soon as possible.

And Trump saying for the first time on Saturday night that he plans to pick a woman. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: So we will uphold equal justice under the law for citizens of every race, color, religion and creed. I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NOBLES: Trump also revealing his timing for making that announcement, saying it should happen sometime next week. And sources telling CNN that the president plans to wait until Ginsburg has been officially laid to rest before making the official announcement.

Now in the Jewish tradition that could happen very quickly, meaning the president could be able to make the announcement sometime midweek or towards the end of the week. The goal, though, for Republicans is to get this process moving as soon as possible, even with the hope of getting confirmation before Election Day.

Now that would be difficult. Normally it takes several months to nominate and confirm a Supreme Court justice. But the president and Republicans seizing an opportunity here. And they're hoping to have it done quickly -- Ryan Nobles, CNN, Fayetteville, North Carolina.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BRUNHUBER: And a new poll reveals how many Americans feel on the subject. It was taken just days before Justice Ginsburg died. Two thirds of the respondents said, if there were a vacancy on the Supreme Court this year, a hearing and vote should be held on President Trump's nominee. That was fairly even across party lines.

Now the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the prospect of president Donald Trump replacing her on the court has led to tens of millions in donations to Democratic causes.

The party's primary fundraising platform ActBlue says that it processed more than $30 million in donations in the 12 hours following news of Ginsburg's death. Most of that was raised in the immediate aftermath.

The fundraising group saw its biggest three hours in its 16-year history Friday night after Ginsburg's death.

So already, as you can see, Justice Ginsburg's death is having a direct impact on the 2020 presidential election.

But how might it affect how Americans actually vote?

Well, for that, let's turn to Natasha Lindstaedt in England, professor of government at the University of Essex.

Professor, thank you for being here with us. I'll start with the obvious, the questions everyone has been asking in various ways over the last 24 hours or so. Conventional wisdom says the conservatives are traditionally far more interested in the Supreme Court. But as I just mentioned, Democrats just set a one-day fund-raising record.

Which party's voters will be most energized here over this issue?

NATASHA LINDSTAEDT, UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX: Well, I think it heightens emotions on both sides. But for every American, the Supreme Court really does affect our lives. They rule on issues that affect our daily lives, whether it be on immigration rights, gay rights or women's reproductive rights or the Affordable Care Act.

But we are seeing, with the Democrats, there is a greater sense of urgency here. And that's why we saw some anecdotal evidence from early voting, that a lot of Democrats are being ushered in to vote early because they sense that this election is more important than ever, that there is a lot on the line.

Now if we look at the swing states and we look at the key issues that, when we think about the Supreme Court, in the U.S., which is about women's reproductive rights.

[04:35:00]

LINDSTAEDT: Now there is a majority of Americans on every single swing state that is more in favor of being pro-choice than being pro-life. Now in terms of some of these red states, Republican-led states, there is a very, very strong majority that are pro-life.

So we see that, with a lot of the issues that the Supreme Court rules on, they're very polarizing issues that are really, really important. And I think it is going to motivate people on both sides but probably the Democrats more so than normal.

BRUNHUBER: Well, we'll have to see about that. I wonder about the independents, the swing voters, you know.

Do you think that if Republican politicians are seen as sort of flip- flopping on this issue of nominating someone so close to an election, will the idea of fairness, of hypocrisy, persuade any undecided voters?

Or are they just used to that, basically?

LINDSTAEDT: I think it is too hard to tell what they're going to do. We have been having trouble gathering what they're actually going to do in this election. This is something that the Democrats could seize upon. They could use the Republicans' own words, in particular Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham, who heads the committee, to confirm the next justice.

Because Lindsey Graham had said very clearly that we should not nominate a Supreme Court justice in an election year. And the Democrats can remind voters that Antonin Scalia died in February of 2016, a full 10 months before the election.

And the Republicans refused to do any of the hearings. They wouldn't budge on this issue. So this is something that Democrats can remind voters, that Republicans are really lacking integrity on key issues that might matter for the 2020 election.

BRUNHUBER: And not just the White House but the other races as well, the ongoing Senate race in Arizona. Already we're seeing an influence there; possibly several, you know, Republican senators who are in swing states, who are up for re-election and, you know, they may be judged on the question of whether they'll allow a nomination to go forward.

LINDSTAEDT: Yes, that's true. But we see this may only affect a handful of senators. There are 53 Republican senators right now. And this may affect Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Those are the two we're really watching.

That's not enough for the Democrats. They're going to need to really clip more senators, more Republican senators, than just two. And it is really not clear whether or not these Republicans are willing to go against Trump.

So far, we have seen they have been incredibly loyal to Trump. And we have seen Mitch McConnell has great control over the Republicans in the Senate. We saw this with the Kavanaugh vote where not one ruled against Kavanaugh. Lisa Murkowski voted present.

So I think we're most likely going to see the Republicans toe the party line on this issue, because it has become the party of Trump.

BRUNHUBER: Speaking of Trump, will his pick, you know, potentially affect the vote, perhaps help shore up his flagging support with women or potentially, you know, with Latinos, depending on who he picks?

LINDSTAEDT: Right, that's a good question. I think that this vote is something that is going to get him more support from conservative female voters and possibly from Hispanic voters, who tend to be conservative on issues like abortion rights.

But I don't think it is going to move things in a huge way in terms of the Republicans that are already going to vote for Trump. They decided this long ago. I don't think this pick is going to have a huge impact on this.

What I'm looking to see is how the Democrats handle this process and if they're able to convey to the voters some of the hypocrisies that the Republicans, you know, just some of the things they said in 2016 are not in line with what they're doing right now in 2020.

But I think that, regardless of what happens, this is going to be a very emotional election and this particular pick is going to be incredibly emotional as well.

BRUNHUBER: Absolutely, as if this heated election needed any more higher stakes. Thank you so much for speaking with us, Professor Natasha Lindstaedt of the University of Essex. Appreciate it.

LINDSTAEDT: Thank you for having me.

BRUNHUBER: Well, TikTok is safe for now in the U.S. We'll take a look at the deal for a new partnership and how it is going to work next. Please do stay with us.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[04:40:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BRUNHUBER: The U.S. president says he's approved a partial sale between TikTok's parent company, Byte Dance, and Oracle and Walmart. It means the social media company will temporarily avoid being banned from U.S. app stores.

The Commerce Department said Saturday it will delay restrictions that were set to take effect today. Byte Dance will continue to be the majority owner of TikTok going forward. And Oracle and Walmart will own up to a 20 percent share and, of course, that contradicts the president's claims about that deal.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We have a deal worked out, I think, with -- Walmart is going to buy it, along with Oracle, Larry Ellison. It is going to be an incredible combination.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: All right, so let's get more on this deal. Will Ripley joins me from Hong Kong.

Will, you know, finally this long story seems to be coming to an end, at least an end is in sight.

What is the latest?

WILL RIPLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there is a week for this deal to come together, Kim, before that ban on TikTok in U.S. app stores would take effect. So it only has been postponed at this stage.

President Trump speaking about the ,deal praising the deal, even though apparently he's still a bit fuzzy on some of the details. He had initially, for example, wanted TikTok's parent company Byte Dance to make a payment directly to the U.S. Treasury before finding out that was illegal.

Then President Trump mentioned there was some $5 billion education fund that would be set up, TikTok responded in a social media post, that was the first they heard that. They said they're committed to investing in education. What we do know is this is coming together quickly between TikTok's

Chinese owner, Byte Dance, and two major American companies. You have Oracle, the tech company, and Walmart, President Trump praising both of those companies.

TikTok assuring the United States that this restructuring, if you will, will expand its headquarters in the U.S. They say 25,000 jobs will come as a result of this. And the information about U.S. users will stay in the United States. It will not in any way enter the hands of the Chinese owners or the Chinese government, which has been the United States' main concern, of course, with all of its, I guess, kind of ongoing disputes with Chinese tech companies.

Whether it be Huawei, which manufactures cell phones, to now this extremely popular social media app that millions of Americans are using on a regular basis.

[04:45:00]

RIPLEY: Many of them are teenagers, 800 million active users. It's the most downloaded app in the Apple Store. So Kim, even just to have an extra week that people are guaranteed they can download TikTok, is a sigh of relief for many people, especially those using it to vent some steam during this -- the difficult times of this pandemic.

BRUNHUBER: Right, absolutely. But you know, as I mentioned, Byte Dance will be a majority owner of TikTok.

Does that mean the data privacy and security issues that prompted all of this, they're no longer a concern?

RIPLEY: I think the devil is in the details. Apparently, this is enough for the United States government, to have these major American stakeholders now involved even though, as you said, Byte Dance maintains majority ownership, TikTok has a different version of the app in China than what is available in the United States.

But these tech companies and particularly social media companies do have -- and this has been something we have been talking about now at great length lately -- they have so much access to personal information of users, what they're clicking on, how long they're watching.

And this is meticulously tracked and records kept and this information is sold to people. The concern on the United States government's part is this information about Americans could be used to impact America's national security.

So does this deal solve all those problems?

Again, I think we have to wait and see what we learn in the coming days, Kim.

BRUNHUBER: All right, so it still continues. Thank you so much, CNN's Will Ripley for us in Hong Kong, appreciate it. Well, investigators are trying to determine if an envelope mailed to

President Trump contained the poison ricin. Preliminary tests came back positive. The envelope there was intercepted before it reached the White House.

A source tells us it came from Canada and officials are aware of at least seven similar letters, some which were sent to law enforcement in Texas. The FBI says there is no known threat to the public.

All right, still ahead, a look at the extraordinary life and legacy of justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RUTH BADER GINSBURG, U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: In my lifetime, I expect to see three, four, perhaps even more women on the high court bench, women not shaped from the same mold but of different complexions.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: And years later, her prediction came true. Ginsburg in her own words coming up next.

(MUSIC PLAYING)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[04:50:00]

(MUSIC PLAYING)

BRUNHUBER: As you can see there, flowers and signs are piling up in Washington in memory of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She was a passionate advocate for equal rights and earned a cool nickname in her golden years, a title she seemed to enjoy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GINSBURG: It was beyond my wildest imagination that I would be one day become the Notorious RBG.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: Ginsburg was also known for her bipartisan relationship with then fellow justice Antonin Scalia, a staunch conservative. A deep friendship predated their time on the high court.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GINSBURG: Among my favorite Scalia stories, when President Clinton was mulling over his first nomination to the Supreme Court, Justice Scalia was asked, if you were stranded on a desert island with your new court colleague, who would you prefer, Larry Tribe or Mario Cuomo?

Scalia answered quickly and distinctly, "Ruth Bader Ginsburg." Within days, the president chose me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: The two may have been ideological opposites but that didn't stop their personal connection from flourishing. Scalia's son describes it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER SCALIA, JUSTICE SCALIA'S SON: Even though they had divergent views, they had a good working relationship, they helped each other with opinions, they identified flaws in each other's arguments during the drafting process, even on opposite sides, which I think is remarkable and pretty selfless.

But they just focused on what they had in common. And, you know, they didn't compromise their beliefs because they were afraid of what the other might think. They didn't pull any punches in their dissents against each other's majority opinions.

But they knew that that wasn't the most important thing they shared and so they were able to focus on that bigger picture.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRUNHUBER: So we have heard a lot about Ginsburg from people who knew her but let's close out with more of her own words. It is a little window into what it was like to be Ruth Bader Ginsburg and to be a successful woman in a changing America.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RUTH BADER GINSBURG, U.S. SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: If you want to be a true professional, you will do something outside yourself, something to repair tears in your community.

No door should be closed to people willing to spend the hours of effort needed to make dreams come true. We are a nation made strong by people like you.

In my lifetime, I expect to see three, four, perhaps even more women on the high court bench, women not shaped from the same mold but of different complexions. We are at last beginning to relegate to history books the days of the token one-at-a-time woman.

The number of women who have come forward as a result of the #MeToo movement has been astonishing. My hope is not just that it's here to stay but that it is as effective for the woman who works as a maid in a hotel as it is for Hollywood stars.

[04:55:00]

GINSBURG: I have had the great good fortune to share life with a partner, who believed, at age 18, when we met, that a woman's work, whether at home or on the job, is as important as a man's. It helps sometimes to be a little deaf.

(LAUGHTER)

GINSBURG: I have followed that advice assiduously and not only at home through 56 years of a marital partnership, I have employed it as well in every workplace, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

(LAUGHTER)

GINSBURG: When a thoughtless or unkind word is spoken, best tune out. Reacting in anger or annoyance will not advance one's ability to persuade.

To make life a little better for people less fortunate than you, that's what I think a meaningful life is. One lives not just for oneself but for one's community. Thank you so much. Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BRUNHUBER: A remarkable life. I'm Kim Brunhuber. Thank you for joining us in the CNN NEWSROOM. Stay with us, because "NEW DAY" is next.