Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Democrats Celebrate Debate Performance, Concede Race Still Razor-Close; Blinken, Zelenskyy Discuss Ukraine Strike Restrictions; Trump Says He Will Not Debate Harris Again; AG Garland Condemns Escalating Attacks Against Career Staff; SpaceX Crew Completes First Ever Commercial Space Walk. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired September 12, 2024 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:38]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: It is 8:00 p.m. in London, 10:00 p.m. in Kyiv, 3:00 p.m. here in Washington.

I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM. And let's get right to the news.

The debate is the rearview mirror and the candidates are now on the road. Today's race for the White House crisscrossing the country with a particular focus on swing states. This hour, Vice President Kamala Harris is set to campaign in Greensboro, North Carolina, hoping to energize voters in a state which Democrats are eager to flip in November.

He's not the only one on the road, former President Donald Trump, he's in Tucson, Arizona. His running mate, J.D. Vance fundraising in New York. Governor Tim Walz in Michigan. Spouses out to Gwen Walz in New Hampshire, Doug Emhoff in Nevada.

Following all of this post-debate campaigning, as always, CNN's Jeff Zeleny.

Jeff -- Jeff, help us get behind the scenes in the past 48 hours in both campaigns, how is Harris planning to capitalize and how is Trump planning to turn it around?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jim, there are a couple of different issues the Harris campaign is really seeking to amplify from the debate or trying to keep that conversation alive from the debate.

First and foremost, as Vice President Harris arrives in Charlotte for a rally this hour and then goes to Greensboro, North Carolina, later, she's highlighting her commitment to protecting abortion rights. We all remember that moment from the debate, actually several moments with her and the former president as she was trying to pin him down on his position on a national abortion ban.

Well, now, that moment has been turned into a television ad for swing states just like North Carolina.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I did a great service in doing it. It took courage to do it. And the Supreme Court had great courage in doing it.

KAMALA HARRIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES & 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I have talked with women around our country. You want to talk about this is what people wanted, pregnant women who want to carry a pregnancy to term suffering from a miscarriage, being denied care.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: Jim, for all the questions in this presidential election, I believe this may be one of the most interesting ones, what is the effect on a presidential election of that Dobbs decision that overturned Roe versus Wade.

It's been tested in midterm elections, but not yet in a presidential election cycle, the Harris campaign clearly believes this is something that resonates -- that resonates with suburban women voters, young voters, and others. So that is what they are pressing in North Carolina. But certainly, a Democratic presidential candidate has not won that state since Barack Obama in 2008. We will see if she can be the next one, or if it stays red in the Trump column.

SCIUTTO: So I know Trump says he won the debate. Fact is many of his own allies say he did very poorly. So, how is he messaging in the days since to try to turn that around?

ZELENY: Look, he is campaigning in Arizona as you mentioned, but still keeping one eye on Pennsylvania. Of course, that is the mother of all battleground states, the most electoral votes, 19 electoral votes, and perhaps trying to replace the debate in people's minds with some other issues. His campaign is up with a new ad overlooking the debate entirely on the issue of fracking.

Of course, that is -- has been along challenge for the vice president. In the debate, she came out squarely against it. She said that she would not try and ban fracking leases. What fracking is, of course, is drilling into a shale rock in the ground to lead to natural gas asked and other types of energy sources up.

But take a look at this new ad that ignores her debate answer completely, and goes back in time.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Will you commit to implementing a federal ban on fracking your first day in office?

HARRIS: There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking.

AD ANNOUNCER: That will immediately put tens of thousands of Pennsylvanians out of work and send utility bills skyrocketing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: So that is a moment that was taken from a CNN town hall actually, back in 2019 when she was to the left of many positions, she is right now. During the debate, she said she would not ban fracking. In fact, a president cannot ban fracking. That takes an act of Congress. And she points out that she was actually the vote -- in the bill that would open more leases up.

So the bottom line is the Trump campaign believes -- believes that they can perhaps make some ground up here in western Pennsylvania where fracking is very common, many jobs by trying to hit her on this.

[15:05:05]

It's unclear if that old information, how that will away with her actual position. But at the very least, it points out she's been on both sides of this issue.

So, Jim, the bottom line is, with some 54 days to go before the election, debates, of course matter, but the winners have debates do not necessarily become the winners of elections. That's why both candidates on the campaign trail. This is an incredibly tight race.

SCIUTTO: Jeff Zeleny, thanks so much.

Now to our panel. Karen Finney, Democratic campaign veteran, CNN political commentator, and Matt Gorman, Republican strategist, former senior advisor for Tim Scott's presidential campaign.

Good to have you both.

I'm curious what you both think the race stands after the debate because it strikes me that after the Biden-Trump debate, when Biden did extremely poorly Trump and team and frankly, many Democrats are saying this race is over. It's Trump's, he's got it.

After this debate, while you have the majority of folks saying Harris won, you have a lot of folks reverting to that, doesn't move the needle, kind of thinking. I just wonder how both those things can be true, right? And I know that debates rarely definitive but in your experience, I'll start with you, Karen, you've had a lot of experience with debates. Is this one likely to move this race?

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: So, here's where I think it matters. Each candidate went into the debate with different work that they needed to get done. And I think from the perspective of Kamala Harris, she did that. She is, in addition to if you want to say she won the race, she needed to show that she could, quote/unquote, take on Trump in a serious and substantive way. She needed to show that she was presidential, that she has talked about her vision and her ideas and give people -- I mean, this is the biggest audience, unless there should be a second debate that she will likely have between now and the election.

So give the viewing audience and those who may view it as pieces of content on streaming or social media. A reason to either pay attention to the election if they haven't been, or to take a second look. And as we saw in some of the commentary from our own focus groups at CNN, there were voters who still had some questions, who wanted to hear more from her and they still want to hear more.

But that's the goal of the debate, is you want to get more voters paying attention to who you are and what you say forth up positive, not for the negative.

And what I would say with Trump, I also think what was important. She did a very good job of drawing the contrast. And, frankly, it was very clear in this debate that he had really lost a step from the Donald Trump that I saw on the debate stage in 2016. We didn't talk about it as much after the debate with Joe Biden because we focus so much on his age. But Trump was not able -- who's not as agile and you really kind of fell apart pretty quickly.

SCIUTTO: Matt, so the rub on Trump going into this was his job is to focus on issues and not take the bait. He didn't do that, but don't trust me. That's what Republicans set on the air afterwards.

So did it hurt him in the votes that count the number that counts, which is what do you think that this was damaging to his chances of winning -- winning the election?

MATT GORMAN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Here in the short-term, right? Because these things as 60 million people, casual observers to the hardcore people to follow policies day in and day out like we all do, right? That's a big part of it. But also it's a missed opportunity cost, right? That's 90 minutes. You won't be able to get back unless we do another debate. But still, you just can't get that back that time.

Yeah, there's real cost, but I will say it, I would -- I would expect this small bump for Harris a little bit. These things are a thing, but the show goes on. I think there are tough debates, you have to keep going.

I think, too, this race is going to be tied. It wasn't disastrous. The bottom didn't fall. It wasn't anywhere close to what we saw with the Biden thing. I mean, look, I worked for Mitt Romney in 2012, we had a very good first debate. And as we got more closer to the election things were certainly not going in our favor.

So, these things not determinative but there are big earned media moment you want to be vantage of. But that being said, it's going to be extremely, extremely tight from here on in.

SCIUTTO: Karen one thing that happened after the debate, besides the spin, was quite an important endorsement. In terms of Taylor Swift announcing right after, announcing on Instagram that she would be voting. And since then, encouraging folks to sign up to vote. And that's arguably more key.

Last night, she used that win at the VMAs to then encourage people again, to vote -- register to vote. Republicans are reacting. Have a listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TAYLOR SWIFT, POP SUPERSTAR: This is a fan voted award and you voted for this. I appreciate it so much. And if you're over 18, please register to vote for something else that's very important to America, the 2024 presidential election.

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't think most Americans, whether they like her music, or fans of hers or not, are going to be influenced by a billionaire celebrity who I think is fundamentally disconnected from the interests and the problems of most Americans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[15:10:08]

SCIUTTO: Interesting he took a shot at a billionaire celebrity. Anyway, set that aside for a moment. I mean, the truth is Republicans were angry, right, to see that some of the work immediately went after attacking her, which strikes me is might reveal their actual reaction to this.

I just wonder, listen, no one thing is going to -- going to turn this election around but does she have enough influence in enough numbers, right, to potentially affect the results, particularly among those young voters?

FINNEY: Well, here's where I think it matters, Jim, it matters that the numbers that vote.gov is reporting in terms of it, but over 300,000 who have come to the site. That tells us that the impact that she's having is the potentially people who may not have otherwise been paying attention or may not have been and registered to vote how are now paying attention at least to the idea of voting?

What I would say that with young voters is what we now know is we've got two jobs, one, we've got to get them registered and convinced them that their vote matters. And then you've got to convince them to vote for your candidate. So it's very helpful with regard to getting people to pay attention to the election.

I think -- I don't think there's real data that shows celebrity endorsements really drive a significant number of votes, but obviously nice to have.

SCIUTTO: Matt, I want, you know, in another day in politics long gone sadly, if a politician were to lose an endorsement he or she might say, well, that's too bad. I loss and I still respect that, you know, that endorsers, supporters, and so on, et cetera. But no, in this day and age, Vance is like, well, billionaire celebrity, who cares? Does that help, right?

I mean, wouldn't this smarter play to be -- well, we still hope that we can win among those young Americans because we have this -- you know, we're looking out for them at grocery prices or whatever instead of just saying, well, forget about her. GORMAN: I hear you. I mean, look, my philosophy is, you know, she's a private citizen. She can vote for whomever she wants. God bless her, go for it, I was actually struck by her post is rooted in sort of humility, right? It was I did my research. You do yours and you make sure you vote, which I appreciated.

I mean, look, I want -- I've seen Bruce Springsteen 20 times in concert. I'm used to enjoying the music of people that don't agree with me politically.

SCIUTTO: Right.

GORMAN: That is more than okay. So I think maybe I'm in the minority on this, but I come at it from a little different point of view.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, you're more highly developed than some folks today, right, in terms of how they reacted to this, even around the Thanksgiving dinner table.

Matt Gorman, Karen Finney, thanks so much to both you.

Still ahead the United States secretary of state is vowing the U.S. will adapt, that's the word he uses as the war between Ukraine and Russia continues and changes. So what does that mean for how Ukraine is allowed to use American weapons and where, crucially.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:05]

SCIUTTO: Pressure is mounting on the Biden administration to allow Ukraine to use American weapons to strike deep inside Russia. A growing number of both Democratic and Republican lawmakers are urging President Biden to lift U.S. restrictions.

The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Ben Cardin, says, simply, the time has come.

Secretary of State Blinken, who is visiting the region, said the U.S. is planning to adapt as the war demands.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTONY BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE: And as what Russia is doing has changed, as the battlefield has changed, we've adapted and as you've seen through the provision of some of the most sophisticated weapon systems we've had, through the extraordinary provision of military assistance overall, more than $100 billion from the United States, the sharing of intelligence and many other things at every step along the way as necessary, we've adapted and we've adjusted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: CNN's Kylie Atwood is at the State Department.

Kylie, U.S. first gave these ATACMS weapon systems last year. It took them some time to allow Ukraine to use them even within 60 miles of Russia. Now the question is, do they allow for strikes inside Russia against facilities we should note that are striking Ukrainian territory? Is it your sense that the administration is about to lift these restrictions?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It's my sense, Jim, that there is division with the within the administration over this right now, that some folks think it's a good idea, and some folks think it's not. Those who do think is a good idea rest in the camp of Republican members of Congress and also Democratic voices in Congress that you were citing earlier, who has said that now is the time. Let's give Ukraine what it needs.

The Biden administration has routinely dragged its heels, dragged its feet when it comes to actually saying yes to the things that Ukraine has asked for. So let's go for it and give it to them. Those who in the administration are more reticent to give the green light here point to a number of things. Obviously, basically the risk of escalation with Russia if Ukraine is firing military targets deep inside of Russia, but also strategically, there are concerns that this isn't all that effective.

There's a certain number of ATACMS that the United States even has. They've given as many as they can to Ukraine. It's not a high number U.S. officials say, and they believe that those ATACMS could actually be used in different parts of the battlefield, like in Crimea. They don't necessarily believe that striking deep inside Russia is integral to their military strategy right now.

But as you heard from the secretary of state, he took what the Ukrainians had to offer to him this week in terms of their justification, their argument for why the U.S. should get to a yes here, he is going to be presenting that to the president and the key meeting to watch tomorrow here in Washington is between President Biden and Prime Minister Starmer, the new prime minister of the U.K. They're going to be discussing how to move forward on this key question of allowing or not strikes deeper inside of Russia by Ukraine.

SCIUTTO: We'll see if there's an announcement perhaps when they meet.

Kylie Atwood at the State Department, thanks so much.

Well, joining me now to discuss, Democratic congressman from Massachusetts, Jake Auchincloss.

Thanks so much for joining.

REP. JAKE AUCHINCLOSS (D-MA): Good afternoon, Jim. Thanks for having me on.

SCIUTTO: So what's your view? Is it time for the U.S. to lift these restrictions on Ukraine?

AUCHINCLOSS: It's past time. Ukraine is undergoing a bombardment to its civilians, to its infrastructure, to its troops and United States is handcuffing its ability to fight back. If the American military had these restrictions in place in World War II, we wouldn;t have won the war.

[15:20:02]

The president must (AUDIO GAP) Ukraine to strike sites of military application within Russia. And in particular, Jim, oil refining. There are four oil refineries around Moscow, west of the Ural Mountains, well within range of ATACMS and F-16s that account for 20 percent to a third of all Russian oil refining capacity. They could be disabled with aerial bombardment and that would significantly undermine the Russian war economy.

You pair that with the adoption of tougher sanctions the Treasury Department has been proposing to the White House. And you could deliver a one-two punch to Putin's petro state.

SCIUTTO: This has been the pattern with every new weapons system it seems that the U.S. has supplied to Ukraine. I mean, you talk about tanks, you talk about HIMARS, you talk about ATACMS, you talk about F- 16s where its a bridge too far, it's too provocative until it isn't anymore and the administration eventually gives him.

I mean, it's -- so bigger picture in your view, does the administration exaggerate the risk of escalation? And I bet if they are, is it a failed strategy of constantly delaying and then breaking those delays?

AUCHINCLOSS: I don't think they exaggerate the risk of escalation. I think that they are indexing to escalation on the wrong dimension. And what I mean by that is yes, of course, Putin is nuclear armed and that is a significant concern that the United States needs to credibly deter (ph), but the most concerning red risk of escalation would be that Putin takes Kyiv and then looks to Poland or looks to Finland, or looks to Moldova.

And that is why our Baltic allies, those who have the most to lose from a potential Russian escalation are the ones who are most assertive about U.S. unleashing Ukraine to strike Russian troops staging sites, and energy infrastructure.

SCIUTTO: Yes, it's good point and some of those allies, Eastern Europe, they've lifted the restrictions on it earlier and arguably they've had quite a view of the risk of escalation.

All right. Let's talk for a moment about now this Ukrainian offensive continuing inside Russia in the northeast, as its been happening, Russia has been making an increasing move in the east, particularly going towards key Ukrainian supply lines.

And I just wonder in your view, is this Ukrainian offensive inside Russia? Maybe a tactical victory, but a strategic failure. I mean, is it worth the cost in effect?

AUCHINCLOSS: I believe it's a tactical victory and potentially a strategic victory in so far as its claim on Russian land can be a negotiating chip for Russian claims on Ukrainian land. I do though think, that we have to zoom out and look at what are the strategic pillars of Ukraine's success in industrial war, battles matter a lot less than disabling the means of production and distribution.

Again, looking at World War II, a big part of American victory was taking out German and Japanese production and distribution lines. We can do that against Russia. Russia is relying on its oil exports and particularly on refined oil exports to be able to sustain its war economy. If we disable those four Moscow plants, maybe the one outside of St. Petersburg, Petersburg as well, then it amplifies all the battlefield successes that Ukraine can have either within Ukraine or within Russia.

SCIUTTO: I want to talk for a moment about the debate, presidential debate earlier this week, because Trump was asked twice, in fact, by the ABC moderators, who he wants to win in the war in Ukraine and in either answer, did he say he wants Ukraine when he just said he wanted the war to end.

And I wonder what your reaction was to that answer.

AUCHINCLOSS: It's pathetic and it demeans the United States standing on the world stage. We saw in 2018 when he was at a press conference in Helsinki next to Vladimir Putin, that he threw his own intelligence agencies under the bus in acquiescence to Vladimir Putin's absurd claims. We saw on the debate stage a couple of nights ago that he would refuse to actually assert that he wants Ukraine to be victorious.

This is a fellow democracy fighting for freedom and self-determination against an authoritarian and brutal regime. It's positively un- American, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Another topic. I reported last week that the U.S. fears that Russia has changed its decision calculus. That is, they believe its more likely that Russia will carry out attacks, sabotage on key undersea cables, which is, you know, carries so much of the world's communications, Internet traffic would we who are mostly disabling.

In your view, should Americans and our allies in Europe be prepared for such attacks and the consequences which, of course, would extend the civilian population enormous economic costs?

AUCHINCLOSS: Enormous costs and disruptive to government, to business, to civil society? We need to credibly deter those undersea attacks. One way to do that, not the only way, would be to say to the Kremlin, we have $300 billion of your assets much of it held in Brussels, the rest of New York City.

[15:25:03]

We're going to bond those assets.

And if you attack undersea infrastructure, the entire cost of repairing an undersea infrastructure, as well as the lost economic productivity costs, will be taken out of your frozen assets. So you can blow these things up, but you're paying for it.

SCIUTTO: Why hasn't the U.S. used that leverage more actively? I mean, there's been a lot of debate hemming and hawing about using some of that money to, for instance, built rebuild Ukraine took time and I know there's a legal process to this and enormous legal precedent. But given the destruction that Russia has already unleashed on Ukraine, why hasn't -- why haven't the U.S. and its allies, in fact, already use that leverage to a greater degree?

AUCHINCLOSS: They are. There is close-knit diplomacy right now amongst the G7 and the European Union to secure a $50 billion loan to Ukraine that is underwritten by that $300 billion in Ukrainian assets. And indeed in a recent op-ed with "The Wall Street Journal", I called that one of the three pillars that Joe Biden could deliver before he leaves office.

He's going to secure long-term funding for Ukraine's industrial base. Do that $300 billion dollars of Russian assets. He needs to authorize strikes and sanctions against Russia. And then third, he should work with Volodymyr Zelenskyy to define victory, victory clearly in the western imagination, a security eastern border, freedom of navigation in the Black Sea, and accession to the European Union. Joe Biden could leave a legacy in Europe before he leaves office.

That is unparalleled with FDR if he unleashes Ukraine to win this war.

SCIUTTO: Before we go, Democrats are, of course, on a high after Vice President Harris's debate performance. As you know, debates don't always translate into votes. Trump just posted on Truth Social, that there will not be another debate because he claims he won this one.

What's your reaction to that?

AUCHINCLOSS: Voters and Americans disagree. But, of course, he's claiming that it was rigged and the moderator's fault. This is a guy who always says that things are rigged against him. He born on third base thought he hit a triple and still complains that the umpires are rigging the baseball game against him.

It's pathetic. It's boring. I think Americans are sick of it.

And Kamala did one of the two big things she needs to do, which is to draw sharp contrast. She was in command. He was out of control.

And now, I think over the next two months, she'll be able to flesh out her policy proposals, particularly on lowering costs and housing and energy and health care that are going to resonate with everyday Americans.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thanks so much for joining me again.

AUCHINCLOSS: Good to be with you.

SCIUTTO: Coming up, slamming efforts to weaponize the U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland's message to his staff and state attorneys general. I'll be joined by one of those attorneys general, Phil Weiser of Colorado, on that, as well as election-related misinformation.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:31:23]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back.

As we just reported, Donald Trump just posted on Truth Social he will not participate in another presidential debate, claiming that he won on Tuesday, an analysis even many Republican supporters of Trump do not agree with.

Now to news from the Department of Justice. There's a warning today from U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland that the Department of Justice will not be turned into a political weapon. In a speech to department staff and prosecutors from across the country, Garland praised the work of career staff who he says are facing escalating attacks and threats of violence.

CNN's Jessica Schneider joins us now.

Now, it was notable, Jessica, that Garland did not mention Trump by name, but Trump just quite publicly said recently that he was going to jail a whole bunch of people if he were to be -- if he were to be elected. Was this a response in effect to that?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: I think it was. I think it's the biggest response we've seen from the attorney general so far. And what I found particularly interesting is that parts of this stinging speech, they were released hours before Garland actually gave this speech this morning. So word started getting out that the attorney general would be slamming these recent attacks and tactics by Donald Trump and his allies, you know, even though he didn't directly name them.

And because of that, maybe because of that, Attorney General Garland got this standing ovation before he even started speaking this morning. And really, what I found is that this speech was aimed to accomplish two things.

First of all, it was a big thank you from the attorney general all employees of the DOJ, because the attorney general acknowledged that first these public servants just don't hear "thank you" enough. And that they've never before in history faced so much scrutiny and so many threats. So this was a way for him to say, not only thank you, but also I've got your back.

Secondly, this was a way of sending that message to Donald Trump and others that attacks and threats that many of these DOJ employees and FBI officials and others have faced in recent years is just unacceptable. You know, you mentioned it, Jim. Trump and his allies have repeatedly attacked the DOJ, attack the FBI, claimed without evidence that the DOJ has been weaponized against the former president. They've even discussed plans to dismantle DOJ and FBI, and then they've threatened to prosecute their own political enemies.

So, Attorney General Garland, he addressed that any stress throughout the speech, the DOJ operates in just an impartial manner. Here he is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MERRICK GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL: There is not one rule for friends and another for foes. One rule for the powerful and another for the powerless. One rule for the rich and another for the poor. One rule for Democrats and another for Republicans.

We have only one rule: we follow the facts and apply the law in a way that respects the Constitution and protect civil liberties.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCHNEIDER: And this was about a half hour speech. And, Jim, I'd say it was really notable because, you know, we've seen AG Garland respond in part to attacks in testimony to Congress various times. It responds to lawmaker questioning in response to questions from the press.

But this really was probably the most forceful and direct speech we've seen from the attorney general where he slams these attacks from Donald Trump and his allies were just about two months from the election. So DOJ kind of has to be careful at this point, what they say moving forward because of their rule that they don't do anything in the 60 days before the election to influence it in any way.

So this was an important speech for the attorney general, really a crucial time.

[15:35:01]

SCIUTTO: Jessica Schneider, no question. Thanks so much.

Speaking of the election, threats to local election officials, the rise of artificial intelligence have presented new challenges to this year's election. Colorado, a leader in regulating A.I. in this country is now requiring political campaigns to disclose any use of A.I. generated content in their messaging.

The state's attorney general, Phil Weiser, has issued a public advisory, warning voters to be aware of election-related deepfakes as they're known, and A.I. generated misinformation. He joins me now.

Good to have you on. Thanks for taking the time.

PHIL WEISER, COLORADO ATTORNEY GENERAL: Great to be with you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So we've heard about this coming threat for a number of years, right? The advent of deepfakes were going to be a seminal moment in American politics. Of course, A.I. is all around us these days. I wonder why are you issuing this advisory now. Have we reached some sort of inflection point?

WEISER: There are a couple of reasons. The first is Colorado passed a law and the law requires candidates to do as you noted, a disclosure, if they're going to use A.I.

Second, the technology has matured. It is so easy to take anyone's image, likeness, video, audio, manipulate it, and make it sound like they're saying something they might not be saying. That's a real risk for voters. And voters need to know this risk is out there. They need to be careful, too.

SCIUTTO: Okay. Let's talk about another kind of risk and this is a risk of threats to local election officers. There's been an exodus of tops -- of top officials since 2020, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center, a 36 percent turnover nationwide that compares with about 20 to 30 percent before 2020, Colorado, 40 percent turnover.

What and who do you blame for this exodus?

WEISER: I want to call out and you just get a great report about AG Merrick Garland statement about law enforcement and the rule of law, and not tolerating really the abuse of our institutions in Colorado.

We just finished our office along with the Republican D.A. from Mesa County. Prosecution against a county clerk, former county clerk now, Tina Peters, who undermine the election machinery. The integrity of elections, and who engaged in the sorts of lies and misinformation that has pleaded more risk of political violence.

Right now, if you look around -- all around, the temperatures getting turned up, people are awash in misinformation including as I noted A.I., and it's having an effect. It is moving people to make threats. It's encouraging greater violence.

We all need to take seriously that we need to steward our democratic republic. And that means defend the rule of law, hold people accountable when they undermine elections like Tina Peters did, and make sure that people serve in a way that allows us to have a democracy.

SCIUTTO: But the thing is we didn't hold the most powerful figure accountable in Donald Trump. I mean, he tried so many of these things in 2020, pressuring state election officials via his rhetoric. He's been accused of encouraging attacks on local election officials. He had his own personal lawyer who went after a couple officials in Georgia, as you know.

And while there were indictments, he wasn't tried and he's running again, in a razor thin election. I just wonder what that means, what kind of message in your view that sends to folks who might be the target of this kind of stuff? And what kind of message it sends to Trump and folks who support him from doing the same this time around?

WEISER: It is truly unfortunate that these efforts to have real prosecutions around January 6, around what happened in Georgia, pressuring the secretary of state to come up with votes are not going to end up before a jury. The American people, I believe, would want to know what a jury thinks about these sorts of actions.

Instead, the vote is going to be by the American people and people got to watch for themselves any debate that President Trump is unwilling to accept that even lost the last election, unwilling to take any responsibility for what happened on January 6 and what I just have to say is up and down the ballot, people get to vote.

And when you look at 2022, a lot of election deniers got to feed it at the ballot box. The American people want public servants who care about serving, addressing problems, and honoring the rule of law. And so the verdict that right now is before the American people is on Election Day.

And I will tell you, I know a lot of officials, Democrats, and Republicans who are worried about the rule of law to sound administration of justice and our ability to be a democratic republic.

[15:40:02]

That's part of what people are voting on.

SCIUTTO: All right. Before we go, I want to talk about social media because this week, 42 state attorneys general, including yourself, sent a letter Congress urging them to require a surgeon general's warning on algorithm-driven social media platform. That, of course, was recommended by the surgeon general a few months ago.

It's hard to get 42 state attorney generals to agree on something in this environment. But boy, it does seem that there's bipartisan concern and I'm a parent and I get it, man. I mean, just -- well, it affects kids, but it certainly affects adults as well. I think going to get this as a warning?

WEISER: I will say on the point of state AGs come together, we had 47 state AGs condemning what happened on January 6, calling for accountability there. We've got a coalition of state AGs broad bipartisan calling for the warning label. We're in court ourselves litigating against Meta, a number of us investigating TikTok.

And the message that you noted is clear. We are seeing the research, young people were getting these notifications, all hours of the night aren't sleeping. Young people going down dark holes.

We need to warn parents, warn young people about the dangers of social media. And yes, social media companies need to get the memo. They have a product that's endangering young people. I and my colleagues, other state AGs, we're going to do something about it.

SCIUTTO: We'll be watching.

Phil Weiser, thanks so much for joining us.

WEISER: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. The four-person civilian crew, SpaceX's "Polaris Dawn" mission successfully completed the world's first commercial spacewalk earlier today. Billionaire Jared Isaacman and space engineers Sarah Gillis, were the two who partially exited the Dragon spacecraft to take in the view of all this around 7:00 Eastern this morning. Wow, must be fun, a little scary.

The "Polaris Dawn" mission already broken number of records since it launched on Tuesday, including traveling further into outer space than any other human has. Since NASA's Apollo program ended more than 50 years ago.

[15:45:10]

Here to break down what this means for the future of space travel is the CEO of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Daniel Dumbacher.

Thanks so much. Daniel, for taking the time.

DANIEL DUMBACHER, CEO, AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS: Oh, thank you, Jim. Glad to be here.

SCIUTTO: So, listen, I mean, I watched this. I can only imagine the feeling of opening up a door right to a spacecraft there and kind of poking your head and half of your body out of it.

Tell us what was accomplished here.

DUMBACHER: Actually, it's a rather historic mission, Jim. And there's a lot of us would have liked to have been in that position, but the crew did a fantastic job. SpaceX did a fantastic job and what they've accomplished is to demonstrate the ability of private enterprise to take on exploration in beginning to perform those functions that are necessary to extend the human neighborhood further into space.

SCIUTTO: Tell us why private is important here.

DUMBACHER: Well, in the past, as you noted, NASA did this with the Apollo missions. The last time we did it was in 1972 with Apollo 17 out this far with humans. And now with SpaceX and the other activities going on with other companies, you're now seeing space tourism human beings that are not government astronauts going, going to space and demonstrating these capabilities.

So we're growing the pool of people that are capable and available to do it. We're extending the training, the engineering is proving out well and now it's time to help grow it.

SCIUTTO: So, SpaceX is doing a lot of stuff now that used to be the preserve of NASA, that they're sending satellites into space with regularity. They're going to and from the space station safely, taking astronauts up and crucially back down. And now, they're doing a spacewalk.

Boeing was supposed to be a second private option for that and it's not going so well, including, of course, this issue with the astronauts still stuck at the space station and the safety of their own, their own spacecraft.

What does that mean? To not have a second private option?

DUMBACHER: Well, you always like to have options, particularly in space operations. You try to have as many backup options as you can, and you have to be careful about comparing the missions. Starliner, this was -- this was a test flight for it. It -- NASA and the team made a decision for the safety of the crew.

This -- today's mission and what "Polaris Dawn" has accomplished has been accomplished by SpaceX. They chose to take the risk on the astronauts. The crew took the -- took the risk on themselves and now they've gone out beyond the Van Allen Belts and further than humans have gone since '72 and they're demonstrating capability the private citizens can do this, which is actually the way the model is set up.

The government is here to start things and then and then private enterprise takes it to the next level.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, they do it cheaper, no question.

It was noticeable that one of the folks who got the privilege or took the risk as well of exiting the spacecraft is the billionaire Jared Isaacman. Is that what you want for space travel like this? Do you want it to be kind of buying a ticket to space?

DUMBACHER: Well, eventually, you want to be able to buy a ticket to space, like you buy a ticket today to fly from New York to Los Angeles. Now that's a long way down the road from a space travel perspective, but that's what we're working to.

So just like private commercial air travel developed in the following World War II and in the '50s and '60s, space travel is evolving and it has a starting point. And that's where we're at today.

SCIUTTO: Daniel Dumbacher, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

DUMBACHER: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: To a live event now, Vice President Kamala Harris is holding a campaign rally in North Carolina, key swing state. She's neck and neck with the former president.

Let's listen in.

HARRIS: Okay. All right. Okay. Okay.

We got some work to do.

Are we going to do this North Carolina?

[15:50:01]

CROWD: Yes! HARRIS: It is so wonderful to be back in Charlotte. I want to thank you all. Can we give it up for Stacey for telling her incredible story?

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And can we please thank that incredible Anthony Hamilton for incredible performance. I love Anthony Hamilton. And it is so good.

I love you back. I love you back. Thank you.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And we have so many outstanding leaders here today, including my friend, Governor Roy Cooper. And your next --

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And your next governor, Attorney General Josh Stein.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And here with us is your next attorney general, Congressman Jeff Jackson.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: Mayor Lyles, my dear friend, the council of state candidates and all the leaders who are with us today. I thank you, all, everyone -- everyone here for taking the time and doing the work you are doing. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: All right. So here's the thing.

Okay. We have a lot of work to do. We have a lot of work to do. Okay.

So North Carolina, you probably know, please have a seat if you have a chair.

Two nights ago, Donald Trump and I had our first debate.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And I believe we owe it to the voters to have another debate.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: Because this election and what is at stake could not be more important.

On Tuesday night, I talked about issues that I know matter to families across America, like bringing down the cost of living, investing in America's small businesses, protecting reproductive freedom and keeping -- (CHEERING)

HARRIS: And keeping our nation safe and secure. But that's not what we heard from Donald Trump.

Instead, it was the same old show, that same tired playbook that we've heard for years, with no plans for how he would address the needs of the American people because you know it's all about him, it's not about you.

Well, folks, I said it then, I say it now. It's time to turn the page.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: Turn that page, turn that page.

(CHANTING)

HARRIS: Because, to your point, to your point, America is ready for a new way forward. We are ready for a new generation of leadership that is optimistic about what we can do together.

That is why Democrats, Republicans, and independents are supporting our campaign.

Over 200 people who worked for President George H.W. Bush, President George W. Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney have endorsed me for president.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: Former Vice President Dick Cheney and Congresswoman Liz Cheney are supporting me as well.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: Because as they said, we have a duty as citizens to put country above partisanship and defend our Constitution.

(CHEERING)

HARRIS: And that is my pledge to you. I will always put country above party and I will be a president --

SCIUTTO: Looks like our feed there from Vice President Harris's campaign event in North Carolina -- she's back.

HARRIS: We pull (ph) our nation backward, we are fighting for the future. A future with affordable child care, paid leave and affordable health care, a future where we build what I call an opportunity economy, so every American as --

SCIUTTO: We've been listening to Vice President Harris there at a campaign event in North Carolina, key -- Carolina, key state that Democrats want to flip this November.

We'll continue to monitor her comments. Thanks so much for joining me today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.

And "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next.