Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Security On High Alert For Charlie Kirk Memorial; Charlie Kirk Messaged Van Jones The Day Before He Was Murdered; Poland Scrambles Jets As Russia Strikes Ukraine; NATO Allies Pledge To Bolster Defenses On Eastern Flank; CDC Advisers Vote On New Recommendations For COVID Vaccine; Confusion And Delays Mark Meeting Of CDC Vaccine Advisers; Tonight: Bob Dylan, Dave Matthews, Willie Nelson, Kick Off Benefit Concept As Farmers Face Crises; ABC Facing Backlash Over Jimmy Kimmel Suspension; Former Crime Reporter Uses Writing To Help Prisoners. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired September 20, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:59:40]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Boris Sanchez in the nation's capital. My colleague Jessica Dean has the night off.

We begin this hour with officials trying to find out why an armed man was posing as law enforcement and acting suspiciously outside of Charlie Kirk memorial site in Glendale, Arizona.

Officials say the man was taken into custody yesterday, though the incident has put security on high alert before tomorrow's event.

High profile conservatives, including President Donald Trump, are expected to be there. And police say more than 100,000 people could be in the crowd.

CNN's senior White House reporter, Betsy Klein, joins us now. Betsy, what are we expecting from this memorial tomorrow?

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well Boris, officials from the highest levels of the Trump administration and the Republican Party are expected to converge in Arizona to honor the late Charlie Kirk.

And Kirk was a very trusted adviser of President Trump and many at this White House. His Turning Point U.S.A. group was also really critical to propelling Trump to victory back in November of 2024, but he was also a very close friend of the president and members of his family.

He was instrumental in helping the president to select some top aides, as well as members of his cabinet, during the presidential transition. So many here at this White House are grieving the loss of a close personal friend. Now, I spoke with a senior White House official who tells me the

president has been personally involved in preparations for that speech tomorrow. He is expected to talk about Kirk's life and the impact that he had on the MAGA movement.

These remarks also expected to be more personal than the typical presidential speech, but I would just note that when the president initially reacted to Kirk's death, he really laid bare some of the political divisions in this country right now. He took aim at the radical left and vowed to crack down on political violence. It remains unclear at this point whether those kinds of themes are going to emerge in his remarks tomorrow.

Also, among those speaking in addition to the president, Vice President JD Vance will speak along with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, chief of staff Susie Wiles and many, many other top administration officials.

And underscoring the very close ties that Kirk built with so many in the president's orbit, the White House plans to send two planes full of staff, top officials, guests of the president. A senior White House official telling me, quote, "it shows the impact that Charlie had on this administration".

Now, this event is also going to pose a key test for law enforcement, particularly the U.S. Secret Service. That agency, already under so much pressure and strain.

And to help with that, this event has been given a special event assessment rating level one designation. And what that does is really unlock a number of federal resources to help bolster security preparations.

So those resources include things like bomb detection, canine teams, as well as air support, things like drones and helicopters to hover over this event, as well as cybersecurity risk assessments and additional screening.

Attendees are told to expect TSA-like screening procedures. And in a sign of how strict the security is going to be, there is a strict "no bag" policy, Boris.

SANCHEZ: And Betsy, stepping back, obviously as you noted this speech that we're anticipating from President Trump said to be a personal one. Talk to us about the relationship between President Trump and Charlie Kirk.

KLEIN: They were incredibly close, Boris, I think it's really -- and not just the president, but key members of his family -- he was very close with Donald Trump Jr. As well as Eric Trump. Don Jr. described him as a brother as he was grieving the loss of this friend.

But Kirk was a really rare person in the president's orbit who could call the president with direct feedback, criticism. He really represented the youth voice to the president from the MAGA movement.

And he was able to do that, to push back without being criticized by the president publicly. They had a very close relationship.

I think a good example of that is the Iran strike that the president ordered just a few months ago. Kirk said that that was something that members of the president's base, particularly young people, had wanted the president to get out of endless wars and really viewed this negatively.

They obviously had a little bit of disagreement there, but ultimately were able to remain very close, very deeply aligned, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Betsy Klein, live for us at the White House. Thank you so much, Betsy.

KLEIN: Yes.

SANCHEZ: So in the days before Charlie Kirk's death, he had publicly been sparring with CNN commentator Van Jones over the role of race in the recent killing of a Ukrainian refugee. Across Twitter and on the airwaves, the debate got heated, and in the middle of it, Kirk messaged Jones this, inviting him on his show so they could, quote, "disagree about the issues agreeably". That message was sent September 9th. Kirk was killed the next day.

Joining us now to discuss is CNN senior political commentator and former Obama administration official Van Jones.

Van, thank you so much for being with us on this Saturday. Talk to me about your thoughts on getting this message and the timing of it.

[17:04:45]

VAN JONES, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well look, I mean it was a little bit of a shock. Obviously, Charlie Kirk and I were not friends. We did not agree on anything. And that last week of his life, we were really going at each other over, you know, what happened with the Ukrainian woman who was -- who was murdered.

And so the last thing I expected was to hear from him. In fact, we were trying to deal with the wave of death threats and racial stuff that was coming at me in the middle of that controversy when my team called and said that he had been shot.

So that was the opposite of what anybody wanted. And we immediately, you know, denounced that, that killing. But it was the next day when suddenly my team called back and said, Charlie Kirk was trying to reach you the day before he died. I was like, what? He was trying to reach you. He had sent you a message.

And so I saw the message. And it was a message saying, let's talk about this civilly. Let's -- let's, you know, come on my show. Let's be gentlemen. And he said, let's disagree agreeably.

And, you know, this is a weekend to kind of praise the good in Charlie Kirk. There's going to be a long conversation about his exact role in the things that people that he's done that people do not like. But I thought it was important to put that into the public record that

for all the talk now about censorship, he wasn't trying to censor me. He wasn't saying I shouldn't have a show. He was saying, come on my show.

For all the talk of civil war, he wasn't talking about violence. He was talking about conversation. And so there's been this attempt, there's almost like two Charlie Kirks. One who, you know, is the guy sending me this.

There's another Charlie Kirk. People are wrestling about that. But nobody should be able to say I, because of Charlie Kirk, I believe in censorship. Because of Charlie Kirk, I believe in civil war. Because of Charlie Kirk, I believe in violence, which you're now seeing. The Charlie Kirk, we should be firing people -- if we are going to uphold this version of Charlie Kirk.

I think that takes off the table some of the things that are being done in his name that do not match with this version of Charlie Kirk.

SANCHEZ: Van, it's really interesting because you mentioned people wrestling with some of the things that Charlie Kirk had said in the past.

And Ta-Nehisi Coates actually wrote about this this week. He wrote about the idea that memorializing Kirk's civility ignores the caustic nature of his rhetoric. I wonder what you make of that, given the fact that I imagine a lot of what Kirk said did not sit well with you, and that, as you noted, you were getting death threats based on this public argument that you were having.

JONES; You know, I've been wrestling with it. I think the country's been wrestling with it. No one should be killed for their political beliefs. No voice should be silenced for their political beliefs.

I was born in 1968, on this day in 1968, 57 years ago.

SANCHEZ: Happy birthday, Van.

JONES: Today is my birthday. Yes, exactly. Today is my birthday. I'm happy to be talking to you.

And there were assassinations. You know, Dr. King, Bobby Kennedy -- we've never recovered from as a country. And so we have to stand against that.

And again, on Memorial weekend, you want to praise the good in anybody. And at the same time look, I was the recipient myself of pretty caustic language from Charlie Kirk. And unfortunately his -- a lot of his followers were even worse than that, frankly, much worse, including racist death threats.

And so this is a figure we have to wrestle with as a country, to figure out how do we want to remember him. But I just want to make sure that -- and I was shocked to see it. I did not expect it at all. But when I when I saw that message, I thought it was important to put it in the record that he was not calling for Van Jones to be taken off the air. He was not calling for Van Jones to be fired as someone who disagreed with him on the public airwaves.

He was calling for me to come to have a bigger platform, even on his own show. That has to be put into the record.

He was not calling for civil war. Civil war last week was trending higher than the NFL last week -- and when -- in the beginning of the season.

That is not good because of Charlie Kirk. No, no, no. He was not calling for more violence. He was calling for more dialog, at least in the last day of his life when it came to me.

And I want that to be a part of the public record. It does not excuse or take away any of the other things that are also in the public record, but I want to make sure that if people want to praise the good and hold on to the best of Charlie Kirk, it did not include canceling people off the public airwaves in my case. In fact, it included more dialog, not less.

SANCHEZ: And Van, would you have gone on his show?

JONES: You know, I would have invited him on to our air. You know, we're building our platform here. I wouldn't -- I wouldn't have tried to help him build his platform over there.

[17:09:44]

JONES: But if he wanted to come -- come on and you could referee, I would have loved to debate him. And I would have -- and, you know, maybe I would have beat him, maybe I wouldn't. He was a very tough debater.

But that's the right way to deal with it in America. Outdebate them, outwork them, outorganize them, outthink them. Don't try to out violence them. That is wrong in any case.

And look, I debated about whether to share this at all, because I don't want to give aid and comfort to people who just want to whitewash everything. I don't want to do that because that disturbs the country. Frankly, it disturbs him.

But at the same time, to see him being now used to take people off the air. He didn't want me off the air, he wanted me on the air. You got to -- you got to take it one way or the other.

If you -- if you're -- if you're down for Charlie Kirk, then you can't be down for censorship because, you know, that wasn't what he was dealing with when it came to me.

And, you know, he did have that other side to him where he had that professors list. And he was going after professors.

So he has a complicated legacy. I just wanted to make sure the record was complete. SANCHEZ: Van Jones, so great to get your perspective, and we

appreciate you sharing your birthday with us. I hope you're blowing out some candles and eating some cake later.

JONES: I'll be here every time you'll have me -- have me, brother. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much, man.

JONES: All right.

SANCHEZ: Straight ahead Disney pulling Jimmy Kimmel's show could have implications far beyond TV. Later, were talking with one of several artists' unions sounding the alarm about how this could affect everyone.

Plus a new era in how the United States treats and prevents COVID-19. Why a CDC panel is suggesting changes to the rules for getting your next COVID shot.

But first, several new airspace violations by Russia, prompting very different responses from NATO and from the United States. We're going to get reaction next from the man who used to lead NATO's armed forces in Europe.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. Don't go anywhere.

[17:11:40]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: New tonight: Poland and NATO scrambling military jets as Russia launches a massive assault on Ukraine from the air. The Russian strikes hit several locations across Ukraine, including close to Poland's border.

Just a day earlier, NATO intercepted three Russian fighter jets that flew into Estonia's airspace for 12 minutes. That's according to that country's foreign ministry.

Let's get some analysis now from CNN's senior military analyst and former NATO supreme allied commander, Admiral James Stavridis. He's also a partner at the investment firm, The Carlyle Group.

Admiral, always great to see you.

The Estonian prime minister says his country has requested NATO Article Four consultations after he described this violation as totally unacceptable.

We'd seen an Article Four just a week or so ago after some drones flew into Polish airspace, and intelligence officials are still trying to determine whether the Kremlin sent those intentionally or not.

What would these Article Four consultations you think entail? ADMIRAL JAMES STAVRIDIS, CNN SENIOR MILITARY ANALYST: First and

foremost, it's a total of 19 drones that flew into Poland, seems highly unlikely to me that's accidental. and certainly manned aircraft breaking NATO borders, as you just reported, is hard to see as anything other than intentional.

And I think there are reports also, Boris, of drones -- Russian drones over Romania. So that's three examples in the last five days.

The Article Four consultations will set up NATO's response to these continuing incursions. And it should.

Look, Putin is doing three things. He's trying to test the air defenses tactically, see how capable NATO is of responding.

Number two, he's trying to get NATO to say, well, maybe we shouldn't send all that air defense equipment to Ukraine because we got Russia banging on our door.

And thirdly, he's trying to create some divisions in the alliance as nations will have different reactions and different levels of response.

Generally, the further east you go, the closer you are to Russia, the more likely you are to want those Article Four consultations to say, let's put up a pretty stern response to Russia that goes beyond just a memo. Let's get some jets in the air and get ready for action.

SANCHEZ: You wrote in a piece -- an op-ed piece for Bloomberg this week that these brazen incursions demand a NATO response in the skies. What are you hoping to see?

STAVRIDIS: Number one, the alliance increase its air defense posture. They're doing that. It's going to be called Operation Eastern Sentry.

Number two, get our air defenses up along NATO borders and in NATO capitals, but also continue to strengthen the Ukrainians.

And third, tell Russia the next time one of your jets or drones fly over NATO airspace, we're going to shoot it down.

I think this demands a kinetic response. I recognize that has the risk of escalation, but we need to remember who the aggressor is here. It's Moscow, not Brussel.

[17:19:46]

SANCHEZ: I also wonder what happens if we don't see that kind of response and we continue sort of plodding along as we have for not just weeks, but months. I mean, there was talk that there would be a bilateral meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and that has not yet come to fruition.

But now for months, there's been this promise from the White House that there would be some more forceful response. And we just haven't seen it. So what happens with that one? STAVRIDIS: We have got to see Washington link its arms with Brussel

and do two big things, Boris.

One is give the Ukrainians more offensive weapons capability so they can use it not to go after Russian civilian targets, but rather go after the drone production facilities in Russia. Those are known targets and we ought to help the Ukrainians go after them.

And number two, even more importantly, and this is where Washington and Brussel need to be on the same sheet of music. We need economic sanctions against those nations who are continuing to deal with Vladimir Putin.

And we ought to be confiscating Russian assets that are in Western banks that were confiscated three years ago when this whole thing started.

So we have cards to play. I think Washington, and specifically President Trump, needs to start playing those cards.

Last thought, I took heart when President Trump, quite correctly said, Putin, you've let us down. And I think it goes beyond letting us down at this point. Putin is condescending to us, pushing us, insulting us, flying jets over NATO countries. It's time to make a stronger response.

SANCHEZ: Admiral James Stavridis, thanks so much for sharing your point of view.

STAVRIDIS: You bet, Boris. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Thanks.

Coming up, it could be harder for you to go to get a COVID-19 vaccine shot this fall as a CDC panel makes changes that mean it may take longer and cost more to protect yourself from the virus.

[17:21:52]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We could see -- soon see some significant shifts in vaccine policy in the United States. A CDC advisory panel voted unanimously on Friday to remove the broad recommendation for COVID-19 vaccines.

That means that if you want the shot, you'll have to consult with a health care provider. The panel, though, did not go as far as requiring a prescription for the vaccine. It was the last vote in a two-day meeting, described as chaos by a former CDC official.

Let's get some expertise now with Dr. Paul Offit. He's the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Dr. Offit has also served as a member of the advisory committee on immunization practices to the CDC, more recently as an advisor to the FDA on vaccines. Dr. Offit, thanks so much for being with us. The result of this

potentially could mean a patchwork of access to vaccines from state to state, right?

DR. PAUL OFFIT, DIRECTOR, VACCINE EDUCATION CENTER, CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: It's confusing. You have, on the one hand, the Food and Drug Administration has licensed the mRNA COVID vaccines for everyone who wants it over 65 and anybody less than 65 who's in a high-risk group.

The CDC advisory committee then turns around and basically says, pretty much anybody can get it but they don't really recommend it. That you have to talk to your -- have shared clinical decision making with your clinician.

And what they didn't do and what they should have done is what every other country does is say the purpose of this vaccine is to keep you out of the hospital and out of the intensive care unit.

So who's getting hospitalized? Who are those hundreds of thousands of people who are getting hospitalized in this country every year? And who are those tens of thousands of people who are dying every year?

Primarily, they fall into four groups: women who are pregnant, people who are immunocompromised, people who have high risk medical conditions like chronic lung or heart disease, and the elderly.

That's what every other country does. And the reason is, is that every other country has an advisory committee that consists of experts.

Currently, our advisory committee for immunization practices are hired by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and they look like him, which is to say, they're science denialists and anti-vaccine activists.

SANCHEZ: I wonder what you think it signifies that the panel's chair had to break a tie, voting no on the question of requiring a prescription for COVID vaccinations.

DR. OFFIT: That would have been disastrous. First of all, not everybody can easily get an appointment with a physician, and so that would have dramatically lessened the ability to get this vaccine, which already is confusing.

And I think what you're going to see is you're going to see more COVID and more deaths unnecessarily from COVID because of this committee which is not serving us well.

SANCHEZ: On Hepatitis B, the panel had been considering throwing out the universal birth dose recommendation. But they ended up voting to delay the decision. What do you see as the potential impacts there?

DR. OFFIT: Right. So if you have Hepatitis B as a -- as a mother and you are prenatally-screened to find that usually in the first trimester, then then we -- you need to get a Hepatitis B vaccine at birth. And the reason is, is that if you get Hepatitis B as an adult, you

have a 5 percent chance of going on to develop cirrhosis, which is chronic liver disease or liver cancer. If you get Hepatitis B as a baby, as a less than 12-month-old, you have a 90 percent chance of going on to develop cirrhosis and liver cancer. That's why that birth dose is so important.

DR. OFFIT: Also, first of all, the screening test isn't perfect. You can have so-called false negative or falsely reassuring results.

Secondly, you can still get Hepatitis B in your second or third trimester.

And then lastly, and most importantly, one half of the children less than ten in this country who get Hepatitis B were getting it from sources other than their mother.

[17:30:06]

They were coming in contact with people who have chronic Hepatitis B. And you can share items like towels or washcloths or toothbrushes, and that's how they would get it.

And before the Hepatitis B birth dose, 15,000 children less than 10 years of age, will get Hepatitis B from sources other than their mother. That's why we needed the birth dose. And if they loosen that, make it one month, two months, three months of age, then they are -- they are putting children at risk, and they are -- they are doing that because they say, well, other countries do it at 2 months of age, for example.

But other countries don't have the -- our inability to do prenatal screening to the degree that we do.

SANCHEZ: I also wonder, overall, what your reaction is for parents, what should they take away from these decisions? How important is it that they communicate with a primary care doctor now?

OFFIT: It's important, but I think the primary care doctor will know where to look that there are states that are forming their own advisory committees which will then give best medical practices, which will be insurable. And I think that the American Academy of Pediatrics has certainly stood up for children and making sure that the insurance companies cover, again, what are best medical practices.

So, I think we're going to get through this. But right now, every time people watch this current Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, you just hold your breath to see what damaging information they are about to come up with next.

SANCHEZ: Lastly, I just wonder where you think this is headed. I mean, you said you sort of want to cover your eyes and avert the possibilities. But what are they? If you could outline them for us.

OFFIT: I think What scares me is that they would alter the vaccine, immunization -- the vaccine confirmation, no, sorry. What altered -- what worries me is that they would, in any way, affect the vaccine for children's program, because that's a program that pays for uninsured or underinsured children. It pays for vaccines for about 35 million children.

If they start to alter that and that these children can't get vaccinated, then I think we're going to see things being even worse than they are now, where we're seeing outbreaks of measles and then 270 deaths in children from influenza this year, and 10 deaths from pertussis this year. So, it's getting bad, and I think it's going to get worse as it stands.

SANCHEZ: I hate to hear that. Dr. Paul Offit, thanks so much.

OFFIT: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: On a much lighter note, some of the biggest names in rock and roll are lining up to take the stage tonight for Farm Aid's annual food and music festival. Farm Aid board members, Willie Nelson, Neil Young, John Mellencamp, and more are performing as they stand with and celebrate the local farmers that are out growing healthy food.

CNN's John Berman joins us now live from Minneapolis. John has his Farm Aid 40 shirt on. I was half expecting to see that American flag cowboy hat that you've been known to sport at these events. Tell us about what you are hearing there.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: I got to say, the vibe here is just awesome right now. Everyone just smiling and singing and dancing. This has been going on for hours. It's going to go late into the night. You talked about some of the acts that will be performing. You know, Willie Nelson, John Mellencamp, Neil Young. We heard Wynonna Judd before.

On stage right now is Nathaniel Rateliff. He's just got this place rocking back and forth. We are going to talk to him live tonight as part of CNN special coverage of this really unbelievable event. And I've talked to so many people here in the crowd who've been to four mains before. They keep asking me, hey, is this your first concert? I'm like, yes, it's my first time here. But some of them have been here, you know, five, 10. I met one guy who's been here 16 times.

The performer just before Nathaniel Rateliff, Steve Earle, said he watched the first fly -- Farm Aid concert on T.V. back in 1985. I remember watching that too.

He said, two years after that, Boris, he was on stage singing. It's something that's inspired him so much over the years, because everyone here is here for the music, but they are also here for a cause. They are here to help family farmers who struggle through so much. You know, farm bankruptcies rose 55 percent last year, and so many of these farms need our help. Everyone can watch this concert with us tonight. You can dial the number, you can scan the Q.R. code, which we'll give you, and you can donate to this truly, truly amazing cause.

They are doing so much good work here. They have raised $87 billion over the last 40 years. Boris. SANCHEZ: That is impressive, and it all starts in about an hour and a half. So, stay tuned for that. John Berman, live from Farm Aid. Thanks so much, John.

We are joined now by presidential historian Douglas Brinkley for more perspective. Because Doug, you recently sat down with Bob Dylan, interviewing him for an upcoming book that you're writing. And he spoke with you about why he is so drawn to events like Farm Aid.

[07:35:07]

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Well, we spoke in an interview about Willie Nelson, and he's been touring all summer with him. I saw them on July 4th in Austin, Texas. And the fact that Willie Nelson's in his 90s and performing, and Bob Dylan's 84, inspires Dylan to see Willie out there hitting the road the old-style way, like a great blues musician that never quits until they drop, you know, they keep on going.

And Dylan's been doing incredible tours around the country. And he is the one who initiate, he is one of the -- he is the ideas guys behind Farm Aid because, as you know, in 1985 Live Aid, Dylan was a closer there with all these big stars from Bono on down, and at the end of it, line, it was Dylan walking out with Ron Wood and Keith Richards. Some people thought it was a shaky performance. It's fun to watch. But Dylan said, why is all the money just going to Ethiopia? Can't we put some money for American farmers to pay their mortgage debts and then their foreclosures.

And so, Dylan, John Mellencamp, Willie Nelson, and others have been fighting for the American farmers, the small farms of America, ever since. And the concerts are always amazing. But to get to see Dylan with Willie and Neil Young, and John Mellencamp tonight is -- it's one for the history books, and it's in Bob Dylan's home state of Minnesota.

SANCHEZ: Yes, that's notable. Fast forward to today, farmers are obviously feeling a lot of strain, and we were talking to Bill Weir earlier about all of the issues that they're facing, not only immigration crackdowns, but also climate change, tariffs, especially on things like soybeans, high interest rates. Overall, the economy tough for small farms. Can you share with us what this does Farm Aid, not only from a financial perspective, but also just getting awareness out there.

BRINKLEY: Well, because the -- small American farms are iconic, it's actually even though the definition of Americana, and, you know, Neil Young's been complaining about GMOs or chemicals put into coffees, there is worried of just big soybean and big corn just flattening lands of places like Illinois and shutting down the small farmers, it's like the mom-and-pop farmers. So, you can't live a rural life with dignity, because you're being big footed from every side.

And it is just a -- all, you know, the fact of the matter is, you know, Texas State University has the Farm Aid papers and archives, and we go through them and see the letters, and they have a hotline at Farm Aid to call farmers in need, because, after all, we can't predict droughts, we can't predict climate change.

President Trump's just said no to wind power. Well, that will affect people that are -- wind in western Iowa, you know, on their land, to diversify what they are doing. And so, it's a -- it brings pride to American farmers what Willie Nelson and Dylan and the gang have been doing to keep the plight of the American farmer in our consciousness.

SANCHEZ: I wonder what else Dylan might have shared with you about the moment as he sees it, not only for the American farmer, but overall.

BRINKLEY: You know, Bob Dylan doesn't like to get involved with politics. He lets his song speak for himself, you know, but he played Farm Aid in 2023, did it with Tom Petty's backup band. Tom Petty used to be one of the original Farm Aid musketeers.

What Dylan also stands for is American manufacturing and the American people. You know, people got left behind in the -- in the 90s or even in the 70s. Meaning, you know, we talk about the Rust Belt towns of Cicero, Illinois or Gary, Indiana. What happened to those towns?

But at the same time, what happened to all those small towns, let's say, along old Route 66 from Chicago to Santa Monica. And Dylan paints those old motels or old landscapes as a hobby. And then, he wrote a key song -- co-wrote. The only song Dylan co-wrote with Willie Nelson is a song called Heartland. And it's, you know, it's about the travesty going over the heart of America and agriculture.

And I recommend people pull it up and listen to Dylan and Willie's Heartland. They also did a version of the great Townes Van Zandt song, Pancho and Lefty together, and they've been a long-time friends Dylan and Willie Nelson. And John Mellencamp, unbeknownst a lot of people is one of Bob's closest friends. They have easy shorthand together.

And so, it's -- and Neil Young is -- can be anarchistic and on his own page a lot, he's been rampaging about, you know, various things, but he is on top form. You never disappointed at a Neil Young performance.

[17:40:02]

SANCHEZ: Yes, we'll see if we hear Heartland, potentially tonight. Douglas Brinkley, thanks so much for joining us.

BRINKLEY: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: So, Jimmy Kimmel show getting pulled has been met with both cheers and condemnation, with some raising concerns about how this could be a slippery slope.

We are going to speak with the president of the world's largest musician's union next about what it could mean for the arts as a whole.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:45:01] SANCHEZ: There are growing concerns about First Amendment protections after "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" was pulled from the air following his comments about Charlie Kirk and President Trump. You might imagine reactions from lawmakers are mostly split along party lines.

We want to discuss with Tino Gagliardi, he is the president of the American Federation of Musicians, a labor union that represents thousands of musicians in T.V. and film, including musicians in Hollywood who work on Kimmel's show.

Tino, thank you so much for being with us. How are these artists feeling about the suspension of the Kimmel show?

TINO GAGLIARDI, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF MUSICIANS: Well, first of all, thank you for giving the opportunity to meet with you today. It's important that our voice be heard, because that seems to be the problem that we are having right now, and the control of artistic expression is a real problem for us. That goes hand in hand with the freedom of speech.

SANCHEZ: I wonder if you have heard from the folks working on Kimmel's show, how they are feeling, whether they are hopeful that it gets back on the air.

GAGLIARDI: I think we're all hopeful that it gets back on the air. I have reached out to Cleto and the Cletones to let them know that the full resources of the AFM are behind them, to help them in this very difficult time.

I think it's important to note that in addition to the six musicians that are the house band for Jimmy Kimmel, there is also other musicians that perform on a semi regular basis to help support the performance for Jimmy Kimmel's band.

And, you know, that can reach -- the issue that I have, of course, is that, you know, first of all, these musicians are now out of work. You know, they were in the third week of a 13-week cycle.

And now, in addition to all the other musicians that would be brought in as side musicians, they are all out of work. And in 2024 alone, that represented $1.2 billion in both direct and residual wages.

And we're talking about working families.

SANCHEZ: What would it mean more broadly, for comedy, for the arts, if ABC moves forward with canceling "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" for good?

GAGLIARDI: Well, such as ABC. I mean, when you have a federal agency that is silencing or putting pressure on an outside corporate entity like ABC, then, you know, it's hard to blame the network when we're dealing with a situation where it's state censorship, and that's what, where I really think we have a big problem in this country right now.

SANCHEZ: What is your message to the FCC chair, Brendan Carr?

GAGLIARDI: I would say, we have to allow the artistic expression of the folks that have that opinion, whether it's on -- whatever side of the aisle they're on. It seems really inappropriate for me. That because the FCC didn't like what was said by a particular performer, that he's going to shut down the production altogether.

I've heard a lot of stuff about, you know, the ratings report and all that stuff. He was the second highest rate getter for late night television. So, it's a bit frustrating for all of us. And I think it's, you know, it's a canary in the coal mine here. We really need to be looking at what's going on in this country right now.

SANCHEZ: Tino Gagliardi, thank you so much for the perspective.

GAGLIARDI: Thank you.

Don't forget there is an all-new episode coming your way of "THE WHOLE STORY WITH ANDERSON COOPER" tomorrow. Sara Sidner introduces us to the black and white sides of an old-fashioned southern family united by a dark secret. You can catch "THE WHOLE STORY", Sunday night at 10:00 Eastern, only on CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:53:21]

SANCHEZ: This week, CNN hero is an Indiana woman helping inmates improve their lives through creative writing. Meet Deborah Devine.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DEVORAH DEVINE, FORMER CRIME REPORTER: But when Sheriff SWAT team members arrived at the home, no one was found inside.

I was a television news reporter, and I covered crime. I didn't really understand humanity as I should have as a young reporter in my early 20s. It wasn't until much later that the faces had stories and had names.

I decided to volunteer in a prison because I was always inquisitive and curious about their stories.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is one more in mind that --

DEVINE: I saw the raw talent, and that's what led me to create this 12-week creative writing curriculum.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was convicted of dealing in a narcotic and dealing marijuana. I pretty much grew up on the streets. I lost my mother, my father, my sister and my brother, and came to a crossroads and had to make decision whether I was going to use that as fuel to do better.

DEVINE: Thank you for sharing that. Yes, I know that was heartfelt.

We never excuse what they have done. In fact, a lot of them write about their remorse. We are just giving them a sacred space where they can let their shoulders down. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Eventually, though, I began to confront my grief with a clear mind and an open heart, accepting the fact that no matter what I did or who I hurt, nothing was going to bring my brother back from the dead.

I look forward to my Friday afternoons more than most days, people just let their souls bleed out of their pens onto that paper.

[17:55:04]

And for two hours a day, everyone can just truly be themselves, and we are like a little small-knit family here. I plan on going into college and majoring in psychology when I get out, so, I feel like this is a huge step towards that.

DEVINE: It's going to make me tear up. We'll end on that one. That was really powerful.

Some people would think it's a lock them up and throw away the key.

If a lot of these prisoners are going to be released, then why not use writing as a tool to become better in the space that you're in?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: To learn more about Deborah's inspiring work, go to cnn.com/heroes.

Still ahead, President Trump will be among more than a hundred thousand people expected to attend a memorial for Charlie Kirk. CNN's new reporting on how the president plans to use his prepared remarks, when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)