Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

After Comey, Trump Targeting Other Political Adversaries; Humberto Now A Category 5 While Tropical System Nears Southeast; Netanyahu Rejects Criticism Of Israel's War In Gaza At The U.N.; CNN Poll Takes A Deep Dive Into Different Types Of Independents; Hegseth Shuts Down Group Advising On Women In The Military; U.S. Team Facing Uphill Battle Vs Europeans; "The United States Vs Harvard" Airs Sunday At 10PM. ET/PT. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired September 27, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:01:19]

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jessica Dean here in New York.

And tonight, President Trump continuing to use the weight of the presidency to target his adversaries. The President pressuring another public company to fire a perceived enemy. He is calling on Microsoft now to fire its President of Global Affairs, Lisa Monaco, who served as Deputy Attorney General under President Biden, and in the government, "The New York Times" is reporting the Justice Department has now issued a subpoena for the travel records of Fani Willis, the Georgia District Attorney who charged President Trump in a sweeping election interference case.

And of course, this caps off a week that saw the indictment of former FBI chief James Comey and repeated attacks on late night host, Jimmy Kimmel. Let's bring in CNN's Kevin Liptak from The White House.

Kevin, what more are you learning as we are watching the broader picture of the President going after his perceived adversaries here?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Right, and it seems as if the list is growing by the day of these names that the President seems to be wanting to exact some retribution against. You mentioned Lisa Monaco there. The President's gripes seem to be centered on her time as the Deputy Attorney General in the Biden administration, that is when a Special Counsel was investigating President Trump's role in trying to overthrow the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents.

Those investigations sort of at the center of the President's retribution campaign. Today, he is listing a different name, the former FBI Director, Christopher Wray. The President suggesting without any evidence that Wray may have misled Congress in describing the FBI's role in the January 6th riots.

And so, you see, the President sort of every day adding new names to this potential list, and I think it just goes to show how unbound the President feels in all of this. You know, he made retribution a center of last year's presidential campaign. He has kind of made it the center of his presidency. He has stacked the Justice Department's upper levels with loyalists. He has received virtually no pushback on this from Congress over the Supreme Court, and it is all kind of culminating in these efforts to go after his perceived political enemies.

You know, aside from James Comey, he also berated Pam Bondi, the Attorney General, just a week ago, for not bringing cases against Adam Schiff, the Democratic senator, against Letitia James, the New York Attorney General, for their role in investigating him during his time out of office.

You know, yesterday on the South Lawn, I asked the President who might be up next in this retribution campaign, and he said, no, there wasn't a list, but that he did hope that there would be others. He claimed that this was about justice, not revenge, but it was pretty interesting what he said after that, that they did it to me for four years, essentially saying that because in his view, they weaponized the justice system, that this was his turn now to sort of repay that in kind -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right, Kevin Liptak with the latest reporting there from The White House, thank you for that.

Let's talk further about this with Shelby Talcott, White House correspondent for Semafor.

Shelby, thanks so much for being here on a Saturday evening. It is good to see you.

The former National Security adviser from Trump's first term, Michael Flynn, wrote on X: "Comey is the first domino to fall. Others must fall faster now!" And it just kind of gives us a window into the thinking in some of the people in MAGA world. What do you think we are going to see happen over the next weeks? Months?

SHELBY TALCOTT, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, SEMAFOR: I mean, I wouldn't be surprised. The President himself sort of alluded to it for other people to face indictments, whether that is John Bolton is already under investigation. We are seeing Letitia James has been named by the President.

There is a whole list of names that are either people already being investigated or people that the president has mentioned, he wants looked into.

[18:05:20]

And so it should not be surprising to anybody if this continues and we see more potential indictments against some of these people, and I do think it is notable that is something that Kevin alluded to, this is all the overarching theme of this stems back to how the President feels he has been treated over the past few years. It is something he talked a lot about on the campaign trail, it is something he has repeated since becoming President again, and it is sort of tying this all together into what you're seeing happen now.

DEAN: And so take us behind-the-scenes, the reporting that you're doing as to the thinking for his team around him as to how they move forward with all of this.

What is that like?

TALCOTT: Well, listen, I think, the administration, when I talked to administration officials, say if these people broke the law, they will be prosecuted for that, right? It is an open question. We will see with some of these indictments whether or not that pans out.

But at the same time, there is certainly no love lost as you, as you just said with Christopher Wray, there is no love lost for these people, and so the administration is openly cheering for these indictments, and there -- I think it is also notable that Kevin is right, this administration is filled with loyalists. That's intentional.

I remember talking to people on the campaign trail and during the transition team, and one of the big things that this administration really tried to do was make sure that people were coming on board, that were on board with the president's agenda. It was something that he regretted in his first term, hiring people that he didn't know as well, who ended up blocking him.

You're not seeing that this time around, whether it's at the FBI, whether it is at the DOJ, or whether it is closer to home at The White House.

DEAN: Yes, and so to that point, for all of the people who watched this week and were concerned about what this might mean for the justice system in America and what this means going forward, there are a lot of people in his world that you're describing loyalists, but also people who would identify as being in the MAGA world or conservatives that this was promised to, and they see this as making good on promises.

TALCOTT: Right. They see it as making good on promises, and they also argue again that their belief that this happened to Trump, right, so that there is a precedent for this sort of thing to be happening and that sort of the mentality that I think Trump allies and his supporters are basing all of this off of, and that's important to note as we sort of continue onward and as things sort of progress and maybe more indictments fall with other individuals.

DEAN: Yes, I also want to ask you about the government shutdown. We are just days away now from that deadline. Republicans, of course, control both chambers of Congress, but the GOP is going to need some Democratic help to keep the government funded. Democrats are signaling that unlike last time, earlier this year, that maybe they will put up a fight, that they will be willing to shut down the government. What are you hearing?

TALCOTT: Well, there are two sides to this, right? Democrats argue that if the government shuts down, The White House is going to be blamed because Republicans, of course, control all three levers right now, and so they are saying you're the majority, and so you are going to be blamed by the American public.

When I talk to White House officials, they argue that that's not going to happen. I just spoke with a senior White House official the other day who said that the aggressors ultimately blamed by the American public for a shutdown and argued that Democrats are the aggressor because Republicans have put down a clear proposal.

And so it really is going to be an interesting test to see who does get blamed if the government does shut down, and I think it is going to be an insight into what might happen in the midterms.

DEAN: All right, Shelby Talcott, always good to see you. Thank you. We appreciate it.

TALCOTT: Thanks. Yep.

DEAN: Hurricane Humberto gaining strength tonight. It is now a Category 5 hurricane. It is the second Category 5 of the season. Humberto could also impact the path of another tropical system that's churning in the Caribbean. Let's bring in Chris Warren.

Chris, what should people know about these systems right now?

CHRIS WARREN, METEOROLOGIST: Jessica, the main thing is the one without the name is the one that needs to be watched. Now, Humberto is impressive now a Category 5 hurricane, a very obvious eye right there. Almost a perfect circle, 160 mile an hour winds, gusts up to 195 miles an hour, but this one, soon to be Imelda either late tonight or by tomorrow, expected to be a tropical storm going to move over the Bahamas, where there are tropical storm warnings. Tropical storm conditions expected there with heavy rain, strong gusty winds.

If it gets close enough to Florida, could see tropical storm conditions there as well. But today is Saturday.

[18:10:10]

It is going to take until Monday down here, then Tuesday and Wednesday for it to go by South Carolina. So slow moving systems can transport a lot of moisture from the tropics up in here into the southeast.

So the track is going to be very important. It is possible for more than a day, there could be a Category 1 hurricane spinning off of the Georgia and South Carolina Coast, depending on which track it takes.

A lot of the forecast models today not all, but a lot, have been taking it away from land, and of course, Humberto, as it remains strong, will continue to move off. And the fact that it is strong and it is going to be close to what will be Imelda now, tropical depression nine could help tug it away from the coast.

Now, if it doesn't completely get it away from the coast, it could linger out there. So everything is still on the table. Still possibly could move onshore, could stall and hang out for even longer, or go off out to sea. But Jessica, bottom line too soon to say exactly what is going to happen. We've got days to go.

DEAN: All right, Chris, thank you so much. I know you'll keep an eye on that for us.

Still to come this evening, the Trump administrations peace plan for Gaza is taking shape as President Trump signals optimism about a peace deal. But Israel's Prime Minister vowing to continue the war until Hamas is destroyed as other leaders urge him to reject the plan.

Plus, how a new move by The Pentagon could hurt decades of work integrating women into the military and more.

And more voters are shunning the two-party system. They are calling themselves Independents. But even among that group, there is a wide spectrum of thoughts and views. We are going to dig into that. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:16:28]

DEAN: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday will head to The White House after a defiant speech in front of the United Nations General Assembly.

One item will be on the agenda, and that will be -- or one item that will be on the agenda, rather will be the Trump administration's proposed 21-point Gaza peace plan. Sources telling CNN that plan calls for all hostages to be released within 48 hours of a deal, and lays out a roadmap for Gaza after the war.

I want to bring in CNN political and global affairs analyst, Barak Ravid. He is also a correspondent for AXIOS.

Barak, thank you so much for being here.

I know you have had a busy week. You were at the U.N. yesterday for the Prime Minister's speech. What was your sense of how his message was received and where things stand now.

BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL AND FOREIGN POLICY ANALYST: Hi, Jessica.

I think the most interesting thing in Netanyahu's speech was the fact that he did not refer at all to President Trump's plan for ending the war in Gaza. He did not say a word, not against it, not for it.

He completely ignored it. When I think a lot of people wanted to hear if he is going to lay out any response to the plan or he will talk about it in any way, but he decided to ignore it.

I think the speech itself was mostly for domestic consumption. I don't think Netanyahu, wanted to really convince anybody from those who were in the room. Most of the delegates left the room at the beginning in protest, and I think the speech as a whole wasn't that significant. It is far less significant than the negotiations that are taking place right now about the deal for ending the war. DEAN: And so, you note that he didn't speak of this peace plan one way or the other. What are you hearing about the thinking around this proposed peace plan, both from the Israelis? Whether the Hamas negotiators would be open to this and kind of where the U.S. is in all of this.

RAVID: So obviously, I think President Trump and his team want to end the war. This is very clear. They have very little patience left for delays on this plan. I think they think they think that this 21-point plan creates a basis for ending the war.

I think they managed to mobilize a lot of support in the Arab world, in the international community, but and it is a big but, Netanyahu is going to come to The White House on Monday, and in many meetings, previous meetings and previous phone calls Netanyahu had with Trump, Trump came in to the meeting or started the phone call wanting to or stressing a certain position and left the meeting or the phone call stressing another position which was much closer to that of Netanyahu.

So I think the question is whether President Trump is going to really put his foot down and say Mr. Netanyahu, that is it, you need to end the war and now is not the time for arguments, or Netanyahu will come in, lay out his position to President Trump, and President Trump will come out of the meeting and say, you know what? I agree with Mr. Netanyahu. That's the one big question mark.

Everything else. I think the details of the plan are I am not saying they're not important, but the most important thing is how firm is Trump going to be with Netanyahu in that meeting?

[18:20:11]

DEAN: And I think you're right and that seems to be the thing that's going to dictate where this goes from here is what does prime Minister Netanyahu think he can get? And does he think he can push Trump and convince him to be more in alignment with him, or does the President -- can he hold on to what he actually wants to achieve?

What do you know about kind of as Netanyahu prepares for this, what are their -- what is the Israeli thinking -- the Israeli government thinking, or the Prime Minister's teams thinking around going into this meeting?

RAVID: Well, I think it is basically Netanyahu himself. I don't think, people around him have a lot of influence on his thinking. A lot of it is about domestic politics, whether he thinks that going for that deal right now will serve as political interest.

In many ways, Netanyahu's dilemma, and I heard it from both Israeli officials and U.S. officials, his dilemma now is, he is in this fork in the road, and he needs to choose whether he wants to go with Donald Trump or he wants to go with his ultra-nationalist coalition partners.

Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir. Those are very different choices. In the past, when Joe Biden was the President, Netanyahu chose, many times to go with Ben-Gvir and Smotrich and not with the President of the United States.

Now the question is whether Netanyahu will pick Trump this time, I think that if Netanyahu goes to that meeting on Monday, and it ends without a deal and without him convincing Trump to back him, this could be a very, very serious crisis between Israel and the United States.

DEAN: Yes, it is very interesting to think of it that way, and to your point about where this fork in the road that Netanyahu -- where he is, Trump says he spoke to the Prime Minister Friday, and in Trump's words, he said that he will not allow Israel to annex the West Bank, which, of course, the far right members of his government very much are in support of, that seems like a key issue that really underscores and highlights exactly the fork in the road that you're talking about.

RAVID: Yes, definitely, and I think that when there were a lot of people, including Netanyahu himself, including his confidant, Ron Dermer, that said, oh, it is not going to be a problem. We will convince Trump to give us a greenlight for some kind of annexation in the West Bank, maybe not the whole West Bank, maybe just small parts will also convince the UAE to be okay with it. We will manage to do something.

And I think that in the last week, it became clear both the Arab world, especially the United Arab Emirates, that made it clear that annexation, any kind of annexation, is a red line and President Trump went publicly -- went out publicly and said, I will not allow it, I think that took this thing off the table.

For Netanyahu to do this now, it will be, a direct confrontation with President Trump and I really don't think that Netanyahu will go down that road. I don't see that, but when it comes to Trump, I think we have a historic record already and we saw that in the Trump wanted to end the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, and he was willing to confront Netanyahu on this thing, and he forced him to turn back the Israeli jets who were on their way for another strike in Tehran and he forced him into this ceasefire and it was a huge success for President Trump.

And he saw how that he has leverage over Netanyahu, that he can force him into ceasefires and I think that the question is whether Trump is going to be the Donald Trump of the 12-day war that forces a ceasefire on Netanyahu or the Donald Trump of the last eight months that has more or less backed Netanyahu on anything he wanted to do in Gaza.

DEAN: It will be quite interesting to see.

Barak Ravid, always good to have you. Thank you so much.

RAVID: Thank you.

DEAN: Still ahead, more and more voters are identifying as Independents, the traditional swing voter may be a thing of the past. Longtime pollster Frank Luntz will join us next to take us through the newest numbers and what they might be able to tell us about the 2026 midterms.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:29:19]

DEAN: They are some of the most coveted voters in American politics, Independents, but the notion of a classic swing voter could be a thing of the past. Well, today, more Americans identify as Independents than Republicans or Democrats.

In a new CNN poll, we broke those people down into some key subgroups. There is the lookalikes, which may reject the party label, but still align on a lot of issues. There is the disappointed middle, the upbeat outsiders, what we would traditionally think of as a swing voter.

And finally, the checkout, who are largely uninterested in politics. Let's bring in pollster and communications strategist Frank Luntz.

Frank, always good to have you, especially on a Saturday night. Thanks for being here with us. We kind of toss around independent voter. It was great and interesting to see how in our polling we were able to kind of begin to kind of put people into different pockets and make more sense of this. Tell me more about how you think of an independent voter and what you got from this information.

[18:30:20]

FRANK LUNTZ, POLLSTER AND COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIST: Well, I love that checked out column.

DEAN: Yes, because those are the unaffiliated. They really don't care. They're not following the news and not engaged. And they typically do not vote in elections. So, they're less important. The ones that matter most are those who are rejecting both the Republicans and the Democrats. They're truly independent because they're independent of both sides.

And I note that so many people describe themselves as independent. But I have to warn you and warn viewers. Most people who call themselves independent still have a preference. They will say independent because it sounds good. They think it sounds good. But in reality, the chosen sides and the percent that haven't chosen sides, the percent that actually goes and swings between one party and another in my work is down to about 10 percent. And that's problematic because that means that everybody's already made up their minds before they turn on the TV, before they collect their news and most importantly, before they vote.

DEAN: As we're looking at these numbers, knowing what you've just described, why then do you think, as you even said, they think it sounds better to say independent? Why do you think we're at a moment where so many voters are rejecting the title or the identification with either party? LUNTZ: It's a great question. It's because it goes with some baggage

that I can give you three or four reasons why people don't want to be labeled a Democrat and the same thing for the Republicans. And by being independent, they sound sophisticated. By saying that they're independent, people will spend time with them and try to win them over to their side. The truth is they've already chosen that side. And the fact is that we are becoming more ideological, more polarized with every passing month. And you can see it in the government shutdown. You can see it in the Big, Beautiful Bill that Americans are saying to Washington in particular, enough is enough.

DEAN: We also, in our poll, find most people think that America's best days are behind us. Forty-six percent say they're ahead of us. Fifty- four percent say they're behind us. Does that match what you're hearing out there?

LUNTZ: Yes, it does. And it could be even worse. And what they're saying is that the country that they were expecting to receive is not the country that they've gotten. And the most important aspect of this -- do you have a better life than your parents did when they were your age? Almost every American says yes. Will your kids have a better life than you when they get to be your age?

Almost everyone now says no. And that's the source. That's the core of this anger and frustration. That's the reason why people are so pessimistic, whether it's the environment or the economy or social services or government that doesn't seem to listen. We all have our different reasonings, but we all agree on one thing. We were to believe that America would get stronger, would get tougher, would get better. And we question whether it is right now. And there's a difference.

Republicans and Trump voters do believe that the best days are ahead of us. Democrats and leftists, liberals or progressives, do believe our worst days are behind us. This is a perfect question where there is a partisan chasm between the GOP and the Democrats.

DEAN: Yes, that's what I wanted to ask you. If it was -- if it did break down in what you're seeing on party line and if it's actually -- that our country has become so politicized that people are feeling this way, or if indeed people truly believe that the country is just not it's fallen short of what it's promised.

LUNTZ: It's all -- it's both of those.

DEAN: Yes.

LUNTZ: You're correct both ways. And the problem is, the public is looking for someone to say in a single word, all caps, exclamation point enough. Enough with this, enough. And if -- when -- if the government does shut down on Wednesday, both parties are going to get hurt. Donald Trump, his supporters are absolutely behind him, but his opponents are absolutely against him. There is no common ground anymore. There's no one in the center for this.

And I do believe that we're reaching a breaking point. And I warn viewers that at some point the public says enough about democracy. And I believe we're heading in that direction where they simply believe this is not solvable and there's no way to come together and that scares me.

DEAN: And so, knowing that, is there any solve for what you're describing there, for what scares you? Is there a way out of that?

LUNTZ: It will be an elected leader who says, I'm willing to listen. It'll be an elected leader who says, I don't have all the answers, but I have to ask -- throw it back to you. I don't think there's anyone like that.

[18:35:06]

Make no mistake, Donald Trump -- President Trump will benefit from his own people if the government does shut down. The Democrats will benefit from their own people if they are tough for the President. Both sides will win, but both sides will lose. And in the end, America loses.

DEAN: All right. Always interesting to get your take on this, Frank Luntz.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate it.

LUNTZ: Thank you for having me.

DEAN: Still to come, the Pentagon is scrapping a decades-old program dedicated to women in the military. And ahead, we're going to talk with a former Marine Corps pilot about the potential impact on National Security.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:21]

DEAN: The role of women in the U.S. military is facing another significant change. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has eliminated a decades old advisory group designed to support women in the military. Hegseth reposting the Pentagon announcement this week, writing, quote, "Gender neutral, color blind, merit based."

We are joined now by former Marine Corps helicopter pilot Kyleanne Hunter. She's also the CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

Kyleanne, and thank you so much for being here with us. I'm hoping you can first just explain the type of work that this now eliminated panel did and how it functioned.

KYLEANNE HUNTER, FORMER MARINE CORPS HELICOPTER PILOT: Yes, thank you so much for having me. The Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services or DACOWITS as it's known at was a group of civilians and they were made up of both veterans and non-veterans who worked to provide evidence-based recommendations to the secretary of defense on well-being and treatment, recruitment and retention and employment and integration of women into the military. This was a committee that was established in 1951 to better integrate and incorporate women into the military services and has been working across all administrations since then and has had over 96 percent of its recommendations adopted that have improved the military as a whole.

And so, when we talk about things like improving lethality, improving war fighting and improving merit-based promotion, and that is squarely the things that DACOWITS did.

DEAN: And the Defense Secretary posting in part gender neutral, color blind, that -- were two or some of his words, he said, posting this announcement that this would be terminated. What do you say to that gender neutral?

HUNTER: Well, so many of the things that DACOWITS did actually allowed for gender neutral merit-based promotions. For example, one of the big achievements that happened was removing gender designations from fitness reports or officer qualification records so that when individuals went up to promotions, nobody knew what their gender was, what their race was. They were solely being evaluated on their qualifications, on being able to meet the standards that they needed to be able to meet to do their job.

And so, when we talk about things like gender neutral and colorblind, those are the types of things that DACOWITS has been doing.

DEAN: And so that's what it was trying to do, was to put in -- it sounds like from what you're describing -- was to put into place, you know, evaluations that allowed for that.

HUNTER: Exactly. You know, if we know that there has historically been bias against women in promotion, and some of that is subconscious bias that exists. Some of that is conscious bias that might exist. Some of it might be due to thinking differently if an individual couldn't take a physical fitness test because they were recovering from a pregnancy or they were recovering from some different medical condition.

So, by removing those gendered markers from promotions, what DACOWITS was actually help ensure the absolute best people got into the jobs based on how they do the jobs that they were qualified to do to begin with.

DEAN: And so now that this is going to be gone, what are your thoughts on that? Are you concerned that there will be things that are missed? Do you think -- what kind of impact do you think that might have?

HUNTER: I think there's three big areas of impact that are concerning with the elimination of DACOWITS, is actually having a strong voice for the fastest growing group of people in the military that are now becoming veterans as well. You know, we talk about a lot of these big recruiting booms that we're seeing. It's in large part driven by women wanting to join the military.

And having an organization like DACOWITS ensures that the institution is prepared for their arrival, that we know that they can then go in and do their best in the qualifications that all already have gender neutral standards to them.

Number two is there's a real concern on what this means for recruitment overall. DACOWITS was a strong recruiting tool. We know that. We know that people joined the military because they saw it become a better place to work, right? The military is an employer of choice. And that's often because of the type of work that DACOWITS did.

[18:44:59]

But third, there's also concern just overall for what this means for military readiness. Several of DACOWITS recommendations, whether it was on protective equipment, whether it was on aviation equipment and the way that people were selected for pilot pipelines or even how aircraft were acquired, you know, those were recommendations that DACOWITS started and they improved the military for everyone. And so, there is a concern of what this is going to be for overall military readiness as well.

DEAN: All right, Kyleanne Hunter, thanks for that context around this. It really helps understand a little bit about what this is about. We really appreciate it.

HUNTER: Thank you so much.

DEAN: And it is Europe against the U.S. Next, we're going to take you to New York, where the Ryder Cup is pitting some of America's best golfers against their counterparts from across the pond.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:26]

The Ryder Cup is one of the biggest and most important events in all of golf. Unlike the four majors played each year, this one is played once every two years, and it's a team of players from the United States against a team of players from Europe. And what's considered proper golf decorum at most events is replaced by an atmosphere that's often a cross between a football game and maybe a frat party.

This year, the Ryder Cup is being played at Bethpage Black on Long Island outside New York City. Let's bring in CNN's Don Riddell. He's there. He joins us now.

Don, this three-day event was won by the Europeans in 2023. The Americans got off to a rough start yesterday. Where do things stand now?

DON RIDDELL, CNN ANCHOR: Well, I'm afraid to say for the American golf fans watching that things went from bad to worse today. And frankly, it's been an absolute disaster for the American team. It has been eventful and it has been emotional for some of the players, and tensions really bubbled to the surface in one of the groups between the 15th and 16th holes. Scottie Scheffler and Bryson DeChambeau really getting into it with Justin Rose and Tommy Fleetwood. It was a dispute that began when Rose was lining up one of his putts.

One of the American caddies kind of got in his way, and they were arguing for quite some time afterwards. And, you know, they kind of kissed and made up after the match which the Europeans had won. But that is just an example of how heated, testy and ugly this has been at times.

The European fans have been talking -- sorry, the European players have been talking about the treatment they have had from some of the fans here at Bethpage Black. Some of the insults have been incredibly personal and rude, and they've been speaking about that.

And it's a shame because all of that overshadows what has been an extraordinary performance by the European team. They currently lead by 11 and a half points to 4 and a half. That's a record lead in the Ryder Cup since the modern format began in 1979. It's going to be a coronation tomorrow this -- I mean, historically, no team has ever come back from more than four points down to win, and even then that's only happened twice. The Americans are seven points back. Two and a half tomorrow will clinch it for the Europeans to retain the trophy. Three points for them to win it outright.

And, you know, they have been incredible. The American team, on the other hand, it has been an absolute nightmare. And questions are already being asked of the captaincy of Keegan Bradley and some of the selections and the choices he's made. Clearly, things just haven't worked. There have been very, very few highlights for them. And the biggest disaster has been the world number one Scottie Scheffler, who has dominated world golf over the last four years, hasn't he? He's won four majors, an Olympic gold medal, 22 titles worldwide. He's the undisputed world number one, but he's lost all four matches that he's been involved in here so far. The first time that's happened to an American through their first four matches in the Ryder Cup.

So, I mean, they must just be thinking, what on earth can we do? If the world number one player is so utterly toothless in this event, then what hope does any other American player have? So ...

DEAN: Yes.

RIDDELL: ... as I say, it's been a disaster. It's been an incredible sporting occasion. And if you like good golf, it's been great to see it because the Americans have been playing it, but not a great day for American golf at all, I'm afraid.

DEAN: Sounds like it. Don Riddell, thank you so much for that. We appreciate it.

Harvard has become ground zero in America's culture wars during President Trump's second term. His administration has launched multiple attacks on Harvard's funding, trying to pressure the school to get rid of all diversity initiatives when it comes to admitting students and hiring faculty. CNN's Omar Jimenez takes a detailed look at this week's edition of "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper," and here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voiceover): As Harvard's lawyers battled to restore more than $2 billion worth of federal funds for science, tuberculosis researcher Dr. Sarah Fortune was scrambling, along with other scientists at Harvard School of Public Health, to figure out how and if she could continue potentially lifesaving research.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. SARAH FORTUNE: TB is the leading infectious cause of death in the world. We are trying to understand drug resistance in TB. We're trying to understand immune protection from TB. And we're trying to understand how to diagnose TB better.

The contract that was cut was a seven-year contract, roughly worth $8 million a year. That funded a little work at Harvard, but probably 85 percent of the funding went to other institutions.

[18:55:04]

We are a consortium, actually, of 21 labs at 14 institutions. And that money just stopped. And for us, importantly, there were research animals that were supported on the grants, which is like a half a million dollars. We gave serious thought to euthanizing the animals. We luckily didn't have to do that, because a philanthropic donor step forward.

We should not have to count on philanthropic donors stepping forward to save research animals in a research system that is as sophisticated as the United States.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DEAN: Be sure to tune in. It's an all-new episode of "The Whole Story with Anderson Cooper: The United States vs Harvard." It airs tomorrow, Sunday, at 10 P.M. Eastern and Pacific, only here on CNN. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)