Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

U.S. Forces Successfully Rescued Airman In Iran; Trump Issues Profanity-Laced Threat To Iran; Hundreds Of Military And Intel Personnel Carry Out Daring Rescue; CNN Poll: Dems Have Advantage With Base Disapproving Of Trump; NASA Gives Briefing On Artemis II Mission. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired April 05, 2026 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:00]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

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

We are following breaking news tonight as President Donald Trump announces U.S. forces successfully rescued an airman shot down behind enemy lines in Iran. U.S. officials telling CNN that mission involved hundreds of American military and intelligence personnel as the officer evaded capture for more than a day, hiding alone in a mountain crevice.

The president taking to social media this morning to share that news and also to reiterate threats against Iran, announcing Tehran has until Tuesday to open the critical Strait of Hormuz.

Let's bring in CNN's Julia Benbrook, who joins us live from the White House now.

Julia, what more can you tell us about this incredible rescue mission? Let's start first with that.

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, President Donald Trump, he announced that this rescue mission was successful on social media. That was overnight. He said we got him. And he also said that this was one of the most daring rescue operations in the history of the United States. He said that he monitored it closely with other top officials, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, as well as the chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

And we are learning some more details about what it took and how complex this all was. It involved dozens of aircraft and hundreds of military personnel and intelligence personnel. We know that CIA operatives led a misinformation campaign in hopes of sending anyone looking to capture this missing service member in the wrong direction, but ultimately was successful.

The administration is celebrating that. They are relieved. And we do know that we're going to hear more from Trump tomorrow. He had announced that he will be speaking with the press on Monday at 1:00 p.m. Eastern. That's here at the White House. It was originally slated to be in the Oval Office. They now say that it's going to take place in the briefing room, which likely means that more reporters will have access and there will be more questions not only about this rescue mission, but on the overall Operation Epic Fury and where things stand right now.

DEAN: And he's also talking a lot about the Strait of Hormuz and this deadline. What more is he saying on that?

BENBROOK: He has repeatedly made this threat that he would target Iranian power facilities if they do not fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, that critical waterway where 20 percent of the world's oil typically passes through. His deadline here has shifted because he made this threat originally late last month, and it was a 48-hour deadline. Then he put that on pause for five days, extended it another 10.

He had been saying that the deadline was on Monday, and now it appears that he is making that deadline Tuesday. He had a post today on Easter morning, I might add, that I'm going to pull up for you with a warning that it is a bit jarring. There's a lot of profanity in this post, but I'll read it for you now. He said, quote, "Tuesday will be Power Plant Day and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one, in Iran. There will be nothing like it. Open the," and then he used profanity that I'm not going to read directly, but it's there on your screen, straight.

"You crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell. Just watch. Praise be to Allah." He then signed that post like he usually does, "Donald J. Trump." I will note that an Iranian senior official did respond to that ultimatum, saying that the strait would be opened only when Iran was fully compensated for financial damages during the conflict.

DEAN: All right, Julia Benbrook at the White House. Thank you for that reporting.

We are joined now by CNN's senior political and global affairs commentator, Rahm Emanuel, who previously served as U.S. ambassador to Japan and mayor of Chicago, among many other jobs.

But, Rahm, good to have you here with us.

RAHM EMANUEL, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Thanks.

DEAN: We have -- we've talked about Trump's post for the last several hours. I've read it in full many times. I'll put it up again so people can take a look at it. But a couple of things stick out. Obviously the language, but also where he says, "Praise be to Allah," you know, kind of a swipe at Islam as well. It feels like you have this post, we also have this kind of inflection point where he's threatening a real escalation in this war while these talks, these diplomatic talks are going on.

What is your sense of where we are in all of this right now?

EMANUEL: Well, Jessica, first of all, Happy Easter to you, your family. Obviously, the president's post is not in that spirit in any way. Two things I would say. We went in to destroy or degrade Iran's capability of getting a nuclear weapon. They found out in this process that they have a nuclear option. It's called closing the Strait of Hormuz. And you see this president like literally look like a toddler in a high chair banging his spoon with food all over his face, who has gone from peace to we're going to destroy your country. And he's all over the place because he got into something.

[19:05:06]

He started a war with no explanation of why. Fighting a war in which he can't define for anybody what victory looks like. And can't tell you how he's going to leave it. And so he's literally taking aim at everybody and anything in between. And I also think the second piece, I look at that obviously it's so unpresidential, doesn't go -- need to be discussed. It looks unhinged, feels unhinged, but also we have lost the ability to have strategic communication, which is essential to the Iranian people who don't trust their own government.

The president of the United States has missed every opportunity to address them in a way that would be strategically poignant in the same way that the Iranian government, what's left of it, communicates not only to the American people but to the world public opinion in a very smart, strategic way. And that is a component of this. And I think that the troops, the servicemen and women in all branches of the military, deserve a commander-in-chief who's going to give them air cover and use his tools wisely.

DEAN: Yes. I mean, to your point, with the Iranian people, at the very beginning of this, the president said, it's your time. You know, stand out -- stand up and take it back. And now there's been back and forth over whether regime change is an objective or not. But now we're also threatening to bomb infrastructure that would mean maybe they don't have power and other things like that.

So knowing all of that, obviously you worked as chief of staff during the Obama administration. You were part of an administration that handled Iran and negotiating with Iran. What would you do right now?

EMANUEL: Well, I think there's two things I would say. On the short term, rather than try to open up the Strait of Hormuz, I would say, you know, the alternative is it's close to everybody. It's either open to everybody or closed to everybody. The idea that we're fighting Iran, trying to degrade both their strategic capacities, and yet they get to sell more oil and are making more money than ever before without sanctions. Never has happened ever in American history. Ever.

And we've just given Russia an $80 billion gift and the price of oil and taking sanctions not only off of their oil industry, but also executives that I think are elements of the administration are having business discussions with. It's nuts.

Number two, on a longer term basis, Iran's whole theory is to push America out of the Gulf. We have 40,000 troops through Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia. I would take the Abraham Accords, which is a peace agreement between Israel and Gulf countries, and expand its definition. One, if you're part of the Abraham Accords, you get no tariffs. We eliminate them all. Two, if you're part of the Abraham Accords, you get first in line for weapons from the United States in the sense of get in front of the queue.

Third, the Abraham Accords is going to finance pipelines like Saudi Arabia has but for all the other Gulf countries to the Red Sea so the Strait of Hormuz never becomes a choke point again. So immediately open to everybody or closed everybody. So there's pain really felt in Iran. It's not like China and Iran get economic benefit from this while we're fighting, our men and women are risking their lives. Second, use the Abraham Accords and expand its definition so America doubles down in the region and is seen by our Gulf allies, who are now nervous about the relationship with the United States, that we are there to stay and to protect them.

That would be what I would do long term, short term. But I will say one other thing. Nobody can unring the bell that Donald Trump rang. That's the problem we're all in. We're in a fix of a president who can't define why, how, and when.

DEAN: And I do want to ask you about that last point and as it pertains to our allies, both in the Gulf and around the world. Many countries are facing an energy crisis due to the chokehold there in the strait. Obviously, you were ambassador to Japan for many years. They have been suffering from this as well. How is this war impacting our relationship with allies, and what is the importance of that I think to the American people who may be watching at home saying, yes, it also is impacting us in the sense that gas is more expensive, all of these things?

EMANUEL: Exactly.

DEAN: But what is it? Why does it matter that it's impacting our relationships around the world?

EMANUEL: Well, first of all, we never -- I mean, the president of United States never consulted any allies, never had any dialogue. As I said again, regardless of what your position on the war is, he could have said, I sat at the negotiating table for months trying to find a peaceful way to resolve this, and the American word is worth defending. And every president before me has given that word. He even lost a political opportunity to raise the level of what we were about to do.

Now, Japan, Korea, other countries in the Indo-Pacific, specifically, they have -- they import about 90 percent of their energy from that region. So not only weren't they consulted, their now economy is suffering because of this decision, and is going to suffer even worse because they are more dependent on that region for their oil and gas.

[19:10:12]

And this is going to come at a major, major impact. One other thing to give you a calculation, it didn't exactly on, Jessica, what you asked, but while we're all tied up with what's happening in the Gulf and the battle against Iran, China just announced in the sea of -- in the South China Sea, where the Philippines are, a treaty ally country for the United States, they're building a new fake island on the coral reefs there, showing that as we take our eye away from it, China is putting a stranglehold where 14 percent of the entire world's fish are caught and 40 percent of the entire world's seaborne GDP sails through.

So we're distracted. And they're literally -- they haven't done this in three years or five years put another island there, firming their control of the South China Sea, risking the Philippines, Vietnam, and other countries, and the whole world's economy where they're going to put a chokehold on it. And we have no response because all our assets, military wise, and our attention is in Iran and in the Gulf.

DEAN: All right, Rahm Emanuel, good to have you.

EMANUEL: Can I say one thing?

DEAN: Yes. Go ahead.

EMANUEL: Can I add one thing?

DEAN: Yes.

EMANUEL: I wanted to specifically to the army general that was fired. I want to thank the Army General George -- Randy George, who's been, I worked with him as ambassador. He is a true American hero and deserves all our praise for his selflessness, his sacrifice, and his service for this country and a career built to it. I want to thank you and your family for what you have done.

DEAN: All right, Rahm Emanuel, good to have you. Thank you.

EMANUEL: Thank you.

DEAN: Still to come here, President Trump's latest threats on Iran's critical infrastructure enters a legal gray area. We're going to talk to a former JAG lawyer about that. Plus, a look inside what it took for a U.S. airman to survive behind enemy lines after his fighter jet was shot down over Iran. And the Artemis II crew now less than 24 hours away from that lunar flyby. We're tracking the crew as they inch closer to the moon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:16:55]

DEAN: President Trump escalating his threats against Iran, vowing to hit the country's energy sites and infrastructure if a deal is not reached to open the Strait of Hormuz by Tuesday. These plants supply power for millions of civilians and would mark a significant escalation in the war.

And we're joined now by retired Army lieutenant colonel and former JAG lawyer Dan Maurer. He's now an assistant professor of law at Ohio Northern University.

Colonel Maurer, thanks so much for being here with us. We really appreciate it.

LT. COL. DAN MAURER (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Thank you. Good evening.

DEAN: From your perspective, what does the law say when it comes to attacks on targets like this, energy infrastructure?

MAURER: Right. So the first thing to know is that attacks on infrastructure are not per se war crimes. That's a common misperception. Infrastructure is often attacked and there are often legitimate military reasons for doing so. So a bridge could be fair game. Power plant could be fair game. Even a dam could be fair game.

The problem is, most of this is usually civilian infrastructure only used for civilian purposes. The general legal rule is that that is off limits. It's protected, cannot attack it. But when it is at the same time being used in a way that provides a contribution to the adversarial enemy's forces in some way, and by attacking it, we get a military advantage from it, it becomes a lawful military objective. But it has to meet those two prongs first.

And then even if you are able to legally attack it, because it makes an effective contribution to the enemy's military and because attacking it gives us an advantage, the attack we launched still has to be proportionate, which means the anticipated collateral harm, damage, that we would cause can't be excessive in relation to the concrete military advantage that we think we're going to get from it. That's a calculation that's hard to make.

There's no bright line, you know, rule that says if more than this, then disproportionate. It's a judgment call that commanders have to make. And because these targets, these kinds of targets are so high visibility, so high risk, there's so much at stake. That decision to strike those kinds of targets is usually held at a very, very high level of command. We're thinking, you know, four-star admirals and generals, if not withheld, to the secretary of defense or the president himself.

That's how important these strikes are and how dangerous it is, how close it is to committing a war crime if you don't do it right, and every single target has to have that analysis. It's not just a blanket. all bridges, all power plants, whatever. Every single potential target has to go through that analysis. And that's why we have JAGs on the staff of these commanders to help them think through those problems.

DEAN: Right. So those JAGs like your former job, you would sit with those commanders and walk them through essentially the particulars that you just, you know, the grand points that you just made, but the particulars in this situation to help them assess if that's the correct, that's a legal move or not. Right?

MAURER: That's right. And facts matter, as with everything in the law. Facts matter. And even if you can attack it under the circumstances, you still have to take feasible precautions to make sure that you are limiting collateral damage. That means you might have to adjust the time of day or night when you -- when you drop a bomb, if it's going to be a drop a bomb, you can change the angle of attack.

[19:20:06]

You can change where it strikes on the ground. You can change where, you know, detonate above ground or below ground. What kind of weapon is it going to be used? All these are factors that the command has at its discretion to mitigate the potential civilian harm. And that is the point, the primary point of the Geneva Conventions, the body of law of war that we signed back in 1949, along with every other civilized country that we're supposed to be following in this kind of war and any kind of conflict.

DEAN: And I'm curious where the line gets drawn between you take something like what we've seen Russia do with Ukraine's energy infrastructure and how they've gone about that. And then what Trump is suggesting and how those might be similar or different?

MAURER: Right. Well, one of the reasons we teach the law of war in these -- and rules of engagement that implement law of war to our soldiers and our airmen, our Marines, our pilots, our sailors, it's because we want reciprocity. We want our enemy to be treating our civilians with the care that we are treating their civilians. We want our prisoners of war, if they're captured, to be treated with respect and dignity according to Geneva Conventions. So we do that to them.

And if we see one party like Russia engaging in clear law of war violations and we don't condemn it, we look like we're advancing that, that idea that we're, that we're protecting it, that we're enforcing it by silence. And then when our leadership comes out with statements as blanket as we saw this morning that seem to make no distinction between military dual use kind of civilian objects and pure civilian objects, it seems like we're adopting the same kind of there are no rules in warfare kind of mentality and philosophy, and that is just not, one, the moral right answer and not the legal right answer.

And I have trust and confidence in the chain of command because they've been doing it for a quarter century now in the global war on terror, following the law of war, listening to the legal advice of their JAGs and obeying it, obeying the law of war because it is the right thing to do and it's pretty clear cut. We don't want to be creating war criminals in our ranks. So I'm hopeful. I'm confident. I'm hopeful that our senior commanders, if they are given the task and given the mission to start attacking various parts of the infrastructure.

We're not going to go Russian mode on it. We're going to take care and deliberate thinking and analysis of each and every possible target according to the laws of war.

DEAN: All right, Colonel Dan Maurer, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

MAURER: Thank you.

DEAN: Still ahead here in the CNN NEWSROOM, a former double agent familiar with military extractions joins us after the break to discuss the rescue of the airmen stranded in Iran.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:27:12]

DEAN: Talking more about the downed airman rescued from behind enemy lines in Iran after U.S. forces carried out that massive and risky mission to save him. We're joined now by former intelligence officer and host of Newsweek's "Unconventional," Naveed Jamali. He's also the author of "How to Catch a Russian Spy."

Naveed, it's great to have you here. Let's draw on your intelligence experience here and what role intelligence agencies and the intelligence community played in this situation.

NAVEED JAMALI, FORMER INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVE: Well, I think, Jessica, I mean, the first part is that they're going to do what's known as ISR, which is literally looking over the battlefield, helping find the downed pilot, find the downed crewman all the way up to there's been reports of the CIA launching a deception operation to fool the Iranians as to where the actual operation was happening.

So full spectrum, it is something that is closely tied to combat search and rescue or CSAR. And there's no doubt that those intelligence platforms played an important role in the outcome of this operation.

DEAN: Yes. And you mentioned that deception campaign, which is pretty incredible considering, too, how quickly it had to -- had to play out.

JAMALI: For sure. I mean, look, talking about speed, I think it's really important to acknowledge something really important here, which is the combat search and rescue community. You know, whenever there is aircraft flying, especially in theater, there is going to be a combat search and rescue element.

I had the chance to fly with the 176 Wing of the Alaska Air National Guard last week. They specifically focused not just on CSAR, but they actually rescue people in Alaska. And I got to see how a combat search and rescue operation actually takes place. And you talk about speed, the people that are going to be on scene the first are those CSAR components. We've seen video of aircraft flying. That is likely part of this rescue triad.

And the reason that they're there is for exactly this moment. And I mean, they're just amazing human beings, amazing Americans. I'm so proud of what they do. And it's just amazing to see this work kind of come to fruition with a positive outcome.

DEAN: Yes. We are, we are very lucky to have them and are grateful for their service indeed. Talk us through the preparation that goes into this and what really stood out to you being with them.

JAMALI: So the preparation is, this is something they do 24/7, right? This is in their DNA. Their motto is these things that we do so that others may live. Unlike other traditional, and I've covered a lot of military elements from B-2 stealth bombers to ICBM missiles, the big difference between the combat search and rescue community is they're not offensive weapons. They're not there to conduct combat operations.

They're literally there to rescue people, and they will do anything up to moving heaven and earth to make sure that someone comes home on a bad day. So, the call would come out like this unlucky jet -- unlucky jet is the saying that means a jet is down two good chutes. Then they're going to launch before the information is actually passed. So, they run to those planes, they run to those helicopters. They're going to go and they're going to try to find that downed crewmen. They're going to make contact and speed is of the essence, right?

[19:30:23]

They want to get there before the enemy does. And then they're going to. When we were there, we saw them jump out of a plane with a parachute, to go and these are highly trained, medically capable, like personnel. Their job is to stabilize the wounded patient and then move them to extraction.

So, while they are armed, Jessica, the point here, their focus is on rescue. And I just want to add one final thing to that. You know, we talk about saving the lives of these two American pilots. And that's amazing. But there's something else that came out of this, and that is de-escalation.

Look, I think every American, whether they believe we should be in Iran or not, would not tolerate an American airman being paraded for propaganda by the Iranians. And I think that had that happened, had this rescue mission failed things would have ratcheted up pretty quickly in Iran. This gives everything a strategic value to sort of kind of calm down a little bit. So besides saving those lives of those two airmen, these rescue personnel may have de-escalated and helped keep the war at this level and not here.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN HOST: All right, Naveed Jamali, thanks for being here. We appreciate it.

JAMALI: Thank you.

DEAN: New polling numbers painting a clear picture of how Americans feel about President Trump amid the escalating war with Iran. We're going to take a look at those, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:36:15]

DEAN: President Trump tonight escalating his threats against Iran, demanding they make a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or he says he's going to target infrastructure -- energy, infrastructure.

A new CNN poll showing just 33 percent approve of how the President is handling this war, with just 35 percent overall job approval. Let's bring in CNN senior political analyst and "Bloomberg" opinion columnist, Ron Brownstein. Ron, great to see you. Where are the American people on this? I mean,

I just gave the poll numbers that we have, but where would you assess the American people are on this?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, right now, President Trump's disapproval of his performance as President is the highest it has ever been in a CNN poll in either term. And he has seen enormous retrogression from where he was in 2024 among virtually all, I think all of the groups that moved to him in that election, whether were talking about young people, non-college, non-White voters, Latinos, all of them have moved away. And, you know, one thing that is different, it seems to me, than in his first term. I mean, Trump has always inspired strong support and strong opposition.

But in many ways, in his first term, the strong opposition was about elemental qualities of who he is. People thought he was racist, misogynist, corrupt, a threat to democracy. I think all those things are still there.

The difference in the second term is that there are a lot of specific policies, I think more than in the first term, whether were talking about tariffs or the way ICE is handling its duties or taking over Greenland or this war, that are also generating supermajority opposition. And I think that put him on a narrower ledge even than he was in his first term.

DEAN: It is really interesting to kind of see where we are as opposed to the first term, because it is it is different in so many ways.

I also want to talk about the Democrats. On this generic ballot, they're showing an early advantage of six points overall, their favorability, though still low. What does this tell you about where the Democrats are and can they capitalize on this, as we look toward the midterms?

BROWNSTEIN: Right and this is the critical question, look, a six-point advantage in the generic ballot, which is how people intend to vote in November is pretty small when you're looking at a 64 percent disapproval of a sitting President.

I asked the CNN polling unit to kind of dig into those numbers, and it really tells you these further results really frame the challenge facing Democrats in November. Why do they only have a six-point advantage in the ballot when he has a 64 percent disapproval? Well, 91 percent of the people who approve of Trump say they are going to vote Republican in November.

That's about what Republicans got in 2018 and 2020 in the exit polls, among people who approved of Trump when he was President the first time, but only 76 percent of the people who say they disapprove of Trump say they are now intending to vote Democratic in November, that's way below what we saw in 2018, when 90 percent of the Trump disapprovals voted democratic in the house. 2020, ninety-three percent of the Trump disapproval.

In fact, Jessica, if you look at every Senate race while Trump was President, there was only one Republican Senate incumbent or challenger who held their Democratic opponent to less than 89 percent of people who disapprove of Trump. And that's what we saw last year in New Jersey and Virginia in those governor races, 92 to 93 percent of people who disapproved of Trump voted Democratic, going all the way back to 1994, looking at the exit polls, there's been no President who has seen less than about 83 or 84 percent of people who disapprove of him not vote for the other party.

So, this really is the issue, Democrats have not yet consolidated the anti -- the voters who are disappointed or discontented with Trump's performance. But if you are a Republican and that is your last line of defense, that you will hold Democrats to this unusually low number among people who disapprove of Trump, lower than we've seen in any election in the last 30 years, far lower than what we saw in his first term.

You've got to be a little nervous if that's what's keeping you in the ballgame at this moment.

DEAN: Before I let you go, too, I want to ask you about your new article for CNN Today, titled, "Why California Democrats are sweating the race to replace Newsom".

This race is fascinating and what is playing out there in your home state is really interesting. Democrats obviously have controlled much of the political landscape there for a very long time. Lay it out for people, what you're seeing.

[19:40:44]

BROWNSTEIN: Well, you know, you talk about the capacity of Democrats to kind of, you know, trip over themselves in 2010, California voters at the prodding of Arnold Schwarzenegger in the same era when they passed a redistricting, independent redistricting commission that they've just overridden, they passed what was called the top two primary reform, where all candidates from all parties, both major parties and minor parties, they all run in a single primary in June and the top two finishers go on to the general election in November.

The idea was that this would encourage candidates to appeal beyond their party base to try to build bipartisan or centrist coalitions. The situation we're in now, though, is you've got two major Republicans and eight viable Democrats, including three who are kind of at the top of the field.

And so even though the Republicans are only getting about 35 percent of the total vote right now, there is a risk that they could finish one, two, because none of the Democrats are getting much above 12 or 13. That's partially a reflection of the weakness of the field. I mean, there's no one in it who's consolidating the field the way that Newsom did in 2018, the last open seat race.

But it's also because there are just so many of them. And I think that's going to put increased pressure on party leaders like Newsom, Senator Padilla, Nancy Pelosi, maybe even Barack Obama to try to give Democrats more of a signal about who they should coalesce behind. Because in a state where Donald Trump's approval rating is 25 percent and Democrats usually win 60 percent or more of the general election vote. The idea that voters in the fall would have to pick between two Republicans to succeed Newsom is really, as I said in the story, making Democrats sweat.

DEAN: It is it is so, so fascinating. We will continue to keep an eye on that. Ron Brownstein, always good to have you, thanks so much.

BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.

DEAN: All right, we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:13]

DEAN: UCLA, putting on a masterclass in dominating South Carolina to win the Women's NCAA basketball championship. It's the first title in the program's history, and it was so one sided.

The 79 to 51 final is the third largest margin of victory ever in a women's Division One championship game. An emotional head coach, Cori Close, described the win as immeasurably more than she could have ever imagined. Close's UCLA team never trailed against the Gamecocks and winning it all in her 15th season. She becomes the longest tenured coach at a single school to win a first championship, congrats to them.

There's competition on the court and there's an entirely different game on the sidelines. The new CNN special "Money Madness: College Basketball at a Crossroads" explores that divide. CNN's Omar Jimenez knows a little of what it's like to play for a college team. He joins us now to talk about how the game and the fans have evolved -- Omar.

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN ANCHOR AND NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, I just want to start out by saying a lot has changed since I played college basketball for Northwestern University, one of them being n NIL, Name, Image and Likeness payments or the ability to be paid for your name, image and likeness was not a thing when I was playing. It would have been nice, maybe as a player, but it wasn't a thing.

Now, it's basically a staple of the college athletics landscape, especially in basketball, where you do see some players making millions of dollars tied to that dynamic. But the other thing that wasn't really mainstream, it wasn't really a thing at all to this degree was sports, gambling. And now you can't really turn on a professional sporting event, a college sporting event, without seeing the influence of either one of those companies or one of those dynamics.

And you can't really talk to anyone who consumes sports in a serious way that hasn't either been affected by it directly, or does it themselves.

And so, what it's done is it's created this sort of wild west landscape in college sports where, yes, there are some athletes that make a lot of money and life is great for them. But for the vast majority of athletes, they don't. And it sort of creates this dynamic of vulnerability that you could be more susceptible to options or proposals that make you skirt the rules, if it means you make a little bit of extra cash. And that's part of the dynamic we explore in this and kind of getting to the roots of what the dynamic actually is in college sports right now, take a look at some of it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BOMANI JONES, SPORTS WRITER: People tend to look at the legalization of gambling in the same vein as the legalization of Marijuana when a much better comparison is cocaine.

JIMENEZ: The 2018 Supreme Court case Murphy versus the NCAA was really the one that opened the doors.

REPORTER: Breaking news the Supreme Court this morning striking down the federal ban on sports betting.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It means that some kind of legalized gambling can spread quickly online and to dozens of states.

JOON LEE, SPORTS JOURNALIST: This was opening up Pandora's Box for sports gambling in the United States.

MICHAEL FRANZESE, AMERICAN FORMER MOBSTER: I knew that was trouble. I said, they're going to open this up. Everybody's going to be gambling. Players are going to get in trouble. And it was prophetic in a way, but it was just common sense from somebody that knows.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[19:50:27]

JIMENEZ: And Jessica, you know, there are two things that really make basketball unique here in terms of this topic of discussion. One, you look at the number of players that are actually on the court, it's five. And so, each individual player actually has the ability to impact the game in a significant way. And so, it makes that person a susceptible potentially target for someone who's trying to influence a game. And if that person agrees, if that player agrees, then they actually, again, will have a big impact on what plays out.

And the other is that just by the nature of how basketball is played and the number of potential plays and the creativity involved, it's kind of hard to tell in real time whether someone is actually having a bad game, or if someone is intentionally having a bad game. And so, you sort of have to have that plus some other evidence for federal prosecutors to be able to actually bring a case.

So, we explore all of that and for those that follow sports, for those that don't follow sports, it's a really worthwhile watch to understand where we are in college athletics, where we are in college basketball, and especially in the context of march madness, even though its April, March madness doesn't expire -- Jessica. DEAN: That's right. Omar, thank you so much and stick around. The new

CNN "Special Money Madness College Basketball at a Crossroads" airs next only here on CNN.

Four astronauts are about to make history by traveling further into space than any other human. And after the break, were tracking the Artemis II mission to the dark side of the moon.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:56:41]

DEAN: NASA just now wrapping up a briefing on the Artemis II mission as the crew prepares to fly around the moon in less than 24 hours. CNN correspondent Ed Lavandera joining us now from the Johnson Space Center in Houston and Ed I know you were at the briefing; you've been there all day. What did you learn?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you can definitely get the sense that this is an Artemis II mission team that is just fully prepared for what is coming tomorrow, and incredibly excited by watching this crew fly around the moon and everybody gearing up for that.

We learned a lot about exactly how this is going to play out. Here in the next few hours, the Artemis crew is going to -- the capsule, is going to become getting closer to the lunar, the sphere of influence there and then it will start getting slung shot right back toward earth. But there will be a time there where they are going to be capturing images. And we spoke with one of the heads of the science team here, and really kind of laid out exactly what the goal is going to be for these crews.

We learned a lot about how they're equipped with cameras. And it's really about trying to capture as many images as possible. They will be working two astronauts at a time by the window snapping pictures, the other two sitting back preparing for what's next. They have a laundry list of specific spots on the moon surface that they want to document and photograph, and they're going to be following that as the day and the hours progress.

The excitement is going to be building here because this is now the point where once this happens and they fly to the other side of the moon, that they're going to start coming back. And we asked the NASA officials here this afternoon what that moment is going to be like for them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELSEY YOUNG, ARTEMIS II LUNAR SCIENCE LEAD: And we had, you know, a lot of conversations when we started scoping the flyby about how fast are they going to be moving? Are they going to have time to see some of these smaller scale features during the flyby?

And so, we have an amazing visualization lead for the mission right from the Goddard Space Flight Center and he has done just amazing work to really try to reproduce as close as possible the illumination conditions they can expect at the speed that it will be moving. And it actually from the perspective of the spacecraft, they will be moving slow enough to really be able to make robust observations.

So, it was quite a relief to our team and definitely to the crew when we started playing these, these visualizations, I don't know what they're going to feel, but I know what they're going to see and they're going to have time to make observations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAVANDERA: We were asking them there about what exactly as they're hooking around the moon, are they going to be feeling that sensation that they're curving around something? The NASA scientists here, they're not really sure exactly what the crew is going to feel in that moment. So, we will have to hear from them. But they are hoping to capture thousands of images of the moon and a part of the moon that we've never seen before.

DEAN: Yes, this is a lot of firsts here. We also saw them putting on their spacesuits today and practicing that. What was that about, Ed?

LAVANDERA: Well, it was interesting because they spent hours today putting on those spacesuits. It's actually the first time that they had put on these spacesuits in zero gravity. Remember, this is a test flight mission. And so, they're trying to work out all the possible scenarios and things that they need to prepare for in the future.

So, putting on these spacesuits in zero gravity, very different from when they were first put into these spacesuits here on earth. And one of the challenges is that in case of an emergency, if for example, cabin pressure drops out, they have about 15 minutes to get into those suits. So that's part of the training they're going through now. Just see how quickly they can get them on.

DEAN: All right, Ed Lavandera with the very latest and exciting day tomorrow. Thank you so much for that reporting. And thank you so much for joining me tonight. I'm Jessica Dean. Just remember, if you're here in the U.S., you can now stream CNN whenever you want using our CNN App. Go to cnn.com. /Watch for more and we're going to see you again right back here next weekend. The CNN special "Money Madness" is headed your way next. Have a great night.