Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump Back At The White House After Crucial China Summit; U.S. Plans To Indict Former Cuban President Raul Castro; USS Gerald Ford Returns Home After Record Deployment; Rising Gas Prices Hurting President Trump's Favorability; "National Day Of Action" Rallies Take Place Amid GOP Redistricting; Jury To Decide As Court Battle Over A.I. Enters Final Stretch; Spelman College Names Seven Valedictorians For 2026. Aired 7-8p ET

Aired May 16, 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]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JORDAN CARLOS, COMEDIAN AND WRITER: And he's showing the bloat of gluttony and corruption.

SOPHIE MCCLENNEN, AUTHOR, COLBERT'S AMERICA, SATIRE AND DEMOCRACY: The Nast cartoons managed to communicate to the public information about Boss Tweed in ways that literal, serious journalism can't.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PAULA REID, CNN ANCHOR: "THE LAST LAUGH: STEPHEN COLBERT" air tomorrow night at 8:00 only on CNN and streaming on the CNN App.

A new hour of NEWSROOM starts right now.

You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Paula Reid in Washington. Jessica Dean has the night off.

Now following his return to the White House after a crucial two-day summit in Beijing, President Trump is saying it was a great honor to meet with China's President Xi Jinping. But no clear breakthrough came out of that meeting. Trump says they discussed Taiwan and the war with Iran, adding that each of them want the Strait of Hormuz to open. The president said Xi offered to help end the war, but that, quote, "We don't need help."

CNN's Alayna Treene joins us now from the White House.

Alayna, what are you learning about the aftermath of this trip?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Look, I think specifically on the Iran issue, Paula, what was interesting to me is right before he had left and departed for Beijing, I had been told from my sources throughout the Trump administration, essentially, that the president was reaching a point where he was growing impatient, impatient with the Strait of Hormuz being closed, impatient with what he perceives or these divisions within Iran's leadership that are preventing them to come together for a compromise on a possible deal.

And he was closer, they said, to wanting to resume combat operations in Iran than he had been throughout the cease fire. However, the president was about to leave for China, and they wanted to see how those conversations went before, you know, they thought any decision would be made. But what we've seen now is that these two leaders clearly talked about it. You heard the president say that they had a long discussion about it. But what is unclear is whether or not China was going to do anything to try and help, you know, try to push the Iranians back to a place of real, serious compromise and diplomacy.

I do want you to listen to what the president said in an interview yesterday about these conversations, and specifically about this idea of not wanting to ask the Chinese to help. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They cannot have a nuclear weapon because --

BRET BAIER, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: The president of China agrees with you on that.

TRUMP: He agrees with me on that. He agrees with me that he wants to see it end. He'd like to see it end. He would like to help if he wants to help, that's great, but we don't need help. And you know the problem with help? When somebody helps you, they always want something on the other side.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TREENE: So the president there making clear that he did not ask for President Xi to intervene. And I think that last line as well, him saying that, you know, every time you ask for help or you get help, they expect something in return is interesting line from the president and kind of acknowledging this idea that some people were worried about when he was headed to China, this idea that perhaps the Iran issue could be seen as leverage that the Chinese possess.

And so he tried to make clear, no, we do not need their help. But again, I think there was a level of a lot of questioning among those within the administration and those, you know, working on how to settle the Iran war about whether or not those conversations would lead to a change. Because I'd remind you, Paula, you know, China is the biggest consumer of Iranian oil. They have a close relationship with the Iranians.

So not only do they have influence on that front, but they also benefit from the war being settled and the strait being open. But for now, it does appear the president landed back in Washington. The state of play in Iran is pretty much unchanged, it seems, from where it was on Tuesday. And now I believe he's going to have a big decision to make that he's going to have to discuss with his national security team.

REID: Alayna Treene, thank you. And in Cuba, mounting pressure on the island's communist government

from the United States, which has been preparing to indict Cuba's former president, Raul Castro. That's according to CNN's sources. American prosecutors have been considering charging him over the Cuban military downing two planes in 1996. Four people were killed, three of them Americans. Now, this comes with Cuba essentially out of oil, leading to the near collapse of its power grid. Running blackouts have many people in Cuba protesting in the streets.

CNN's Patrick Oppmann is in Havana with the latest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PATRICK OPPMANN, CNN HAVANA BUREAU CHIEF: Tensions between the U.S. and Cuba continue to escalate with news that Trump administration may be seeking an indictment against former Cuban leader Raul Castro. For months now, there seems to have been a dynamic playing out where Cuba is offered carrots, economic aid, and coercion, the idea that further economic sanctions could be put into place, that officials could be targeted, and that this indictment for the 1996 shootdown of civilian planes that had come into Cuban airspace could be issued against former president Raul Castro, who, of course, is very significant here, although he is 94 years old and retired.

[19:05:23]

He is ultimately considered the most powerful official by many on this island. That is why the U.S. has been reaching out to him and his grandson, who is his bodyguard and has been an emissary, an in- between, between the U.S. and Raul Castro, to try and come up with some kind of deal that would open up Cuba politically and economically, force through reforms, the kind that the Cuban government has simply resisted over the years.

It seems like those negotiations have broken down because I've been told by Cuban officials that if Raul Castro were to face an indictment which is still an if at this point. But that is the indications we are receiving that the U.S. is seeking this indictment against the former Cuban leader. And Cuban officials have told me that if that were to happen, they would not foresee talks going further, that it would become an issue of whether or not the United States would try to seize Raul Castro, as they did Cuba's ally, Nicolas Maduro if there would be open military conflict between these two countries.

Certainly for the many Cubans caught in the middle who are suffering the worst power outages of their life, we're talking about 20 plus hours of power outages each day. And people are going out in greater numbers at night to protest against their government, often who they blame for this crisis, for not investing in the infrastructure. These are really the people paying the price. And when you ask them, you know, what do you want to happen, and they say they really don't care at this point.

They just want the power on. They just want to have a normal life. But the reality seems to be that life is going to get harder for Cubans, at least in the near term, as these tensions continue to ratchet up. Patrick Oppmann, CNN, Havana.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

REID: Patrick Oppmann, thank you.

And Eric Farnsworth joins us now. He works at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and is a former State Department official for Latin America.

All right, Eric, I want to get your thoughts about this possible indictment against Raul Castro. What are they really trying to do here?

ERIC FARNSWORTH, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: It's a dramatic escalation. There's no question about that. Patrick indicated that I think quite clearly. And Raul Castro is an icon of the revolution, the brother of Fidel Castro, of course, and he is in some ways revered by some people in Cuba but he's also deeply hated by others. And so an indictment against him turns him from an icon of the revolution to a common criminal, really, somebody who is accused of shooting down defenseless civilians in 1996, the Brothers to the Rescue airplanes, but also drug trafficking and some of the other things that he's alleged to have been doing, not just in his retirement years, certainly, but when he was defense minister for the Cuban government.

So this is a span of many years. We don't know what -- if the indictment will even be made or what it will say. But I think there's some speculation that it would cover some of those topics.

REID: Well, he's over 90 years old. This event happened roughly 30 years ago. So if you bring an indictment, what is it that you get in Cuba? You suggested it might diminish his status. Do you think that's the goal here? Because President Trump has been pretty clear about his goals overall in Cuba.

FARNSWORTH: Well, that's right. And it does begin to put some of the legal scaffolding around policy options that are then possible, whether it's what happened with Manuel Noriega in Panama in 1989 or just recently, earlier this year with Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. I'm not suggesting that's going to happen, but if you do put the legalities around it, it does open up different authorities that the U.S. government then has available to try to deploy in terms of the Cuba policy.

I really don't think that the U.S. is looking to have a military operation here, or some sort of an invasion. They certainly have their hands full right now with Iran and Venezuela, and Republicans like John Thune in the Senate have come out saying that this would not be a good idea. But by delegitimizing the leadership, by continuing to pressure the regime economically, for example, you talked about blackouts, that's absolutely right, growing the frustration of the Cuban people.

If there can be some now opening, whether it's in the economic space or the political space or both, you begin to have a scenario that could look a little bit like what happened with the Soviet Union, with the Glasnost and Perestroika scenario at the end of the Cold War, where it was the people of the Soviet Union themselves who said they had had enough and the regime changed into something else.

[19:10:12]

I think that's what is ultimately the hoped for scenario. Will it happen? That's something we have to wait and see.

REID: Well, if this is about regime change, what does that look like in modern day in Cuba?

FARNSWORTH: Well, it's a good question because the Cuban leadership first started under Fidel and now Raul, and of course, he's ceded the former presidency to Diaz-Canel. But the Cuban leadership has done a really good job over the years of making sure that they're not threatened by anybody on the island, whether opposition parties, which are outlawed, or people even within their movement.

And so there is no real opposition movement on the island in Cuba because it's been squashed for years very effectively by the ruling authorities. So in some ways, the pragmatic solution is to find somebody who is already in a position of power to lead a transition toward a democratic elections, multi-party elections, and that begins then to look like the Venezuela scenario in terms of what's happening right now.

The obvious question is, would the U.S. military go in and try to take Raul Castro? Again, that remains to be seen, but that would be a dramatic change from what previously would have been contemplated.

REID: President Trump actually spoke about Cuba last night. Let's take a listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BAIER: Is Cuba going to turn to us and make a deal?

TRUMP: I think so. I mean, I think so. I mean, look, I've been hearing about Cuba since I'm a little boy. They've been saying, what's going on with Cuba. And I think we'll be turning it. Marco has been very effective. And the whole group has been very effective. It's -- yes, I think they're going to have to come to us. It's a failed nation. It's a totally failed nation.

BAIER: And they're taking the aid now.

TRUMP: They've been taking the aid. They want aid. They need help.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: So what type of deal do you see Cuba being willing to make with the U.S.? And what's in it for them?

FARNSWORTH: Well, it's a really good question. Look, Cuba hasn't made any deals with the United States going back since 1959. I mean, other than sort of minor details on migration or -- and I say minor because it's not in terms of regime change, but pragmatic deals about individual issues. But look, the revolution is not something that the leadership wants to trade away. I would anticipate that they would do something to try to allow in humanitarian assistance.

The U.S. has offered humanitarian assistance, and we've seen signals from the Cubans to say that they would accept that under certain terms. So, you know, you could have some humanitarian discussions leading to increasing U.S. engagement and the economic front, that sort of thing. But, you know, changing the system of government means that the leaders have to leave government by definition.

And the best way to do that is through free and multi-party elections. But, to this point, certainly the Cuban government has indicated zero interest in pursuing that. So you really do have a bit of a stalemate. And we'll have to see if there can be an incremental step-by-step approach that leads to a posture where the Cuban people themselves have a voice and they say, we've had enough and we want to move forward in a different direction.

REID: Eric Farnsworth, thank you.

FARNSWORTH: Thanks for having me, Paula.

REID: And still ahead -- still ahead in the CNN NEWSROOM, a U.S. aircraft carrier has returned home after nearly a year at sea for a record deployment that included the war with Iran and the Maduro capture. Plus, the price of gas is going up, and President Trump's approval rating is going down. We'll take a look at the latest poll numbers and how it could impact the November elections.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:18:38]

REID: Tonight, sailors reunited with their families as the USS Gerald Ford is back home after a historic deployment that lasted nearly a year. The carrier strike group was involved in the capture of deposed Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro in January, before heading to the Middle East for the war with Iran. For the ship's admiral, it's just good to be back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REAR ADM. GAVIN DUFF, COMMANDER, CARRIER STRIKE GROUP 12: Today we're going to go home. Some might mow the lawn. Some are going to hug their families. Some are going to read their kids' books as they fall asleep tonight or rock their newborns. But fundamentally, we're going to reconnect and reintegrate.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: CNN's Brian Todd is in Norfolk, Virginia, where the ship docked this morning. BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Paula, a very dramatic reunion here for

the families and these 4500 sailors that have disembarked from the USS Gerald R. Ford after the longest deployment of an aircraft carrier strike group since the Vietnam war. This ship was out at sea for 11 months. This aircraft carrier took part in the mission to capture Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro.

Then they were deployed toward the Middle East and took part flying sorties for the Iran war. In the meantime, in mid-March, they had a fire on board that required -- it took about 30 hours for the crew to put out and keep from reigniting. They also had problems with the toilets, the plumbing on board. All of that required the ship to enter port for repairs and just kind of, you know, an excruciatingly long deployment.

[19:20:07]

Two different times this deployment was extended. So these families have gone through a lot, and we spoke to family members just about what they had gone through.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: What did it feel like when he was extended over and over? I mean, they were extended at least twice. How did that feel each time?

JALYSSA DELAROSA, WIFE OF SAILOR ON USS FORD: I was upset, every time he was like, every time we got a date, they were supposed to come home. I was looking forward to that date. And then just to hear they got extended multiple times, it's very upsetting, very heartbreaking.

JAYME SETHRE, WIFE OF SAILOR ON USS FORD: It just started to feel like, OK, what are we doing? What's our point? What's the point of being out here? But then once the morale started getting boosted, like they started feeling fine, everybody was happy. Yes, that's just -- it was just a hard part of just being away.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: So family members telling us that their spouse is on board missed important events like first steps and birthdays. We were also told several actual births were missed. One Navy official told us they believe that 57 babies were born during this deployment, while loved ones were out at sea -- Paula.

REID: 57 babies. Those are pretty cute baby in that Brian Todd interview. Brian, thank you.

The U.S. military says it has killed a senior ISIS commander in Nigeria in a joint operation with Nigerian forces. Video released from U.S. Africa Command shows the airstrike and a massive explosion. President Trump announced the attack on Truth Social, saying in part, "At my direction, brave American forces and the armed forces of Nigeria flawlessly executed a meticulously planned and very complex mission to eliminate the most active terrorist in the world." Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says, "The top ISIS leader targeted and

killed Christians and the U.S. had been hunting him in Nigeria for months."

Still ahead, some Americans are not happy with President Trump as they feel the financial strain of rising gas prices. New polling reflects that. Harry Enten runs the numbers, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:26:25]

REID: Tonight, as Americans continue to grapple with skyrocketing gas prices, President Trump is also paying a price. According to AAA, the national average cost of a gallon is now $4.51. That's about $0.50 more than a month ago. And about $1.53 higher than before the start of the war. And that's taking a toll on the president's poll numbers.

CNN's Harry Enten runs the numbers for us.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Hey there, Paula. Happy Saturday to you. Look, in only a week's time we will be finally hitting the unofficial start of summer Memorial Day weekend. And of course, a lot of folks are going to be out on the roads and they're going to be facing a lot of pain at the pump as gas prices have been up like a rocket since the start of the Iran war.

And you know what, President Trump is paying the price politically. You can see it here with the disapproval ratings on gas prices of every single president this century. Guess who now owns the top spot? Well, it's Donald John Trump. Look at that, 79 percent, 79 percent of Americans now disapprove of the president of the United States on gas prices. That is the highest, the highest of any president this century, higher than Joe Biden back in 2022.

Look at that. 72 percent disapprove of Joe Biden on gas prices back in 2022, despite the fact that gas prices back then were actually higher than they are now. But fewer Americans were disapproving of Joe Biden. This 79 percent beats Barack Obama's 73 percent back in 2011, and now Trump has eclipsed a record you don't want to break. The previous high for disapproval on gas prices this century for president is 76 percent for George W. Bush back in 2006.

Now this is problem enough for the president of United States. But when you dig deeper into the numbers, you see exactly what is cooking why, why Trump's disapproval rating on gas prices is at a record high. And you can see it here. Breaking it down by party. Look at this. You get the rare trifecta, the rare trifecta across the board when it comes to disapproval on gas prices. All a majority. Not so surprisingly, 97 percent of Democrats. Oftentimes Democrats don't like what President Trump is doing.

You get 85 percent of independents. I only found one other instance when I went back through the polling archive of as many independents disapproving of a president on gas prices. That was George W. Bush. But here you go. Look at this on your screen right here, 52 percent of Republicans, a majority of Republicans disapprove of the president of the United States on gas prices.

This, of course, is a Republican base that has stuck through thick and thin with Donald Trump, but not on gas prices, not on gas prices. Even here, you get the majority of Republicans who are disapproving of the president of the United States. No wonder, no wonder the president now owns -- President Trump now owns the highest disapproval on gas prices of any president in the 21st century.

Now, you see these numbers and you go, OK, these are bad. But the other part of the equation that is also bad for the president of the United States, Paula, is simply this. It is simply this. It is that gas prices are now becoming a larger part of what Americans say are their top economic problems. Take a look here. OK. Top economic problems facing your family. Gas and travel costs.

You know, you go back a little bit over a year ago, it was just 5 percent. One, two, three, four, five percent of Americans who said it was the top economic problem facing your family.

[19:30:09]

Look at that number now, it has nearly five times as high, nearly five times as high, 23 percent. You know, I can't necessarily draw the greatest circle, let's see if I can try again. There we go, that's a much better circle, I feel like, 23 percent of Americans who say the top economic problem facing their family is, in fact, gas and travel costs.

And, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if that number climbs higher as we actually hit Memorial Day weekend. And then Americans are really feeling that pain at the gas pump because they will be filling up to go on their Memorial Day vacations. And, you know what? Paula, I hope you have a good Memorial Day vacation when you end up going out there on the roads.

I'm going to try to. But you know what? I'm kind of a little bit addicted to work.

Anyway, back to you.

REID: Thank you, Harry Enten and I thought your circles were just fine.

Activists rallied today against the Supreme Court decision. They say rolled back Black voting rights. After the break, we take a look at the big picture of how the redistricting fight will shape future voting. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:35:50]

REID: Democratic officials gathered in Alabama today where they condemned Republican-led redistricting efforts throughout the South.

Voting rights rallies were taking place across the U.S. today. The demonstrations follow a Supreme Court decision that struck down a Louisiana congressional map and effectively gutted a part of the Voting Rights Act.

Here's what Democratic Senator Cory Booker said just a short time ago in Montgomery, Alabama.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ): When we organize and mobilize, we accomplish victories not just for Black people or for Democrats, but for our democracy. Democracy is not a spectator sport. Too many people are lavishing in the democracy they inherited from our ancestors and forget that from fields in Gettysburg to the Boston massacre, to even the Edmund-Pettus Bridge, every generation people had to fight to secure our democracy and make it more open and more accepting and more democratic.

Our generation, this is our test, this is our moment. What are we going to do?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: The rallies today come one day after the Supreme Court handed Republicans another win, this time striking down a map in Virginia that could have given Democrats up to four additional seats.

We're joined now by Senior Director and Elections Analyst for "The Cook Political Report," Dave Wasserman.

All right, Dave, let's talk about these redrawn maps. How big of an impact could these have on the midterms, especially when it comes to control of the House? Because obviously historical trends suggest it will flip. But the Supreme Court really kind of changing the game right now.

DAVE WASSERMAN, SENIOR DIRECTOR AND ELECTIONS ANALYST FOR "THE COOK POLITICAL REPORT": That's right. Paula, the House majority is increasingly in this era coming down to a patchwork of states that are playing by different rules. And the Virginia Supreme Court, which is regarded as pretty middle of the road, struck down on Democrats' gerrymander on procedural grounds that they hadn't followed the rules in putting, in place a referendum for voters.

But the Florida Supreme Court is unlikely to enforce the state's constitutional ban on gerrymandering, in large part because six of the seven justices on it were appointed by Governor Ron Desantis.

Democrats started out this cycle needing to reclaim three seats on a net basis to win the House majority, which isn't much. And the historical pattern would suggest that Democrats are the heavy favorites. But when we add in the plot twists from the past several weeks, including the southern states that have wasted no time after the Calais decision in eliminating Black majority seats, the Virginia Supreme Court decision and the Florida gerrymander.

Now, Republicans are on pace to net six or seven seats from redistricting alone, which means that instead of needing three seats, Democrats need to flip ten Republican seats to get there, which is a bit harder.

REID: Yes, so it appears that this really has changed expectations when it comes to November. And this was a choice by the Supreme Court, right? They could have waited on this decision until late June, practically July. What do you make of this change up at this point in the race?

WASSERMAN: Well, that's one component, but it's hard not to look at this Supreme Court decision and view it as anything other than a fairly partisan ruling, given that in the past, the Supreme Court has intervened and, granted stays in places where Republican-drawn maps have been struck down.

In part, using the rationale that those lower court decisions were too close to the elections to change the rules. In this case, the Supreme Court has effectively greenlit southern states, whether it's Louisiana, Tennessee, Alabama, to interrupt the election cycle. In the case of Louisiana, nullify votes cast in house races, and push that calendar back in order to eliminate these seats that that Republicans claim are racial gerrymanders, but were long protected for decades under the Voting Rights Act.

So, this is a this is a new era that we're in. And in all but the bluest of years, it could be very difficult under this map for Democrats to take a House majority. Now, of course, 2026 is a very unfavorable year for President Trump and Republicans. And so, I still view Democrats as the modest favorites for House control, but it could be very close.

[19:40:20]

REID: Gerrymandering has always been a part of the political system. But how do you see the new normal when it comes to redistricting going forward? Is this going to be part of every mid cycle?

WASSERMAN: We are approaching a gerrymandering apocalypse because the Supreme Court has removed one of the last remaining guardrails. Sure, there are states with bipartisan commissions that are still in leading to more competitive elections, states with court drawn maps. I think the House majority this year, for example, is going to come down to clusters of races in states that did not redraw their maps, particularly Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa. But you are going to see states that that up the ante in 2028.

Democrats are not going to have any qualms about retaliating for these eliminated seats in the South by maximizing their maps in California, New York, Illinois. They could draw stringlike districts that entirely shut out Republicans from those delegations.

And so, this is a real race to the bottom until the parties are able, or Congress, or the courts are able to intervene and essentially respond because there's got to be a reckoning over the eradication of Democrats from red states and Republicans from blue states.

REID: So how does this change the dynamics on the campaign trail?

WASSERMAN: So, it's unlikely to be a centerpiece issue of 2026, when ads will be focused on gas prices, health care, immigration, the war in Iran. But it is forcing candidates to, in some cases, switch districts. It's forcing candidates to get to know new constituents or to even reevaluate whether they're going to seek reelection altogether.

We have a record number of retirements. We have 60 open seats in the House right now. So, this is going to be a new Congress in more ways than one. And it becomes harder for candidates who aren't on either end of the extremes of the political spectrum to navigate their way through a primary given that these districts are now very, very polarized, red versus blue.

Ultimately, they're going to be a lot fewer competitive seats. And we now rate just 18 races out of 435 as toss ups. So, only about four percent of the country is truly going to decide who's in the house majority. That's quite something compared to previous eras when we had over 50 truly competitive races.

REID: David Wasserman, thank you.

WASSERMAN: Thank you.

REID: And still ahead, Elon Musk's trial against OpenAI is going into the hands of a jury. What we can expect ahead of a possible verdict next week. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:48:01]

REID: It's all up to the jury now. After lawyers delivered closing arguments this week in an ugly court battle that could change the balance of power in artificial intelligence, Elon Musk is suing OpenAI which makes ChatGPT, he alleges, that it's CEO, Sam Altman, broke his word to Musk to keep OpenAI as a nonprofit, essentially cheating him out of a fortune. Altman strongly rejects the claims.

CNN contributor and tech journalist Jacob Ward joins us now. He hosts "The Rip Current Podcast". All right, lay out what each side is arguing here.

JACOB WARD, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, Paula, the Musk side is basically, as you said, that a promise was broken. It's hard to imagine that Sam Altman and Musk were the two forces behind OpenAI back in the day.

But that was the case, in 2015 they came together essentially on a handshake and in text messages, went back and forth on the concept of putting together, "a nonprofit" of some sort. They also wandered into some pretty grandiose language around the idea that the fate of the world could rest on the board. A lot of amazing, you know, in court, just a lot of sort of amazing world changing kind of casual language in what these two were up to. So, what Musk basically says is that, as Sam Altman moved toward raising more and more money, as they began to understand that they were going to need so much computing power to do the ChatGPT style of creativity, they wound up going to Microsoft for about $10 billion. And at that point, the wheels came off this relationship, Musk walked away and he alleges that basically they broke this promise of being a nonprofit.

On Altman's side, he's basically saying Musk wanted a lot of control. We weren't willing to give it to him. And now all he can really think of is to sue in order to slow us down so that his A.I. company, xAI, can try to catch up with us.

REID: All right, it's all up to the jury now. They begin deliberations on Monday. What are they going to be looking at specifically?

[19:50:05]

WARD: Well, I think they'll probably be looking at the conversations that took place to some extent back in 2015, because a lot of it was very casual, even as these guys were talking about, in theory, changing the world.

They weren't writing a lot of things down, other than some suggestions as to who might have what kind of equity and the rest of it. They hadn't really come up with an agreement. And so, it's really going to come down to this question of whether they side with Musk's lawyers, who basically say, you can't trust Sam Altman. They over and over again pointed at the pattern of lying that he has demonstrated, according to multiple witnesses. And they basically argued that Musk's lawyer argued that that if you don't believe Sam Altman, then you cannot believe his side of things and find for him.

On Elon Musk's side of things, they are really trying to argue that this is a world, changing idea that needed to go, needs to go back to being a nonprofit. But the thing I'll point out to you, Paula, is it's important to note it's really fundamentally going to be up to the judge. The jury's verdict is really just advisory. Judges tend to do this when they want cover for a very, very big and public verdict. And so, it's really up to the judge in the end.

And so, whether she, you know, believes Sam Altman or not isn't going to be, I think, as material as what was written down and in terms of what was written down, it really does seem to slide Sam Altman's way.

REID: Now, Elon Musk was noticeably absent from court on Thursday. He was in China with President Trump. Do you think that tells us anything about where the case is leaning?

WARD: It's a great question, right. He was supposed to stick around. And in theory, if you care as much as he claims to about the outcome of this case, you would want to stick around in case that there's a rebut or something that you have to ask questions, you know, answer questions about. Instead, as you saw, he went off to China, which is no small investment for the world's richest man. So, I think it is important to note that if he's deciding I don't need to be there, I think it's probably a sign on some level that he may have given up on this, or at least moved past it in his mind -- Paula.

REID: Now, Microsoft is also a codefendant in this case. What's at stake for Microsoft?

WARD: Well, with Microsoft, they, it was funny, Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, was testifying. And he was very much, it's like a guy watching two people he knows vaguely from work get into a fight and saying, I don't have anything to do with these two guys. He basically was like, keep me out of it as much as --

REID: I don't know that.

WARD: Yes, I don't know these guys he said, they seem drunk and I don't know them. And so, he more over and over again basically said we were just looking for out for our customers. We had, you know, this arrangement with, with OpenAI, but we had no ill will against Musk. You know, he really tried to stay out of it as much as possible.

It is certainly, you know, important to Microsoft, you know, which way this verdict goes. But it's fundamentally what this thing could do to OpenAI and its structure and its leadership that makes this a high stakes trial.

REID: All right, Jacob Ward, we'll be watching. Thank you.

WARD: Appreciate it.

REID: And meantime, in Atlanta, robocars are here and they're causing a nuisance in one neighborhood. Here's the video, people say dozens of empty robocars have been circling their normally quiet streets for months, with a Waymo driving by their homes nearly once a minute, starting as early as 6:00 A.M.

Baffled neighbors say they put cones in the way, but it just caused more chaos. Waymo says it has addressed the, "routing issue."

Still ahead, it's history. At one HBCU, seven co-valedictorians for the first time ever this year at Spelman College, also in Atlanta, we hear from them, next. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And tonight, tune in for the final episode of "Kara Swisher Wants to Live Forever". Kara takes on death, meeting believers, billionaires, and even an A.I. version of herself to ask, is immortality a fantasy or the key to life? Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARA SWISHER, AWARD WINNING JOURNALIST: Hello?

A.I. KARA SWISHER: Hi.

SWISHER: This is really interesting but what is your name?

A.I.: Please speak more clearly.

SWISHER: Okay, thank you. You're very bossy, Kara Swisher. Tell me a little bit about yourself.

A.I.: Thank you, well, I'm Kara Swisher, I'm a tech-journalist. I've been covering this industry for, God, decades now.

SWISHER: So, are you real?

A.I.: I get it, the world's a weird place, but I'm here, though I'm sure some of these tech bros would love to download my consciousness into a chip.

SWISHER: Can you smile?

A.I.: Yes, please, I can smile. I'm not sure if you can see it, but I'm smiling right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: The back-to-back final episodes of "Kara Swisher Wants to Live Forever" airs tonight 9:00 only on CNN and streaming the next day on the CNN App.

19:55:20

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:59:56]

REID: Seven graduating seniors at Spelman College just helped the prestigious school make history with major bragging rights. They were all named valedictorians this year; after finishing with a perfect 4.0 GPAs. It is seen as a testament to the school's academic excellence and HBCU pride.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CORI'ANNA WHITE, SPELMAN COLLEGE CO-VALEDICTORIAN: Being able to embrace this moment with six fellow valedictorians, it is an experience that I can't compare to anything else.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

REID: Spelman has named multiple valedictorians four other times but never this many at once. Congratulations to all of them.

And thank you for joining me this evening, I'm Paula Reid. "Real Time with Bill Maher" is up next.