Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Tonight
Disney Quietly Took Power From DeSantis' New Board Before State Takeover; Trump Investigations Continue; NY Hush Money Grand Jury Will Break For Most Of April; College-Acceptance Videos Gone Viral; Tech Leaders Call For Pause In "Out Of Control" A.I. Race; Ski Collision Trial Involving Gwyneth Paltrow Is Now On Its Seventh Day. Aired 11p- 12a ET
Aired March 29, 2023 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN HOST: We have big developments tonight in the Trump investigations that will get you in a second. Also, tonight, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a potential 2024 challenger, may have been outsmarted in his ongoing battle with Disney. The company reached an agreement with the outgoing board of its special taxing district in Central Florida. I'm going to explain -- I'm going to say words right now, and then Elie Honig is going to explain the words that I'm saying.
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: That's our relationship.
CAMEROTA: Okay. So, locked in key provisions, they locked in key provisions before DeSantis's new board was able to take over, and their battle stems from Disney's opposition. You'll remember to Florida -- that Florida law that prohibits instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity through third grade and only in an age appropriate manner in older grades. That was the law that critics dubbed "don't say gay." DeSantis retaliated, you'll remember, by going after Disney's special tax status around its sprawling Orlando area theme parks.
Okay, so, we have a lot to discuss with my panel. Jay Michaelson is here. He's a Rolling Stone writer/rabbi. We have Elie Honig. He is our CNN senior legal eagle. He's going to explain everything tonight. Mondaire Jones is a former Democratic congressman and Evan Siegfried is a political consultant and millennial expert. Okay, gentlemen, great to have you here.
What just happened?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Okay. It turns out that for a long time now, Disney has been given quasi-governmental powers over itself. Basically, the state of Florida has allowed them to run their own shop, to make their own rules, and get special little tax breaks. Okay, along comes this law that sometimes called the "don't say gay law." Disney opposes this. Ron DeSantis, in his sort of typical Ron DeSantis fashion, sees a moment of political opportunity. He says, oh, good, I can go after Disney because they don't like this law. And so, he says, I'm going to take away your special privileges, Disney. I'm going to take back control of you like any other company for the state.
And so, the way that they execute that is DeSantis is given the power to name this board, there's a special board that governs Disney, and to put all his own people on the board. But before DeSantis's people could take power, the old board entered into an agreement with Disney, which basically said, you can continue running yourself forever before we leave office.
So, it's like a lame duck Congress sort of passing a bill in its final days saying we're going to preserve the status quo forever and now we're going to have a legal battle about whether that agreement is good.
CAMEROTA: Clever maneuver.
JAY MICHAELSON, RABBI, WRITER FOR ROLLING STONE: It's basically Mr. Toad's wild ride but with people in suits.
(LAUGHTER)
CAMEROTA: That's right.
MICHAELSON: (INAUDIBLE) get that reference.
(LAUGHTER)
That's the millennial --
HONIG: Millennial guy.
CAMEROTA: Have you been to Disney World?
MONDAIRE JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I have.
MICHAELSON: Well, then you're conflicted out of this segment.
(LAUGHTER)
JONES: I thought that was the next segment we're going to --
(LAUGHTER)
CAMEROTA: So great. So --
MICHAELSON: So great, though, right? This is like live by mob rule, die by mob rule. I mean, he's playing. It's kind of like worthy of a Scorsese film like I'm going take it from my point the board myself. I'm going to appoint the board before the board is appointed. I'm going grandfather myself in. So, it's great.
You know, I live near where the "Sopranos" last episode was filmed down in New Jersey. So, this all resonates for me.
CAMEROTA: Great. A nonviolence Scorsese film.
(LAUGHTER)
Just a corporate board level --
MICHAELSON: (INAUDIBLE).
EVAN SIEGFRIED, PRESIDENT OF SOMM CONSULTING, POLLITICAL CONSULTANT, MILLENNIAL EXPERT: Let us talk about the political violence or the political fallout from this.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
SIEGFRIED: Ron DeSantis has been getting beaten up by Donald Trump with a two by four. And what really --
CAMEROTA: Just called names. Right? And said that he didn't --
SIEGFRIED: Names --
CAMEROTA: -- do as well in Florida.
SIEGFRIED: -- and that he would be running a pizza -- he would be working at, not even running a pizza parlor if it weren't for him and all of these.
JONES: These are serious aspersions in a republican primary.
SIEGFRIED: Yes. But Donald -- DeSantis came really to the fore to the Republicans in his fights on these culture wars and the fight with Disney. So, I think in the short term, him taking on Disney and taking them to court is going to benefit him.
But there is a long-term risk. If he loses in court, Donald Trump is going to be able to run away with that because DeSantis's argument going into before he even announces his presidential campaign is I get results. Well, if he can't get results and he get snookered by Mickey Mouse, can you imagine the names and all of the things that Donald Trump will say? I think Ron DeSantis will stay governor through 2026 if that happens.
JONES: This is certainly a brilliant plot twist and what is an elaborate effort to quash any so called woke people in entities in the state of Florida on the part of Ron DeSantis. But as he litigates this in court, I do wonder whether this doesn't remind the American people of how unimportant or ridiculous some of the projects that Ron DeSantis has undertaken, right?
I don't think American -- the American people, as they deal with inflation and as they, you know, take another look at the war in Ukraine that we heavily invested in, that they want to see this guy go up against Mickey Mouse any longer than what he has already done.
CAMEROTA: I mean, I guess we'll see because people definitely seem exercised by woke stuff. So, we'll see if it still has --
[23:04:58]
MICHAELSON: You know, the numbers are not really actually there. I mean, certainly for the republican primary being on -- on the -- on the anti-woke team is a winner. But when you actually look at the numbers on "don't say gay" in particular and Florida participating in the sort of nationwide war on trans people, the numbers -- the moderate middle of America is not on board, both with -- either with fighting, you know, Disney and Mickey Mouse or with criminalizing being gay and trans.
CAMEROTA: Okay, let's move on to what we've learned in the Trump investigations today, at least one of them. So, the Manhattan D.A. -- this is the one is the Stormy Daniels hush money payment, and we found out today that they haven't made any decision about indictment and they're going to be taking most of April off.
And so, basically, Elie, um, does this mean that this investigation is petering out, this one?
HONIG: No, it does not necessarily mean that. Let's -- let's keep this in mind. First of all, prosecutors have almost complete control over what they do in a grand jury when they go into a grand jury. Alvin Bragg right now has unfettered say over will he seek an indictment and when. There's no reason other than we're all going crazy with impatience, myself included, but there's no reason why he has to make decision by today, tomorrow or next week.
He may have a statute of limitations issue that crops up in a -- in a month or so but there is no legal difference. And so, it could be. I'll give you some of the why. Everyone is saying why, why, why, why is it taking so long. It could be he just wants to think about it. It could be he's just not sure. It could be he is waiting for more witness testimony. It could be he wants to bolster his case.
It could be he wants to minimize the amount of time between an indictment and actual in-court appearance. It could be, we don't know this, but it could be that he is wary of being the first of these cases when there probably are others on the way and this hush money case is the weakest in terms of evidence and the weakest in terms of facts.
CAMEROTA: Let me ask you this: Can he coordinate with the other prosecutors, the one in Georgia or even the special prosecutor --
HONIG: DOJ.
CAMEROTA: -- DOJ and say, hey, guys, just wondering, what's your timeline, because I'm trying to figure out my time?
HONIG: Yes, yes, yes. There's no evidence he has. But yes, this is what prosecutors do every day. It happens all the time that you will find out, oh, the guy across the street, a different district is looking at this. First thing you do, you pick up the phone. You say, hey, are you guys looking at so and so? And if so, you go, okay, how are we going to deal with this? So, we have to work together. You're going to go first. We're going to go first. Maybe it gets a little contentious sometimes. It's called deconfliction. Prosecutors do it every day of the week.
Now, here, there's no indication they have. I think they're wary of it because I think they understand that if Merrick Garland or Jack Smith calls down to Alvin Bragg or Alvin Bragg calls over to Fani Willis, what's -- what's Donald Trump -- you guys, what's Donald Trump going to say? I'll leave it to you guys.
SIEGFRIED: Donald Trump is going to have Jim Jordan issuing subpoenas the first thing in the morning. But can we also acknowledge there is one thing that we haven't noted, which that the D.A.'s office said that they -- because of Easter and passover next week and Ramadan and because a lot of New York City public schools are going to be having break, its -- they're trying to make it easier on grand jurors.
Jury duty in any way, shape or form is not a fun thing for the vast majority of Americans. So --
CAMEROTA: Do you think that's true?
SIEGFRIED: I do think there is -- I think there is an element of truth. And I think that they -- if Alvin Bragg had wanted to, he could have plowed through. But I think it is a lucky bounce of the ball for him where he's allowed to, as Elie said, use this time to do it, and this was just already on.
HONIG: But he could have gone to them today, he could have gone to them on Monday, he could have gone to them last week. I mean, he has been done putting in evidence for -- I mean, he called that rebuttal witness last week, Pecker, but there he could go now, he could go Monday, he could go Wednesday. I think he's -- that break, you're right, was preplanned. So, I think he may be riding that.
MICHAELSON: Surely this is the best possible result for this series of cases. We've talked about this before, that, you know, not only is this kind of the weakest case, it's also the least significant. Right? I mean, Donald Trump undermining democracy in Georgia and on January 6th, these are incredibly serious charges and they're important conversations for the nation to be having.
And I think there is a sense -- I'm not minimizing the Stormy Daniels case, but there is a sense in which that trivialized what is really at stake. So, for me, looking at sort of from almost an ethical point of view or the public discourse around this issue, it feels much better to have this conversation about the real stuff, not this distraction.
JONES: I do want to say, as someone who has had to comply methodically with campaign finance laws, I think we ought to be taking this prosecution very seriously. I actually get frustrated when it's referred to in the media often times as a novel legal theory. I mean, someone did go to prison and was, you know, did plead guilty, that person being Michael Cohen, over similar conduct, not precisely the same conduct but similar conduct.
And look, I mean, we should not make it the norm in this country that you can -- you can violate campaign finance law --
CAMEROTA: We don't know about that connection. In other words, you're calling it a campaign finance law, but that -- that's the novel part, is having to say that this hush money payments somehow was connected to the campaign coffers or that it was about -- I mean, that's -- am I right, Elie? That's not necessarily what --
JONES: This is -- no, this is -- it is actually fairly straightforward. So, the campaign finance portion of it is him, you know, basically --
CAMEROTA: It's going to help --
JONES: -- using hush money to keep someone quiet when the disclosure of that information would have impacted the campaign.
[23:10:02]
Otherwise, he wouldn't -- you know, he would not have paid the $130,000. It is for two different people, by the way. It's not just for Stormy Daniels.
CAMEROTA: Maybe he is trying to have Melania not find out. But isn't that the novel part? Am I wrong?
JONES: Then he would have kept paying. The timing of it is significant. It's not a John Edwards situation who kept paying hush money even after the presidential election was over. This was something that was timed around the time of the presidential election, and there's testimony to that.
HONIG: So, this is the factual dispute that will play out at trial. Trump will say personal, prosecutors will say political. What's novel legally is trying to charge this, which is a federal, president is a federal race, the federal election laws over in state court. They're going to have a real legal problem with that.
CAMEROTA: Gotcha. Okay, excellent. Thank you all very much. Also, tomorrow on CNN primetime, former Vice President Mike Pence is going to speak with Wolf Blitzer about being ordered to testify about his conversations with Donald Trump. That's tomorrow at 9:00 p.m. Eastern, only on CNN.
Alright, so, gone are the days of waiting for a letter in the mail asking your parents, is it a thin envelope or a thick one? Now, it's college-acceptance videos. They are sometimes posted, viewed by millions. One student says, stop posting them, it's hurting other kids' mental health. He's here next to explain.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:15:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) (MUSIC PLAYING)
(YELLING)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Wow!
(LAUGHTER)
I like that the mom was involved in that one, too. That's just one of the college-acceptance videos to go viral. This week, of course, is the all- important college decision week in many households.
But in a new piece for "The Atlantic," my next guest says it is time to stop posting those college-acceptance videos. Joining me now is Zach Gottlieb, high school student and creator of "Talk with Zach." Zach, great to have you here. Why -- why can't kids post those videos?
ZACH GOTTLIEB, CREATOR, "TALK WITH ZACH": First of all, thanks for having me. And the problem with posting these videos is college is already such a stressful thing that teenagers have to deal with.
When you post these videos, I mean, it seems like everyone is getting into their dream school and it creates this false reality where -- I mean, a lot of these schools have, like, less than 10% acceptance rates, but 100% of the videos are students getting in.
It creates this very skewed reality of everyone getting into their dream school and it makes people feel who don't get into their dream school really left out.
CAMEROTA: That's really interesting, Zach. Um, I happen to know a little bit about this because I live with two experts. I have senior girl twins, who both just went through this very thing, and I asked them today, tonight, about what their thoughts are on posting this. They made videos that were basically private, but for their inner circle. So, they posted it on the -- you know, just their inner circle of friends.
And what they said was that this is how they find out where their friends are going to school. They might not be their dream schools, but this is how they get their information nowadays. This is how they figure out how their friend who they met at camp who lives, you know, a thousand miles away, where that kid is going to school. So, what's wrong with it just being your community bulletin board?
GOTTLIEB: The thing is if you're doing it like that, if you're showing people where you're going to school, I think that's fine, like if you're showing your friends where you get in to college. It's more when you're publicizing it beyond your own joy and for people who want to find out because when you see these videos, they have like 10 million views, and it is random people on the internet, not people you actually want to hear from.
If it's a friend, yeah, you want to know where they're going and it could be any school and not just like the school that's insanely hard to get into that you want to go to. So, it's more like -- I think posting it for your friends, that's great. It's a great way to see but it's more like I take issue with when you're publicizing it, when you're making it seem like this whole ostentatious event rather than just informing people who want to know.
CAMEROTA: And what about the argument that, you know, there are winners and losers in this college-acceptance game? There just are. That's the reality. And so, the kids who don't get into their dream school, that -- they'll be fine. You know, they'll go to some other school. That's -- they're taking gap year, whatever. That's life.
And for the kids who want to post, this is the end, this is the culmination, this is the celebratory moment of the months that they've worked on trying to get in.
GOTTLIEB: It should really just be about your own joy. So, obviously, it is a celebratory moment. So, celebrate for yourself. Show, like, have that for yourself so maybe you can look back on it. But the thing is our culture makes college this huge thing and teenagers feel like it determines how successful they will be, how happy they'll be.
So, when we see these videos, it is not just about there are winners or losers. It's like this affects me for the rest of my life, which obviously isn't true, because study after study has shown that where you go to college does not affect your future happiness.
So, it's really just like if, um, like you could say, yeah, there are obviously winners and losers, but how the culture presents it, it can be really harmful for students because personally, I think you can make the most of college wherever you go.
So, it shouldn't be framed as winners and losers but rather there are some people who go to their dream schools and other people go to schools that are also very good and they will also have good life.
So, it should be framed like you lost. It should be framed like you're going to make the most of this situation and it will be a great experience.
[23:20:02]
CAMEROTA: For sure. And so, Zach, next year, when you get one of those acceptance emails, what are you going to do?
GOTTLIEB: So, I'm obviously not going to make a huge publicity video about this and post it on TikTok. I might record one for myself just to see, but I definitely don't want to contribute to this culture of college is going to determine the rest of your life. I don't want to do this thing. I even see people like I didn't get into this, my dream school, but I got into this other like ivy league really tough to get into school.
So, it's really just going to be, um, a personal thing for me. I'm going to be really excited about where I'm going to go. And if I don't get into like my ED, dream school, I think college is a lot like life. You make whatever attitude you have of it. So, it's really just going be I'm going make the most of it and I'm going have a great experience wherever I end up.
CAMEROTA: All right, we will want to check in with you and find out what happens next. Zach Gottlieb, thank you very much for your take. My panel is back with me. We also have Insider columnist Linette Lopez joining us. Great to see you, Linette.
LINETTE LOPEZ, COLUMNIST, INSIDER: Great to see you, too.
CAMEROTA: All right. So, what do you think?
LOPEZ: Okay, I have only ever seen one acceptance video, the one you just played, and I think people should stop doing it because that was corny.
(LAUGHTER)
Um, the other thing I have to say is what is the difference between these acceptance videos and somebody with abs taking a selfie and putting it on Instagram? You know, like, I don't have abs, like I want abs. All of social media is a land where people are reflecting an imaginary best life. All of it.
CAMEROTA: And other people are coveting what they see.
LOPEZ: It is a push and it is a pool. The algorithm pushes things on us, but we pull things from the internet, too. What are you pulling? That's one question. And two, do you believe everything that is pushed to you?
The question is, do we need to change the culture of how we look at college and what we want kids to say, or do we change the culture of how we think about social media and what people's lives are actually when they post? You know, it's not real. That kid knows it's not real. He knows that a lot of kids who do this, they know it's not real.
MICHAELSON: (INAUDIBLE) by making this, by being so articulate about like don't post your college acceptance video, he has just like really upped his chances of getting into his dream school --
LOPEZ: Yeah.
MICHAELSON: -- like that was a really good media.
JONES: I was thinking that. I'm like he's going to write a personal statement about his appearance on CNN. Shout out to Zach for doing a great job of --
LOPEZ: Great job, Zach.
JONES: -- very compelling case.
SIEGFRIED: Just shows the video.
CAMEROTA: I know. It's so true. I mean, Harvard is going right now, I'm sure. So, is this -- what do you think?
JONES: I remember how excited I was when I got into my first-choice school, my dream school, right? I called, my grandmother answered the phone, told me what the envelope looked like, I think, opened it.
CAMEROTA: So, you were still opening an envelope?
JONES: I was still in school.
CAMEROTA: Everybody here -- did everybody here have to open an envelope?
LOPEZ: I looked at an email. Yeah.
CAMEROTA: I knew it.
LOPEZ: And I looked at it at work.
CAMEROTA: What?
LOPEZ: I had -- I had a job at a cafe in State College, Pennsylvania, a a place called The Corner Room. Shout out to The Corner Room. I looked at it at work.
CAMEROTA: And then what happened?
LOPEZ: And everybody was really happy for me.
CAMEROTA: Because you yelped?
LOPEZ: Yeah. Because I was so excited. And like, no, I didn't put it on Instagram, but I told everybody.
CAMEROTA: That's great. Okay, so you've got --
(LAUGHTER)
JONES: You know --
CAMEROTA: -- you held (ph) your grandmother's --
JONES: -- had Instagram existed at the time, I'm sure I would have posted some heartfelt video of what I was feeling in the moment. I will say, as much as I feel for people who may not get into their first-choice colleges or universities, I do worry about this generation and just the sensitivity to certain things.
I mean, I want parents to prepare their children for the unfairness of this world. You don't always get what you want. And this -- and this is true in many other contexts. I've just seen it in the workplace with this younger generation. I just -- I want to make sure that we are -- that we are preparing -- that we're toughening people up for the world as it exists.
LOPEZ: The last time I was on this program, we talked about -- we talked about -- uh, we talked about -- oh, my gosh, it just slipped my mind.
CAMEROTA: What did we talk about?
LOPEZ: What did we talk about?
(LAUGHTER)
CAMEROTA: I could never figure that out. We'll see.
LOPEZ: I'm sorry.
CAMEROTA: But hold that thought.
LOPEZ: Yeah.
CAMEROTA: Yes?
SIEGFRIED: I was going to say, first of all, when I got into college, I was at boarding school. And my parents called me and told me. And the way the school I was at, we would have a morning meeting every day, and the principal just said so and so, the class of 2002 got into this school. That's it. And everybody would clap. And that was the announcement. Nothing big.
But what I worry these days, it's not just college-acceptance videos. It's everything. As Linette pointed out, it's the apps. And we saw in the TikTok hearings last week for getting the China stuff. It was we had parents of kids who had committed suicide because of the way that TikTok has gamed the algorithm to really push unhealthy attitudes towards kids.
They are now facing more anxiety, more depression, more isolation, and that's a serious mental health problem. And as Mondaire said, yes, we do have to prepare for kids to be able to understand what it's like to face setbacks.
[23:25:01]
When you fall down, the real question is, how do you pick yourself back up?
CAMEROTA: Do you think they should be posting the video?
SIEGFRIED: Absolutely not.
CAMEROTA: Just do it in a low-key fashion the way you --
LOPEZ: I got it back.
CAMEROTA: Go.
LOPEZ: We were talking about kids and how they feel about being kids, teenagers and how -- you know, they just want to stay adults or they just want to be kids. They don't want to be adults. They don't want to deal with the pressure. Part of the pressure of being an adult is rejection on a large scale and sometimes embarrassing yourself, like I just did on that --
(CROSSTALK)
-- can't remember what I was going say.
JONES: Sometimes, you don't even deserve to get into your first- choice school, right?
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: I just want to day, not your first choice. It's also it is so hypercompetitive right now, particularly in this year and the year before that because of COVID, you know, layover, and all sorts of things. Literally, counselors say this year is the most applications they've ever seen. So sometimes, it's not getting into school after school after school. It's pretty stressful for kids.
MICHAELSON: Just about hurt feelings, either. I mean, kind of -- you know, one of my spiritual teachers, you know, says, be here now. Making this video is the opposite of being here now. This is such an incredible moment. It doesn't need to be turned into a product. It doesn't need to be turned into like a way to get more likes.
It is so -- I do remember sitting at my kitchen table 865 years ago when I got -- when I got my letter. My top choice was a thin letter. So, it wasn't so great. So, but that moment of being present, you know, with your close friends and family or even a sex ed, maybe with your friends that you share it in a smaller way, instead of turning it into like yet another commodity.
CAMEROTA: Great point. Okay --
LOPEZ: Those videos are corny.
CAMEROTA: Hold that thought.
LOPEZ: They're corny.
CAMEROTA: We have to talk about this as we have been throughout the program. Tech leaders are penning a letter calling for a pause in what they described as out of control A.I. development that may ruin humanity. Who signed that letter? What recommendations do they have? What warnings do they have for the rest of us? That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAMEROTA: Major tech leaders, including Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak, signing a letter calling for a stop to the development of -- quote -- "out of control A.I." for at least six months. But with ChatGPT already being used and A.I.-generated fake images spreading online, is it too late?
I'm back now with my panel. Uh, when they speak about this and about it being really worrisome to them, I feel like we should listen.
Here's what some of the letter said. We must ask ourselves: Should we let machines flood our information channels with propaganda and untruth? Should we automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones? Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? Such decisions must not be delegated to unelected tech leaders.
I feel like we should heed this warning.
SIEGFRIED: I think we should heed it and then some. To be honest with you, A.I. (INAUDIBLE) leaps and bounds in technology for us. Think of the invention of the abacus or a semiconductor. They helped us to calculate. They didn't start being able to create their own A.I. code like A.I. has become able to do. A.I. is going to become self- sufficient. And I don't mean that in a sci-fi way, I just mean it in a reality way.
Now, what happens when A.I. comes in? It's going to change the world economy. It's estimated that up to 25% of all jobs in the world could be replaced by A.I. Do you understand the economic displacement? It would make the great discretion looked like a tiny little bad day on the Dow. I mean, it's so terrifying.
And at the same time, we haven't planned for it. We have to really start having government regulate it. It's like nuclear weapons, except with nuclear weapons, it was done by nation states and their nonproliferation treaties. But this is democratized where it's you in your basement can create A.I. and it can run like wildfire and we might not be ready.
LOPEZ: Here is my problem. The people in Washington are still trying to figure out how to take their Venmo transaction history offline --
(LAUGHTER)
LOPEZ: -- turn their read receipts off their iPhones. So, I understand the idea of a six-month moratorium on technological development, but that's not going help Washington get up to speed. I talked to Insiders in this game, and they're hoping that the E.U. can keep up with what's going on in A.I. development.
CAMEROTA: Because we can't -- America can't. The E.U. has to lead the way?
LOPEZ: While they seem to be leading the way in terms of tech, uh, all of the regulation that has come down --
JONES: Yeah, antitrust, the big tech companies. I agree with that.
LOPEZ: -- antitrust, E.U. has been in the lead here. And again, Washington not great with cellphones (ph).
JONES: The six months is not going to solve the problem.
LOPEZ: Not going to solve.
JONES: Six months is an arbitrary number. You say you don't mean in a sci-fi way when you say self-sufficient. I actually do. I mean, my favorite movie is "Terminator 2: Judgment Day." We all remember when the machines became self-aware and there's already been some indication that these machines are doing things that they were not programmed to do yet.
And so, I do worry about the complete absence of national and, in fact, global standards that would govern the way artificial intelligence is created and used.
CAMEROTA: What should they be doing?
JONES: We need to elect younger people to Congress, first of all. But also, we should be having hearings on this and we should be very seriously thinking about how to leverage a moment in which you've got technologists and entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and others who are saying, yeah, this concerns me as well.
So, use that energy that existed, that isn't always there for people who are just trying to make a buck or billions of dollars and get ethicists in this as well because there are a lot of ethical implications, moral questions, involved in this.
[23:35:05]
MICHAELSON: Isn't there a question of also of who is the we, right? So that statement uses "we should do this." Somehow, I don't feel like the libertarian tech bros who signed that statement really think that there should be congressional hearings and government regulation. And even if there were congressional hearings and government regulation, that's the United States, maybe the E.U., but what about China, what about Russia, what about other countries where if we don't move ahead in our A.I. development, they are going to move ahead in their A.I. development.
It feels to me like I don't -- I don't necessarily say that the concerns that are being voiced are incorrect, I think they are correct, but I'm not sure who the "we" is who can put this genie back into the bottle.
CAMEROTA: So, what is the answer?
MICHAELSON: So, I think, you know, it's interesting. So, I'm friends with a lot of A.I. doomsayers who have done a lot of really good work on this. Actually, the effect of altruism movement which gets maligned sometimes actually has done a lot of really good thinking about A.I. risks.
A lot of the risks really are more about like the sorcerer's apprentice. You know, A.I. replicate themselves not in a sort of "Terminator" way, although I also like that movie, but just simply making more stuff and doing more stuff and optimizing for the wrong things. And it feels like there might be a way to have something that looked a little bit like the early standards of the internet, which we're also global and which also took a lot of private actors really acting together because I agree, like these members of Congress, I mean, I feel like every time I watch that TikTok hearing, it was like helping my mom plug in her VCR. It's like this disaster.
Maybe there's a way for people who are actually involved in this work to set standards that they all agree to stand by and then basically segment or ostracized those who don't agree to those standards.
SIEGFRIED: There is one bit of non-doom and gloom very quickly, which is that it can actually alleviate some health care problems in the United States. One of the -- we have a health care shortage of doctors and health care providers, and one of the things that doctors do that is really tough for them, they spend 2 to 3 hours a day taking notes and writing down patient notes.
And there are companies out there that are utilizing A.I. that listen in on an exam, it's all privatized, it follows HIPPA, and it writes up an edited draft for the doctor to review. And if we are able to do that, doctors get more time. Remember (INAUDIBLE) older as a population and we're going have an elder care crisis. This will help to alleviate it.
CAMEROTA: I appreciate you bringing in the good thing about A.I. because it does sound good. Thank you all very much.
All right, stay with me because this was day seven of Gwyneth Paltrow ski collision trial. Her defense team this day called a series of doctors to the stand. We're going let you know what they said, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAMEROTA: Day seven of the Gwyneth Paltrow ski collision trial. She is being sued by a 76-year-old man named Terry Sanderson who says Paltrow ran into him on a beginner ski slope, causing him a lot of damage. He says he suffered a traumatic brain injury and broken ribs. Paltrow says it was Sanderson who hit her. Today, Paltrow's team called several doctors to the stand to try to prove that Sanderson's mental deterioration was not from the collision.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ANGELA EASTVOLD, NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST: There's a number of personality traits that are measured, and Mr. Sanderson scored extremely high on narcissism, and specifically the pattern of his responses within that category suggest somebody who might be, um, feel that he is superior, um, he may feel that he lacks empathy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: I'm back with my panel. Guys, you hanging on every word of this trial?
MICHAELSON: I think I'm the only person -- maybe you'd like Linette --
LOPEZ: (INAUDIBLE) need to send each other a fruit basket.
MICHAELSON: I'm actually super into this trial. I was a skeptic when we were first covering it on the show. Now, I'm all in. I think --
CAMEROTA: What has turned you?
MICHAELSON: I'm really interested. I'm not particularly interested in the outcome of this trial. But I am really interested in the way that we make myths and narratives out of things like this. And so, is this the sort of narcissistic celebrity whose callous and who hurt this innocent person? That's a narrative. Right? And then or is it the gold digger? The opportunist is going after the big money day.
And I'm really interested in what the biases and sort of prejudices are that that we import into those decisions. I think I am on kind of team Gwyneth-cent, which is also a great hashtag, by the way, ah, on the facts, you know, as a lawyer, when I look at it, and I did learn in preparation for this that the vast majority of ski accidents just go to who was uphill and who was downhill. The uphill person always loses.
CAMEROTA: That's kind of law of the hill.
MICHAELSON: That's kind of gravity always wins, as Radiohead said, and I feel like that's kind of the -- it does seem as though all of the data is on the Gwyneth Paltrow side of this. But I'm really -- I'm actually really interested kind of from the rabbi point of view in the meta discourse about this and in how we reach these judgments of who feels innocent or who feels --
CAMEROTA: I like what you're saying about this, Jay, because it is the archetypes. So, we do respond to different archetypes. And so, one is what you're describing, the narcissistic celebrity versus this -- what were you saying? Money grabbing --
MICHAELSON: These are two of the narratives, right?
CAMEROTA: Yeah.
MICHAELSON: Either this is an innocent person who's been, you know, severely injured by the celebrity or this is -- and these are these kinds of myths and stories that we take in --
CAMEROTA: Absolutely. It is also David and Goliath, like, if you see him as the little guy and her as the big celebrity, and that's what the way his lawyers are trying to paint, how many times have you talked to Taylor Swift, you know, in the past month, they're asking Gwyneth Paltrow, though that has anything to do with skiing.
But in any event, it's just interesting also to watch a celebrity have to go through the pedestrian experience of being sued in court like any of us, you know, might if we were --
MICHAELSON: She chose this battle, right? She is clearly very wealthy. Obviously, if there was any doubt in her and her attorneys mind, she would -- you settle this.
[23:45:01]
You make this go away. You don't do this. Either she wants the publicity or I think she thinks she's actually innocent and she's going to -- going to the mat on this.
SIEGFRIED: Well, some of the publicity has been pretty bad for her just from a fashion standpoint and an image standpoint.
CAMEROTA: Stop. She looks fabulous.
(CROSSTALK)
SIEGFRIED: She's wearing Jeffrey Dahmer glasses and Ted Bundy sweaters. But the person who actually comes out looking worse, it's not Gwyneth Paltrow, it's the plaintiff's counsel. I've worked in the judiciary and I have no idea what she's doing. It's a terrible higher by this plaintiff.
CAMEROTA: Because she was --
SIEGFRIED: She was sucking up and being friendly. Oh, yeah, playing compliments. No, you're there, you're there to try and advocate on behalf of your client. This is just stunningly bad leader.
LOPEZ: Yes, she's being Regina George. That's what's happening, like, Gwyneth, the aura of Gwyneth and of her cool girl-ness is just astounding.
CAMEROTA: It's overwhelming, you're saying, the attorney?
LOPEZ: It's overwhelming her attorney. Oh, she was like -- Gwyneth was, like, I like your shoes. And she was, like, oh, my God, Gwyneth likes my shoes. It was -- it's not -- it is not great for her. But Gwyneth looks great. I hope these rich people can work it out.
CAMEROTA: Okay, well, interestingly, we heard from Gwyneth's children today. Her son, his name is Moses. So, here is the defense attorney asking Moses a question. Let's -- oh, it's a standard. It's a standard for us. So, somebody just reading the -- oh, okay. It's too -- this -- this is fascinating. So, Moses didn't have to take the stand, I guess, because he's perhaps a celebrity's child or a minor.
So, it's somebody doing basically a dramatic reading, as I sometimes do of courtroom transcripts, of Moses's responses to what he saw on the slope that day. So, let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: When I skid over, I heard my mom yelling at the guy.
UNKNOWN: What was she saying?
UNKNOWN: She was saying something along the lines of, what the F- word. You just ran into me.
UNKNOWN: And anything else that you recall at that moment?
UNKNOWN: No.
UNKNOWN: Was she standing up when she said that?
UNKNOWN: I did not fully remember, but I believe she was on the ground lying down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Okay, that was awesome. I've never seen that in a courtroom where people do people play other parts, other roles there.
MICHAELSON: It is like a stage reading of the opera, like the music hasn't been finished yet, so we've got --
JONES: Having done a trial before, I can tell you there was probably a lot of argumentation over who would be allowed to read that.
CAMEROTA: Yes, who would play Moses?
JONES: Yes.
(LAUGHTER)
LOPEZ: One of my friends told me that this man who is suing Gwyneth now says that he has multiple personalities. And it seems to me that one of those personalities wants to be famous.
CAMEROTA: Hmmm.
LOPEZ: And that's where we are right.
CAMEROTA: Is that right? I hadn't read of that.
LOPEZ: I thought that that's what I heard. That's what I heard in the transcript.
JONES: It is hard to see him as a sympathetic character --
CAMEROTA: Very hard.
JONES: You know, they're both wealthy, right? These are folks --
LOPEZ: On the bunny slope. You guys, come on, you work it out amongst yourselves.
MICHAELSON: He can't go to wine tasting (ph) anymore. Did you see that detail?
CAMEROTA: So, let's play this. The man who's suing Gwyneth Paltrow. His name is Mr. Sanderson. Let's play this. I think we get to see him.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERRY SANDERSON, MAN SUING GWYNETH PALTROW: Well, that's the purpose, I think, is to make me regret this lawsuit and that it's the pain of trying to sue a celebrity. It's just very difficult. I will tell everyone that. You're going get exposed.
UNKNOWN: Your honor, we're not talking about this case now. He is talking about the world.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Sustained as to the generalization.
UNKNOWN (voice-over): Was it important to you to bring this lawsuit?
SANDERSON: It was. I felt like I was seriously injured. And then I had so many insults added to that, I think, as I said the other day. So many insults added to that and layered on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Okay. So, there was testimony that he had changes to his personality, not multiple personalities. I'm trying to avoid Mr. Sanderson suing you right now. Okay?
LOPEZ: Oh, I'm sorry.
CAMEROTA: That's what I'm trying to --
UNKNOWN: He is clearly interested in doing that.
LOPEZ: Sorry, I don't have --
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: I have to wrap this up because we have to talk about naked dinner party.
LOPEZ: Oh.
MICHAELSON: We were trying to extend this segment so --
CAMEROTA: No, we're not. You're not avoiding a naked dinner party. That's what we're talking about, next. How many have you been to? We're going to ask our panel. There are real things. They're happening. We have the pictures to prove it.
(LAUGHTER)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
CAMEROTA: Have you ever eaten a meal naked? What about eating naked with strangers? It's a new movement. We're not making this up. It's called the food dining experience, but it's spelled like nude. We have the photos to prove it. Here are some photos from one of their recent dinners. Looks great. Would you do this? Let's ask the panel.
Jay, I feel like you've been to a nude dinner party, have you?
MICHAELSON: Yes, to rabbi, that question?
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MICHAELSON: I mean, look, I'm gone to Burning Man 14 times.
(LAUGHTER)
I've been to naked breakfast, lunch, dinner, cocktail party, snacks, you name it.
CAMEROTA: Cocktail parties.
MICHAELSON: There's a time and a place for everything.
CAMEROTA: At Burning Man, there is all nude meals?
MICHAELSON: I mean, there's just everything, everything. It's a wonderful expression of the human spirit. And, you know, sometimes, that's what it means. But I just questioned the whole idea about serving like hot pasta and other things like that.
CAMEROTA: Hot soup. Let me read you the menu. Here it goes. This was one of the recent dinner parties. Carrot and ginger soup, quinoa- stuffed bell peppers, cacao raspberry, avocado mousse.
MICHAELSON: So, like a lot of -- a lot of Jewish people are cleaning up for Passover right now and like crumbs get kind of everywhere. And when I think about quinoa and the naked dinner --
LOPEZ: No. Yeah, that's unacceptable.
MICHAELSON: That's an issue.
[23:54:57]
LOPEZ: I've never been invited to do any like group naked things by anyone I would want to see naked ever in my life. It's always somebody that I'm just like, no, not you, not your friends.
CAMEROTA: You are getting a lot of naked invitations, just not from people you want.
LOPEZ: Out of New York City. You know, people invite you to all kinds of crazy stuff.
CAMEROTA: It is like a nude beach. It's not what you actually what to see when you ramble down one of those.
LOPEZ: No, no, no. You don't. I once -- this head fund manager once told me never go to a fight you're invited to, and I think it's probably the same thing for any naked party.
CAMEROTA: Congressman, how many nude dinner parties have you been to?
JONES: Zero.
CAMEROTA: Are you just trying to run for office again?
JONES: I think people are bored. People are so bored, and I feel for those people.
(LAUGHTER)
JONES: This is not the way -- this is not the answer.
CAMEROTA: Evan, you got nine seconds. How many nude dinner parties?
SIEGFRIED: I've been to none, but it would depend upon if it is a Michelin-starred chef or not (ph) --
(LAUGHTER)
And on the bright side, if you spill red wine, you don't have to take anything to the dry cleaners.
CAMEROTA: Such a great point.
JONES: Oh, my God.
LOPEZ: That's good.
CAMEROTA: Thank you very much. You've made excellent points. Alright, tomorrow on "CNN This Morning," has America's tipping culture gone overboard? And what about at a nude dinner? The new numbers and challenges facing you at the checkout counter, tune in for "CNN This Morning," starting at 6:00 a.m. Eastern only here on CNN.
All right, thanks for watching, everyone. You can find me on social media if you want to talk more about this at Alisyn Camerota. Our coverage continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
