Return to Transcripts main page

Isa Soares Tonight

Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland Back Self-Determination; Democrats and Republicans Spar Over Limiting Ai Growth; Backlash Over Sydney Sweeney's Nude Sports Ad. Aired 2-3p ET

Aired September 14, 2026 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

ISA SOARES, HOST, ISA SOARES TONIGHT: A very warm welcome to the show, everyone, I'm Isa Soares. Tonight, dire warnings from A.I. bosses that the

technology they help create could pose a serious risk to humanity. We'll have perspective from an A.I. expert for you this hour.

Then Europe reacts with both anger and outrage after a Russian strike on Ukrainian passenger train. We'll have the very latest for you. Plus,

leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland say Westminster's rule is coming to an end.

I asked Scotland's First Minister John Swinney about the push Celtic nations are making for a fresh vote on staying part of the United Kingdom.

But first, tonight, Artificial Intelligence, real risks, shockwaves are being felt from Wall Street to Washington after one of the biggest names in

A.I. said his own technology could pose a risk to humanity.

Sources tell CNN A.I. giants Anthropic, Google and OpenAI are discussing creating a standards body for Artificial Intelligence. That's after the CEO

of Anthropic called for a slowdown on how fast the technology is advancing.

In an essay, Dario Amodei acknowledged that people could lose control of A.I., and the technology could be abused for cyber-attacks, bioterrorism

and major economic disruption. In an exclusive interview with CNN, he said the industry needs to take urgent action. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DARIO AMODEI, CEO, ANTHROPIC: Let's focus on our agency and our ability to take the right paths instead of the wrong paths. And I think that the way

to take the right paths is for the industry to work together. If we go too slow, I still believe that the wrong people will be in charge of the

technology. And you know, that again, will bring the probability of things going wrong very high.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: Well, Elon Musk, whose company xAI developed Grok and OpenAI boss Sam Altman say they agree with Amodei. Stocks linked to A.I. tumbled on

Monday, and this is how stock markets are doing right now. You know, Monday, red hours right across the board.

Nasdaq there, pretty flat at this hour. The tech heavy Nasdaq that we'll keep an eye on those numbers for you. And fears are reaching Washington

too. The Senate Minority leader has called for a classified briefing on A.I. from administration officials.

President Trump, however, is dismissing concerns, saying the only guardrail A.I. needs is, quote, "a strong and smart high IQ president", adding that

the U.S. has that in spades. Well, our tech reporter, Clare Duffy is in New York with more on what could be a watershed moment for A.I.

And Clare, I'm not going to ask you about the politics. I'll get to that in just a moment, because it's interesting how that's bleeding in now into

politics. But I mean, this is really a rare show of unity for the big tech's top rivals. So, just tell us what more you're learning about this

idea of a standards body for A.I. here.

CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECHNOLOGY REPORTER: Yes, Isa, it is really rare to see these top A.I. leaders all on the same page about the path forward here.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, joined by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, xAI CEO Elon Musk, also, Google DeepMind co-founder Demis Hassabis, all agreeing that we

need to find a way to slow down the pace of A.I. development.

Our colleague Hadas Gold gained -- got new reporting today that these companies had actually discussed an A.I. standards body earlier this Summer

that would be a public-private partnership, so the government would oversee it, but the companies would fund it, would allow third party evaluators to

look inside of these companies, look at their guardrails, evaluate advanced models before they're released to the public.

We heard some of those same ideas reiterated by Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei this weekend in this proposal that he laid out about how to move forward

here, including this idea of having third party safety evaluators positioned within these companies with access to how the technology is

developing.

And I think it is going to be really interesting to see whether and how the industry is able to move forward without Washington, because, as you said,

Isa, there seems to be real disagreement in Washington about how to handle this issue.

Meanwhile, these A.I. leaders really are the ones who are in a position to slow-down the pace of this technology development, if that is what they

think needs to happen here.

[14:05:00]

SOARES: Yes, and look, I mentioned it. I'm going to ask my producer Earl(ph) to bring up stock prices because we are seeing Clare, really red

arrows right across the board. And I know that these calls by the CEOs you were talking about for a slowdown, you know, we're seeing because of this,

we're seeing a tumble in stocks in particular when it comes to tech stocks. So, just paint us a picture of how they are faring -- these concerns.

DUFFY: Yes, in particular, this is really taking a hit to some of the tech stocks that are really at the foundation of the A.I. industry. So,

chipmakers like Nvidia, Nvidia down just 2.5 percent. When I looked a few minutes ago, Intel down 4.5 percent.

The South Korean company SK Hynix down 7 percent. You're also seeing SoftBank, which is invested in OpenAI, down 13.5 percent. And so,

certainly, I think this is related to these calls by the big top leaders in this industry to slow things down.

All of those companies that are at the foundation of the industry, hoping that this is going to continue to ramp up because that is good for their

business. Interestingly, also on the SoftBank point, we heard from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman in an interview over the weekend that his company is no

longer planning to make an IPO this year, which is something that was previously anticipated, in part, I think, because of this question around

safety.

And he may want the option to remain private and take some of these actions to slow down the company's development in a way that shareholders, if the

company were to go public, might not want. And so, really interesting tensions here between what is good for humans, what is good for this

industry, and also what is good for the shareholders and Wall Street at this point.

SOARES: That's a very good point. I'm really glad you brought that up. Thank you very much. Clare Duffy there for us in New York. Well, in the

meantime, China is rejecting suggestions it poses a threat to A.I. security and a tutorial in a state-backed newspaper called the essay by Anthropic

CEO, a veiled jibe at Beijing. China says the focus should instead be on cooperation. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GUO JIAKUN, SPOKESPERSON, FOREIGN MINISTRY, CHINA (through translator): The development of Artificial Intelligence concerns the common well-being

of all humanity. All parties should work together to advance A.I. in a manner that is open, inclusive, beneficial to all, and oriented towards the

good.

Spreading various threat narratives and engaging in confrontation and malicious competition will only disrupt the global A.I. governance process

and serve the interests of no one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: Well, let's stay with this. Nathan Labenz is a tech entrepreneur who hosts a Cognitive Revolution podcast, which explores the impact of A.I.

society and culture. And he joins me now from Detroit in Michigan.

Nathan, welcome to the show. Look, let me get your thoughts first. First of all, I'm hoping that you were listening there to Clare Duffy, my colleague

in New York. And I really want to get your thoughts on what we heard from President Trump.

Basically, Nathan, just rejecting calls for more regulation and saying -- I think he said it on social media, was a sick conspiracy to undermine A.I.

Is he right or is he simply trying not to lose versus China? How do you see it?

NATHAN LABENZ, PODCAST HOST, THE COGNITIVE REVOLUTION: Well, it's difficult to see into either presidents' mind, to be honest. So, who can

say what their real heart of hearts are? But I think it's really important to be clear on the fact that the people at the frontier companies, the

people at OpenAI, the people at Anthropic, and I know a good number of them, they are legitimately freaking out right now.

You know, I don't think it makes a lot of sense to say that this is some sort of galaxy-brained conspiracy to sabotage A.I. These are A.I.

enthusiasts. These are people who have dedicated their careers to building this technology.

And they're doing it because they believe that most likely it's going to be very good for us. They really believe -- and I actually, I'm right there

with them in being super excited about what A.I. can do in terms of curing diseases, creating material abundance, freeing people from drudgery,

ushering in hopefully a Pax Robotica.

That's my new term for an enduring peace, and, you know, period of human privilege and enduring prosperity between the U.S. and China.

So, they believe in all that. But what they're seeing right now internally at the companies with the A.I. is getting much stronger extremely quickly

and surprising them in terms of their creativity of problem-solving, their persistence, and ultimately literally hacking out of their containers and

taking over parts of other companies' infrastructure and parts of their own infrastructure has them freaked out.

The stock market today would not suggest that this is some sort of marketing gimmick to increase their stock prices. I think we should take

them --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: At their word that they are genuinely concerned, and that we should try to figure out what can we do about it.

SOARES: Right, OK, so, but it seems the President is not, and I wonder whether you feel that he has a point, because even if the U.S. -- I mean,

you heard Clare talking about the standards body, right. These CEOs going to go for standards body for A.I.

[14:10:00]

But even if the U.S. does slow down or finds a way to slow down regulation, do we know whether China believes in the same -- has the same concerns,

whether it believes in Anthropic concerns that there's a greater than 10 percent chance of A.I. killing all humans. Do we have a sense of where that

China stands on this?

LABENZ: Well, I think, again, it's very difficult to see into elite Chinese politics and really know what their internal discussions look like.

I did go to China this Summer for a couple of weeks just to try to get a little bit better sense of what people on the ground there are thinking.

I attended WAIC, which is the big A.I. conference where President Xi gave the opening remarks. And I also went to a number of A.I. companies and a

number of universities and talked to people working on related issues.

And I would say that they broadly are not so concerned about the existential risk or human extinction level problems. Yet, what they all

said to me over and over again is, we are very practical people, and we haven't seen concrete evidence that these things could happen yet.

And so, we're much more focused on the problems that we actually see in front of us. But the problems that we see in front of us are pretty

significant. And they're pretty related to these big problems as well.

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: It's really about how do we make sure for the Chinese side that like A.I.s are doing what they're meant to be doing, and that they stay

under human control and they don't go off committing felonies that they weren't instructed or ever encouraged to commit. So, I think they're

starting --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: To see these things happening. They don't have this like longstanding, you know, sci-fi culture or doomer discourse like we --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: Do here in the United States. But the problems that are actually starting to become real are getting their attention. And, you know, it's a

common observation, but the Chinese government likes control, right? So, A.I. that is out of their --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: Control --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: I do not think is going to appeal to them at all. And I do think if --

SOARES: What?

LABENZ: They start to see these things on their side, they will come down on them.

SOARES: Which then begs the question, Nathan, you're talking about, you know, them being practical. I mean, our viewers will be asking this, who

would enforce the pacing? Who would police it? I'm guessing you need some sort of UN-like body to kind of oversee this.

So, speak to what that may look like, because right now, there is very little trust between the United States and China, or correct me if I'm

wrong.

LABENZ: No, I think that's absolutely right. Trust is low, and it's going to take some time to build it up. I think that what I would recommend for

the U.S. side first is, keep in mind that it is our companies that have been pushing the frontier.

It is our companies that have created these incidents, which I call lab leaks, where the A.I.s are actually breaking out of their training

environments and affecting people who never even knew that they existed in the real world.

We haven't seen that from Chinese companies yet. They're not too far behind, and we might soon, but we haven't yet. It's also been our

companies, including Dario, who I'm -- you know, a huge fan of with respect to a lot of the different lines of work that he's invested in.

But it is also our companies that have been putting forward these ideas about a coalition of democracies that will box out China and ultimately

something makes them an offer they can't refuse. So, we've been kind of escalating this.

And I think what we should do first is, get our own house in order. The competition between OpenAI and Anthropic --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: Is sort of echoes the competition between the United States and China. And if we can't get our two leading companies to come together and

agree on some common framework, then I don't have a lot of hope for a U.S.- China agreement.

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: So, I think we've got to start with --

SOARES: Well --

LABENZ: What we can do --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: And we might need to expand that from two companies to five or more. But if we do that, then I think we're in a much better position to

engage with China and say, look what we've done, and now we want to bring you into this.

SOARES: Yes, in the meantime, the rest of the world is waiting to see whether two -- the world's biggest economies, right -- two of the world's

biggest economies are actually what they're going to -- sort of agreement they're going to reach.

But look, there's another part of this discussion, and our Clare Duffy was kind of hinting at that regarding the IPO. This requires money. This

requires natural resources, right? And there are concerns right now, Nathan, about the growing debt levels among A.I. firms which are borrowing

vast amounts, vast sums of money to build these data centers, right? To try to house this A.I. infrastructure.

Are these warnings in a way to convince investors to give them more money behind these market valuations? Speak to those concerns that we've been

hearing?

LABENZ: Yes -- no, I don't think so. I think, again, the people at the companies are legitimately scared by the developments that they're seeing.

And I think they're speaking against their own economic interests for the most part when they bring these concerns --

SOARES: Yes --

LABENZ: To the public. I do think, though, and I think this is really important, that we don't necessarily have to tank the stock market to slow

down the pace of A.I. development, because the A.I.s that we already have are extremely good, and right now, we are nowhere near using them to the

fullest of their capabilities.

[14:15:00]

Lost in the last two weeks of news or mostly lost, has been the fact that A.I.s have solved a millennium prize, a $1 million open math problem that

had been open for the better part of a century, and that no human had ever been able to crack, and A.I. was able to do that in just, I think like four

or five days of run time.

So, these are the A.I.s we have now. We're not talking about destroying those A.I.s or taking them off online or --

SOARES: And that is terrifying in itself, Nathan --

LABENZ: Refusing to allow businesses to use them. Yes, I think -- I think it is.

SOARES: And that is terrifying in itself, right?

LABENZ: I think -- I think what we need -- shouldn't take away from that - - well, yes, I think so. I think we've gone recently from -- I used to say A.I.s could get scary if they keep getting more powerful. And as of this

Summer, I now feel that the A.I.s that we currently have are indeed scary.

But that means that we don't have to keep pushing this frontier of ever higher capabilities in order to get economic benefits. The A.I.s we have

today are more than enough to deliver all kinds of economic benefits.

We need our -- we need, frankly, time, I think, for our businesses, our people, to figure out how to use them, to deploy them effectively. And

there's -- you know, if you can solve a millennium prize math problem, there are all kinds of efficiencies in the economy that A.I.s can help us

realize and get the benefits of without having to keep pushing on this scaling dimension further and further and further.

SOARES: Really enjoyed the conversation, Nathan. I wish we had more time, but thank you so much really. I think a lot of viewers would have enjoyed

that. And so many more questions regarding A.I., not just obviously on the business front, but also on the politics front, and which is where we're

going to go in about 20 minutes.

Thank you very much, Nathan, appreciate it. Live for us there in Detroit. And do stay with us, as I was saying, for more on this conversation, in

about 20 minutes time right here on the show, we'll take you to Washington where a top lawmaker says the warning bells are ringing louder than ever.

What does that mean for politicians? What sort of regulations do they want to see in place? Stay with us for that discussion. And take you to Europe

now, because leaders are taking a defiant stance in response to a Russian strike on a Ukrainian passenger train on Sunday, there may have been

targeting Western dignitaries.

Now, the strike was launched shortly after separate train carrying former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and others had left the station.

Former CIA Director David Petraeus was actually still at the station when the strike happened.

Officials in Kyiv said it was quite likely a targeted attack. The EU's Foreign Policy chief says the strike was a clear attempt to intimidate

Western countries. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAJA KALLAS, CHIEF OF FOREIGN POLICY, EUROPEAN UNION: It is clearly meant to scare Western countries from supporting Ukraine, from going to Ukraine

to show support. That was meant -- it was clearly a message to the Western world.

I think the question for us is, what do we take from that message? I think we should act the opposite.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: Let's get more on this strike from our Clare Sebastian.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): It was an extraordinary moment. You know, foreign dignitaries and leaders have traveled in and out

of Ukraine throughout this war, and there have been sort of a few close calls before.

But look, Ukrainian railways have come right out and said that at the very moment this attack happened, David Petraeus; the former CIA director, was

on a train, on another train in the station area, not the train that was hit.

But he then told the "Financial Times" that he had to evacuate his train. So, he was extremely close by. Not only that, but shortly before the

strike, another train had departed that station and crossed over the border into Poland, and that was carrying former British Prime Minister Boris

Johnson as well as other European officials.

They had all been attending a major security conference in Kyiv over the weekend. So, this could have been very different. It could have been a

major international incident if Ukrainian railways are right about this.

And I think look, in the context of the broader escalation that we're seeing from Russia in terms of air attacks, it's yet more evidence that the

target list has broadened with it. European officials, though, coming out today and saying, look, this was a message intended to frighten us and it

will not work. So, coming out swinging.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SOARES: Our Clare Sebastian reporting there. And meanwhile, diesel fuel prices are at record highs in the U.S. But President Donald Trump isn't

blaming the war with Iran. He's instead pointing the finger at Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

The President says Kyiv is causing a worldwide diesel shortage by striking Russia's fuel infrastructure. In an online message today, he claimed both

Ukraine and Russia have agreed to stop targeting energy sites. Neither Kyiv nor Moscow has confirmed that.

And despite the President's view, it's clear that the escalation in the Middle East is once again rattling energy markets. Saudi Arabia is being

forced to temporarily shut down a key pipeline following attacks by Houthi rebels.

[14:20:00]

These are before and after satellite images you're looking at, that showed the damage to the East West Pipeline. And adding to the tension, Iran's

state media reports that Iranian commercial vessel was struck in the Strait of Hormuz.

It says one person was killed in the incident. Let's put all these strands for you together. Our business senior reporter David Goldman is with us,

and join the dots for us, David, I think it's important because the geopolitical picture clearly getting kind of more complicated by the day,

not just the strikes, but now.

And we didn't mention this, this meeting that was supposed to happen between Iran and Gulf states has been postponed. So, where are we on oil

prices, which every time I look, that arrow does not seem -- does not go down.

DAVID GOLDMAN, CNN BUSINESS REPORTER: That's right. It's another day, it's another moment for the oil prices to continue to go higher. We hit close to

$110 a barrel earlier today. Certainly, a little bit below that. But much higher than we were at the beginning of the war.

Remember, we were around $70 a barrel for the international standard, and we were close to that just about six weeks ago. So, this is much higher.

And it's causing pain for a number of people. One of the key things that's going on is that, you know, the oil market has been remarkably resilient.

I mean, we've gotten much more oil through the Strait of Hormuz than we have any right to do. And that is in thanks to, you know, the U.S.

government and the U.S. military that's shepherding some of that oil through.

But another key factor is this East West Pipeline that the Saudis have used to pump a tremendous amount of oil that normally would exit the Strait of

Hormuz, instead going through the Red Sea, the Bab al-Mandab Strait, and out to its customers in Asia and in India.

Except we know that the Houthis have started to become more active in this region, and targeted this pipeline, shutting down a tremendous amount of

oil. It's about 7 million barrels of oil, just, you know, every single day, about 5 million of those barrels were used to divert oil from the Strait of

Hormuz to the Red Sea.

About 2 million are used to go to refineries in Saudi Arabia. That's been crucial because of all of those strikes on Russian infrastructure, on

Russian refineries, all of that combined has sent diesel prices above $6 a gallon, a record high in the United States, and keeps -- that keeps going

higher and higher.

Now, the good news is that there is about a week of supply in Yanbu. That key port city in Saudi Arabia. So, this can be managed if the Saudis are

able to repair that pipeline. But they've got a week to do it, if not, those prices could go even higher.

SOARES: And look, we're all feeling it, right? You mentioned diesel there. We're all feeling it at the pump. But the economic picture, David, speak to

that. It's not looking particularly great because I was looking at U.S. borrowing costs.

The ten-year yield, I mean, it hit 5 percent for the first time in 2023. And as we have the yield, we have oil prices. This is inflationary

concerns, right? We saw the ECB, the European Central Bank raising interest rates. Where does this leave the Fed meeting on Wednesday.

GOLDMAN: It's not concerns, it's happening. It's real. And this is the thing that the Fed --

SOARES: Yes --

GOLDMAN: Has to contend with is, how much higher does this go? Oil prices have been incredibly volatile, trading in a range of, you know, $70 to $110

a barrel during the course of this. And so, if you're the Fed, do you raise rates to combat actual inflation, or is this a conflict that could be

resolved, you know, because of a Truth Social post from the President tomorrow?

We don't know. It's unlikely. And we've seen this been -- you know, this has been going on for more than six months now. So, clearly, the Fed has a

very difficult problem to address. It's going to start doing that tomorrow and make its decision on Wednesday. We will certainly be watching that.

SOARES: I know President Trump will have an opinion if they do decide to go down that route.

GOLDMAN: See well --

SOARES: We shall see what comes out of that. David -- he will indeed. David Goldman, good to see you. Thank you very much indeed.

GOLDMAN: Thank you --

SOARES: And still to come tonight on the show, a union under pressure. Why the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are promising self-

determination. My conversation with Scotland's First Minister, that is just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:25:00]

SOARES: After nine days trapped in a hydropower tunnel, a dramatic rescue, and a week of hospital care. Sanjay Sah was a rare survivor of last month's

flooding in Nepal that killed more than 1,300 people. On Sunday, Sah returned to his village and his family. Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANJAY SAH, NEPAL FLOOD SURVIVOR (through translator): In the tunnel, it was not just dark, but it was like a black hole. Even light would not have

been able to pierce through. It was very dark. It was not just darkness, but it was full of obstacles and hurdles like sand, glass, snakes, animals,

dead bodies washed in from outside.

In that situation, my time in there was full of challenges. I did not cry. There was no point in crying. I did not cry when I was inside. I stayed

strong. One should make the heart strong, motivate it and be positive no matter what the situation, life is after all a struggle. We need to fight.

We must never give up.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: What a wonderful homecoming after so much tragedy. And still to come tonight on the show, the politics of A.I. How Democrats and

Republicans have taken very different approaches to the A.I. threat. We'll explore that.

Plus, why Scotland's First Minister wants to hold another Scottish Independence Referendum by 2031. Hear my conversation with John Swinney

coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:30:00]

ISA SOARES, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Welcome back. Westminster's time is coming to an end. That is the message from the leaders of Scotland, Wales

and Northern Ireland who just signed a joint declaration calling for constitutional change.

Now, the agreement doesn't mean the United Kingdom is breaking up. But it puts renewed pressure on the competing visions for its future. Scotland and

Wales are both pursuing great autonomy and at some point, eventual independence. While Northern Ireland, Sinn Fein supports Irish

reunification.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHELLE O'NEILL, NORTHERN IRISH FIRST MINISTER: We're certainly living in times of enormous change. Change that is unstoppable. Change that no matter

what is said by any British Prime Minister will not be able to hold back the tide of what's happening in front of our eyes right now.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: Well, earlier I spoke with Scottish First Minister John Swinney who told me why today's meeting was so important to the devolved nations.

Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOHN SWINNEY, SCOTTISH FIRST MINISTER: Today is a pivotal moment because for the first time in history we have First Ministers in Scotland, Wales

and Northern Ireland who all believe that the people of their countries should decide their own constitutional future and that they should change

that constitutional arrangement.

So, you have three out of the four constituent parts of the United Kingdom wanting a change in the constitutional arrangement. So, today was about

supporting the collaboration and cooperation between our three countries and about making the case for constitutional change. And for me, it's about

making the case for independence for Scotland.

SOARES: You talked about constitutional arrangements. Let me just, you know, bring our viewers up to date with this because I think this is

important. In 2022, I believe it was, the Supreme Court ruled that the Scottish Parliament could not hold another referendum without the consent

of Westminster. Last week, Prime Minister Andy Burnham had -- he had this to say. We're going to play it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDY BURNHAM, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: I would say exactly the same situation in Scotland. I am not aware that there is a majority of public

support for another referendum. And until that changes, Mr. Speaker, there won't be one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: The following day, in a letter to you, he said the referendum was, quote, "off limits." How then, Minister, do you get around this? What is

your strategy here?

SWINNEY: What I would point out is that at the election in May, the people of Scotland elected a parliament with the largest number of members of the

Scottish Parliament ever before committed to independence and the holding of a referendum on independence.

[14:35:00]

And if you look at opinion polls, recent opinion polls, the pattern is that in recent months, the preferred constitutional option of people in Scotland

is for Scotland to be independent. So, I think there's very clear, demonstrable desire on the part of the people of Scotland to decide on

their own constitutional future. And that's the argument I'm putting forward and the one that I seek to make progress with the U.K. government.

SOARES: Right. Let's look at those polls, because I think that is important for international viewers, because in mid-August, the Scottish

Centre for Social Research did a poll on a referendum and it asked people the following question, if I bring it up, should Scotland be an independent

country? How would you vote? 47 percent of the people said yes, 43 percent said no. But when asked in the YouGov poll whether Scotland would be better

off financially, 50 percent said they'll be worse off.

So, Minister, what then is the strategy for convincing those voters who support independence in principle, but remain concerned potentially about

the economic consequences?

SWINNEY: We've got an obligation to make the case for Scottish independence, to put the persuasive arguments to people about how Scotland

would prosper with independence. So, you know, for example, we are suffering -- people are suffering just now in Scotland because of the lack

of improvements in their standard of living. So, much of that goes back to the disastrous decision to leave the European Union. So, an independent

Scotland could secure membership of the European Union and provide us with the opportunity to enhance our trading and economic opportunities.

Now, these are some of the arguments we've got to make to people in Scotland so that we can persuade them of the merits of our case. And given

the fact that there is now in the most recent polls a general pattern that shows that independence is the preferred option of people in Scotland, we

need to build on those levels of support to demonstrate a compelling argument for independence. And that's exactly what I'm doing.

SOARES: Right. So, I'm guessing that the strategy now is to build on that compelling argument, as you say. Do you have, Minister, a sense of a

timeline? Do you do you have a sense when you want to have a referendum by?

SWINNEY: I want to make sure that Scotland is able to have a referendum on the question of independence during this five-year parliamentary term,

which will conclude in 2031. So, between now and then, I think it is reasonable that the desire of the people of Scotland on the question of

independence should be tested in a fair and open referendum. And that's what we're going to concentrate our efforts on trying to secure as part of

the ongoing work of the Scottish Government and the work of the Scottish National Party as well.

SOARES: And our viewers would have seen this because we've been reporting on it. President Trump, we saw over the weekend, basically showed his

support for Northern Ireland breaking away from the U.K. to try and unify with the Republic of Ireland. I won't ask you about this because this is

not your area. But he did say he would not talk about Scotland becoming independent yet. I think the word he used was yet.

Would you seek, Minister, President Trump's support as you pursue independence? And how important would that be to your strategy or not at

all?

SWINNEY: Fundamentally, for me, the issue of independence is about the people of Scotland deciding on their own future. And of course, lots and

lots of commentators, lots of other contributors will make their voices heard about the question of independence. And fundamentally for me, this

issue is about the people.

It's about the people deciding what's right for them and their circumstances. And I'm confident that there is a growing mood within

Scotland that the country should be independent. And I want to make sure that's a reality.

SOARES: And just before you go, Minister, can you give us a sense of what kind of reaction you've had from inside Scotland following, of course, this

meeting today? How has it been received?

SWINNEY: I think people are very excited about the fact that we've got some movement on the question of independence. We've got an opportunity

ahead of us and it's up to us to seize that opportunity. And that's really the whole, the nub of the argument around independence is about enabling

people to exercise a choice about their future. And I think people in Scotland are excited about it.

SOARES: Minister, I appreciate you coming on the show. Thank you very much.

SWINNEY: Thank you very much. Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SOARES: Our thanks to Scotland's first minister there. And still to come on the show tonight, Donald Trump says, stop worrying about out-of-control

A.I. growth. He has the answer to our A.I. fears. We'll tell you about his plan in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:40:00]

SOARES: Welcome back. Well, we told you at the top of the program about the debate raging over controlling A.I. Well, in Washington, Democrats are

pushing for a slowdown in A.I. development, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer today called for a classified briefing between the White House and

the Senate to talk about developing an A.I. framework. His Democratic colleagues say the time has come for Congress to act. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), U.S. HOUSE MINORITY LEADER: Speaker Mike Johnson, he killed a bipartisan task force this Congress that was prepared

to do the serious work necessary to try to erect the guardrails to protect the health, the safety, the well-being of the American people.

SEN. RUBEN GALLEGO (D-AZ): When we create a nuclear weapon, the nuclear weapon did not have the decision-making power to drop a nuclear weapon.

A.I. has the capability, it will have the capability to make decisions like that. This is more akin to Dr. Frankenstein telling us, the monster is

loose, help me stop the monster.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: So, those are two Democrats there. The Republicans have staked out a very different position. They say A.I. regulations will only allow China

to take control of the A.I. race. Donald Trump has long been a champion of A.I. and says there's now a sick conspiracy -- and by the way, those are

his words, sick conspiracy, trying to slow it down.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I've said it from the beginning, whoever wins A.I., and we're leading by a lot, whoever wins A.I. wins.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Have you ever used it yourself or have you been --

TRUMP: Used A.I., yes, I did.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: How do you use AI?

TRUMP: But I would say, you know, for the most part, you can use A.I. for a lot of things right away.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you use it for?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOARES: Let's get more, let's bring in CNN senior reporter Annie Grayer on Capitol Hill with more on this. So, Annie, let's break this down. We now

have the House and Senate back at work, and they're clearly got concerns of A.I. very high in the agenda. Talk me through what Senate Minority Leader

Chuck Schumer, what he's trying to achieve with this. Talk us through that first.

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: So, Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, wants a classified briefing for all senators to meet with

administration officials to understand where current policy is, where there are holes, where the current threat levels are. It's just a way to kind of

get this conversation reignited and going. But of course, Democrats are in the minority here and only have a limited ability to affect change or set

the agenda.

Meanwhile, in the House, there are a group of Democrats who are pushing House Speaker Mike Johnson to keep lawmakers in session until they can

create some meaningful reform or at least show progress on this very complicated issue.

Right now, the House is only set to be in session for this week, and Republican leaders has canceled the remaining session days between now and

the November midterm elections.

[14:45:00]

But -- so -- and the top Democrat in the House, Hakeem Jeffries, is saying that he wants to make this a top part of his agenda and move forward with

legislative priorities if Democrats were to reclaim the majority in November.

But House Speaker Mike Johnson says that lawmakers need to take a more measured approach. He doesn't want to see Congress come in and potentially

overregulate this industry. And he's very concerned that regulation could cause the U.S. to lose the A.I. race with China and sees that as a major

national security threat.

So, the speaker does not want to see any sort of snap reaction here. In fact, he thinks that industry leaders have a major role to play in terms of

leading the charge of what regulation looks like, what safety measures need to be put in place. And the speaker told us just recently, just today, that

he wants to meet with some of those top executives from these big A.I. companies by early next week to try and get some more ideas on the table,

some momentum moving here.

But what we are seeing is this is an issue that has lawmakers deeply divided. It's also exposing how slow Congress is to move on some of these

issues. Congress has been wanting to tackle the topic of A.I. for so long, but we have not seen meaningful reforms or legislation passed through

Congress.

It's also an issue that really creates some interesting bedfellows here, where you have people on the far-right and the far-left coming together in

interesting ways. So, for example, tomorrow in Washington, D.C., Vermont Senators Bernie Sanders, a liberal in the Democratic Party, and Steve

Bannon, right-wing Trump ally, are both going to be attending this event about how to put safeguards in place for A.I.

So, just to show you the different alliances that are building, the divisions that are for sure emerged, and how Congress is really grappling

with what role, if any, they have to play here.

SOARES: Let's see what comes out of the clear divisions playing out as we are seeing it. Thank you very much, Annie, appreciate it.

And still to come tonight on the show, backlash over this ad featuring actress Sydney Sweeney. We'll speak to one female athlete about what impact

ads like this can have on women's sports.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SOARES: Well, a series of ads -- of new ads, I should say, featuring actress Sydney Sweeney, is getting a lot of attention, as well as backlash.

The ads are for the U.S. sports betting prediction market, Novig. They feature Sweeney posing with sports equipment, wearing little to no

clothing, hence why we're not showing you the ad in full.

[14:50:00]

Several prominent female athletes have taken issue to the overt sexualization of women in sports. Let's get more on this. Lottie McGuinness

joins me now. She's a Paralympic powerlifter for Team GB.

Lottie, really great you could be on the show to discuss this, because it is, as we have seen, all seen, going viral. And the response has been very

swift, right? So, you know, you've been posting -- you were also posted, I saw, on your Instagram. Sydney Sweeney, this is what women in sport look

like with your pictures. Tell us -- tell our viewers why you're against it, how it made you feel when you saw it, Lottie.

LOTTIE MCGUINNESS, TEAM GB PARALYMPIC POWERLIFTER: Yes. So, I made the Instagram post yesterday, and I noticed this was trending, telling Sydney

Sweeney what women in sport look like. And the advert has very much made sport go off by look instead of what a body can truly do.

For me, I stand out from a crowd. I've got dwarfism, and I've got big shoulder muscles, so I'm not everyone -- this ad has given the idea of a

perfect body, when really there's no such thing as a perfect body. And it's showing younger girls that it's showing that there might be a perfect body.

And for me, I just -- I jumped on because I am proud of my body. I'm proud of what it can do. I can lift heavy weights. And yes, your body doesn't

have to look a certain way to be able to do sport.

SOARES: Yes. And look, I was following former, your former Australian swimming champion, Ariarne Titmus, and she said, I'm just going to read it

out, I can't describe how infuriated I feel when I watch this. Not only is it a kick in the face to every woman who has dedicated her life to

perfecting her craft, but every woman who enjoys sports for what it is, teamwork, friendship, dedication, excellence, and unity. How do we live in

a world where monetizing a woman's body and sexualizing women's sport is still a thing?

So, I suppose the question is, I mean, do you think that the ad, Lottie, makes a mockery of women in sport or that it sexualizes women or indeed

both?

MCGUINNESS: I think a bit of both. I mean, I am a powerlifter, which is actually a male dominant sport. And today posting the video, I've had a ton

of hate, mostly from men saying, you're only posting this just because you wish you looked like her. And I think it -- I mean, for me, I'm in a

strength sport and loads of women in the strength sport feel ashamed of what they look like because they've got big muscles. And we work hard to

tell women not to be afraid because that's what you're training your body to do.

And so, to have all of a sudden, this ad of promoting like the idea of a perfect body kind of makes those women feel unseen and heard and ashamed.

And they shouldn't be because -- I mean, I train my body almost every day to lift heavy weight. And I'm going to have big muscles. I'm going to be

heavy on a weight scale. But that's because I'm training my body to do what I do. And yes, I think it's -- for me, women should not be ashamed of what

they look like because there is no perfect body.

SOARES: I mean, how do you respond? You were saying, Lottie, how you get those comments, mostly for men, right after you posted it. I've also heard,

you know, she's an adult. She's consenting. She's making money. And women should be free to use whatever they want to do with their own sexuality.

How do you respond to that? I mean, do you feel like it takes women back decades?

MCGUINNESS: Oh, the comments I've heard today, I've had to sort some of it out because they truly have been horrific. I don't usually get affected by

comments, but today it's been quite bad, like second after second. And all the --

SOARES: I'm sorry.

MCGUINNESS: I don't like to say it, but most of the negative ones have been from men. And so, yes, I've got an amazing team around me that's

supporting me. But yes, I think it does take it back because it kind of shows the importance of this trend and shows that the different women in

different sports and showing what we can do.

And I mean, for me, I'll tell my story. I -- when I was growing up, I wanted to be tall and it was seeing Ellie Simmonds, a female athlete with

dwarfism in sport, showing me what was possible and gave me my future. Because without that, I wouldn't be here today. And I think it has taken

this effort and this trend is showing that it's still a discussion.

Women in sport are still like, we should be seen more. We should be shown more because there's little girls out there wanting to be inspired and not

competing to be the perfect body size, not the certain way, because you've got one life and you need to be who you want to be. And you want to be, you

want to be in the sport. And you being a certain size or shape isn't going to get you to your goals.

[14:55:00]

And people will belittle you if they will. They'll try their hardest. But I just hope that you get them.

SOARES: And I'm sorry you're having to get your list -- you're reading all this mail, these messages. I mean, from one moment to another, I just

delete, ignore. Very, very honestly.

But look, I just I wonder whether anger should also, Lottie, be directed at the sports gambling company. When I first saw it, I thought it may have

been A.I. I wasn't sure. But I do wonder where the responsibility lies here, because I mean, in many ways, the ad is doing what it's supposed to

do, right? It's attracting men. It's annoying women. So, where does the responsibility lie here, you think?

MCGUINNESS: I made a comment earlier on my social media saying, if I'm honest, I don't put any hate towards Sydney Sweeney. I should have

recaptioned my Instagram post better. I don't put hate on her, because in a world, you need to be kind. But I think what this company has done to her

and what she's signed that she was signed the contract is that I think the company needs to think.

I mean, if I'm honest, the company is probably thinking, this is working. We've got the attention and everything and all the men are happy. But

realistically, they've caused massive drama. They've caused a lot of girls and women probably being super self-conscious, super negative on myself.

And yes, I do reiterate, I don't have any hate towards Sydney. But yes, I do think the company, what they've done, it's not right. It's really

unacceptable.

SOARES: Yes. Lottie, we're running out of time. I'm incredibly grateful, Lottie, for you coming on the show. Lottie McGinnis there. Thank you,

Lottie.

And that does it for us. Do stay right here. "What We Know" with Chrissy is up next. Thank you, Lottie.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:00:00]

END