Return to Transcripts main page
Isa Soares Tonight
President Donald Trump Hosts Tech Executives For Talks On Whether Artificial Intelligence Is Outpacing Its Safeguards; More Than 100 Israeli Settlers Attack A Palestinian Family Overnight, Setting Their Home On Fire; Republicans Grill Former Special Counsel Jack Smith On Capitol Hill Over Trump Probes; New York To Review Cornell Response To Rape Allegations; Trump Speaking After A.I. Meeting At The WH; Suspected Terror Plot In The U.K.; 100-Plus Israeli Settlers Attack Occupied West Bank Village. Aired 2- 3p ET
Aired September 29, 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, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A very warm welcome to the show, everyone, I'm Isa Soares. Tonight, as the A.I. alarm bells continue to
ring, President Donald Trump hosts tech executives for talks on whether their technology is outpacing its safeguards. We have the very latest for
you.
Then in the occupied West Bank, more than 100 Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian family overnight, storming their house and then setting it on
fire. We have latest on that for you this hour. Plus, "I will not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution from the President or others."
That defiant testimony from former U.S. special counsel Jack Smith on Capitol Hill today. We do begin this hour, though, with the White House
meeting over A.I. and the battle lines are clearly drawn.
While some industry leaders are issuing doomsday warnings of the technology's rapid innovation, U.S. President Donald Trump calls for a
hands-off approach when it comes to government regulation. The President is meeting today with a who-is-who really of tech giants, including the chiefs
of Anthropic, Nvidia, OpenAI and Meta.
Some of those tech CEOs want the federal government to place guardrails on Artificial Intelligence. It's an idea staunchly opposed by the President
who says any regulation would stifle A.I. growth, arguing that the U.S. needs to stay ahead of China.
Straight out then to our A.I. correspondent, Hadas Gold with the very latest. I mean, Hadas, it's really interesting because this meeting comes
as we hear two companies, A.I. -- these two A.I. companies really sounding the alarm on themselves.
We've got this leaked Anthropic IPO filing and then, you know, and OpenAI announcing its scrapped plans for a latest model, right? Over safety
concerns. Just talk us through both of those two warnings because it comes at this critical time.
HADAS GOLD, CNN AI CORRESPONDENT: Yes, so Anthropic, we all know that it's gearing up for its massive IPO, could value the company at $2 trillion.
"Reuters" and the "Financial Times" got their hands on this prospectus, where Anthropic sends a -- spends a significant amount of time talking
about how its own product poses an existential threat to humanity.
They talk about how their models prior showed self-preserving behaviors, have attempted to conceal and manipulate information, and have engaged in
behavior resembling blackmail. In fact, they spend 80 pages of some 261 pages of the main body of the prospectus on safety, compared to less.
I think it's in the 40s or 50s on the actual, you know, product and the business itself, which is stunning when you think about it. OpenAI for
their part, they said that they scrapped a recent version of one of their models, 6.1 of the Astra -- GPT Astra model, over concerns that it was
showing -- that it wasn't improving on things like alignment, which is where the model does what you actually -- as the -- what you as the human
want it to be doing.
They said that it showed higher levels of deception where it wasn't always honest about its actions, and that it was sometimes pushing ahead on tasks,
even when the humans didn't necessarily ask for it to do so, and would at times reach for external tools and services, even if it might be unsafe, or
again, if the human did not intend or did not want them to do so.
So, these are just, you know, adding to the pile of this sort of Summer of A.I. safety risks that we have been seeing. And I think this meeting at the
White House is a reflection of, you know, a recognition that it is time to do something, at least, get everybody into the room.
And I have to say, this is an impressive room that the White House has convened, because not only do you have the President, the Vice President,
the Speaker of the House, the Chief of Staff, the head of NASA, head of the Treasury.
You also have a who is who in the industry, the heads of Meta, actually, two of the executives from Anthropic, from Palantir, OpenAI's President,
Nvidia, you have Elon Musk, you have Satya Nadella, you have Sundar Pichai from Google.
It's literally, you know, the very top of the top of the people who should be in this room to have this conversation. We shouldn't expect any major
policy announcements, but I do want to flag something that's been interesting to me, is that Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, who was
really one of the impetuses for this meeting, has seemed to change his tone a little bit.
[14:05:00]
He was very resistant to Congress doing anything, and now he is starting to say, you know, some voluntary oversight might be in the cards. Take a
listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): Each of them have said in their own ways, in their own words, that, you know, they welcome oversight. And I think what's
going to come out of the meeting today, I hope, is that we have an agreement of the mind, so-to-speak, around the table.
Congress can't go in and just, you know, take a knee-jerk reaction to overregulate this because the frontier labs are ahead of where members of
Congress are.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLD: So, Isa, as we speak, this meeting is taking place in the White House, not clear if we're going to get any sort of remarks or photo spray
after the fact. But again, don't expect any major policy announcements. But this is seen as an important first step towards at least having those
conversations.
SOARES: Hadas, thank you very much indeed. And Hadas was talking, of course, about that meeting taking place at the White House. That's where I
want to take you, our senior White House correspondent, Kristen Holmes, I think she's with us. Is she? Do we have her? Yes, we do.
Kristen, let me go to you then, first, we were listening to really Hadas laying out all the key points of what can we can expect because for weeks,
viewers will know this, right? We have seen the President really downplaying the risks of A.I., even calling it a hoax.
Clearly, from what we've heard from Hadas, these leaders, A.I. company leaders are on a different page when it comes to what they are looking for
here in terms of guardrails. What, if anything, are we expecting to come out of this? What are you hearing so far from this meeting?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: So, this is really what I'm told is a starting point for all the sides to kind of voice how they feel
about Artificial Intelligence, what they think needs to be in place in terms of guardrails, and here, what President Trump has to say.
I was told just a second ago from a White House official that this lunch began at 12:35, it's now 2:06, and that it is ongoing. So, clearly, some
kind of robust conversation, but we don't have a readout yet. Now, one thing to keep in mind is at least one person on this list who is going to
be in that meeting, Anthropic's Dario Amodei.
He is somebody who has said that there needs to be more guardrails. And in fact, President Trump called him out specifically. Now, the two of them did
have dinner on Sunday at the White House, which clearly went somewhat well if he was invited back to this meeting.
Now, interestingly, President Trump himself put out a seating chart of who was actually at this lunch. Next to him on one side, Elon Musk, who has
said that there should be more guardrails in A.I., he was one of those tech voices saying that, also has had a tumultuous relationship with Trump, but
they are back to being fairly close.
On the other side is Jensen Huang of Nvidia, who has really been guiding President Trump on his talking points when it comes to Artificial
Intelligence, and those same talking points that we've heard from President Trump saying we can't put up guardrails, we can't slow down, then we'll let
China beat us in the A.I. race, talking about beating the United States.
I do want to tell you; this comes at a critical time in the United States where feelings are really not positive on Artificial Intelligence. There
was a recent poll that said that 75 percent of Americans say that their feelings about Artificial Intelligence are closer to fear and concern than
they are to hope --
SOARES: Wow --
HOLMES: And excitement. Only 25 percent are leading towards hope and excitement. And on top of that, a secondary poll, part of the same set,
said that 71 percent of people think that the federal government is not doing enough to regulate A.I.
Now, there are a lot of reasons for that. One is that you're hearing these tech industry experts coming out and saying that they're not doing enough,
and there's also people who are concerned overall in general. What does this mean for their jobs?
What does this mean for their future? But it is really coming to a fever pitch now here in the United States ahead of a Midterm election in which
people want some answers, at least from this administration, on how they are going to handle A.I. moving forward.
SOARES: Yes, we'll see, of course, with those numbers really signify any sort of shift from the White House. At least, trying to get on the same
page today for that meal, for that dinner. I know you'll keep us abreast of the very latest, Kristen, thank you very much indeed.
We're going to leave the United States for a moment because we have been following protests in two European capitals in Paris as well, in Madrid, in
Spain. People are speaking out as the cost-of-living crisis puts so many under pressure.
In France, first of all, tens of thousands of people took to the streets, including civil servants and high school students who blockaded dozens of
schools. And they are upset about planned budget cuts ahead of next year's presidential election. Our Melissa Bell has the latest for you from Paris.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): Social unrest has returned to the streets of France for the first time in a while.
This over the government's budget for 2027 that freezes public service sector wages in 2027.
[14:10:00]
What these unions, and there's been a rare showing of solidarity between the unions. They've all gotten together to take part in this protest, in
this strike and in this march, is the idea that these wages will remain fixed when the cost of living continues to grow.
I think one of the most noteworthy things beyond the teachers and hospital workers and railway workers that we've seen out on the streets has been the
huge presence of firefighters, many thousands of them took to the streets in Paris today after a meeting they had with France's Interior Minister.
What they're asking for is not so much a hike in wages as the raising of the resources at their disposal, as they seek to take on these wildfires
that, as we saw this Summer, are becoming more and more frequent here in France.
This protest about public sector wages has seen tens of thousands come out in the streets. There have been disruptions to schools, to railways and to
air traffic control. The big question, how the government over the next few weeks continues to try and get this budget through without causing too much
more of this. Melissa Bell, CNN, Paris.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOARES: Meantime, in Spain, the eviction of an 87-year-old has sparked protests over housing laws. A lawyer for the woman says she will be able to
return to her home, and that is according to "Reuters". However, that has not stopped the demonstrations.
Our CNN's Pau Mosquera explains the Spanish government is now proposing a new ban on evictions.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAU MOSQUERA, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): The measures adopted this Tuesday by the Spanish government have surprised many. Camping
out at Madrid's Puerta del Sol, not so much because of the substance, but because of the way they have been presented.
Protesters had initially expected all the proposals to be presented under one single decree. Instead, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez government has
decided to go ahead with all the proposals with two different texts.
This is one including the bulk of the measures, with measures like a ban on evicting vulnerable families until 2030, and another one restricting the
purchase of homes for speculative proposals. The other one is including a proposal for making rental contracts indefinite.
The general understanding is that they have done it this way because they want to ensure that the bulk of the measures get the approval of the
parliament when once the decrees get to the Congress to be ratified.
While the other texts that could include measures that could be controversial or create some disagreement gets to the parliament in a
separate way. This move has surprised and actually debunked many of those camping out here, downtown Madrid.
And they say that they now have to study both decrees as to see how far do this tax go towards meeting their executives, and also whether they
continue -- they extend this encampment further days. Whatever they decide, they are clear in one point that they will continue to mobilize, and they
already have called for more demonstrations over the next few days.
Pau Mosquera, CNN, Madrid.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOARES: And still to come tonight on the show, angry words on Capitol Hill as the man who indicted President Trump faces Republican senators, all the
name-calling and accusations you can imagine -- well, they're straight ahead.
Plus, CNN hears from an attorney representing one of the seven men accused in a civil lawsuit of an alleged gang rape at Cornell University. Both
those stories after a very short break. You are watching CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:15:00]
SOARES: "I will not be silenced by continued threats of prosecution from the President or others." Powerful words today from the man at the center
of a contentious hearing on Capitol Hill. Jack Smith; the former Special Counsel, if you remember who brought two federal indictments against Donald
Trump, testified before a Senate committee.
Smith said he is dedicated to upholding the rule of law in America, which he believes is being threatened now like never before. And he said since
Trump took office in January of last year, there's been a vilification of the agents and prosecutors.
His words, who worked on his team. He also said the charges against Trump were not partisan, but the result of evidence. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACK SMITH, FORMER U.S. SPECIAL COUNSEL: Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious crimes
against our nation. If asked whether to prosecute a former President today based on the same facts, I would do so regardless of whether that President
was a Republican or a Democrat.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, Republicans who have been -- who have repeatedly called for the former Special Counsel to be criminally prosecuted, well, they were
quick to fire back, claiming he led a partisan investigation. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOHN KENNEDY (R-LA): You saw just the records of the Republicans, and you knew that violated the Speech and Debate Clause, didn't you?
SMITH: That is incorrect.
KENNEDY: You make me want to throw up in my mouth.
SEN. ERIC SCHMITT (R-MO): You have weaponized the Department of Justice against political enemies to an extent that has never happened in the
history of this country. You will go down as a total dirtbag.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, our Evan Perez has been monitoring this story and joins me now live from Capitol Hill. Evan, great to see you. Look, several
exchanges, lively exchanges, and certainly some very aggressive comments. Those are just two of the ones that we picked out from Republicans.
But you tell us what you heard. What stood out to you and explain to our viewers, Evan, the purpose of this hearing.
EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR U.S. JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the purpose of the hearing, Isa, was supposed to be an oversight of the investigation of the
former -- of the President of the United States, of Donald Trump at the time that he was a former President.
Jack Smith was, of course, the Special Counsel who brought two cases against him for attempting to overturn the 2020 election results and for
withholding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. But this became more of a trial of Jack Smith.
The Republicans here today wanted to paint this investigation as a partisan exercise. Smith was having none of that. He, as you pointed out,
essentially said that he stood by everything that they had done as part of this investigation, he said if asked whether to prosecute a former
President based on the same facts, he would do so again, no matter whether it was a Democrat or a Republican.
But one of the things that really developed today was this focus on some of the aspects of the investigation, whether Jack Smith was acting in a
partisan manner. And I'll play you this one exchange between Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Jack Smith, in which, you know, he was trying to at
least connect Smith with Fani Willis, who is the District Attorney down in Atlanta that brought a separate state case against Donald Trump.
Listen to this exchange and I'll explain a little bit more.
[14:20:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCHMITT: What would you say if I had a series of text messages from your team that said you were in Atlanta at a Warriors-Hawks game on February
3rd, 2024, the day after Willis and Wade announced their affair. I don't think you know that we have this stuff, so --
SMITH: Yes --
SCHMITT: I'll give you a second to process it so you don't, you know, perjure yourself.
SMITH: You just took it down really quick, if I could look at that again. I recall going to a University of Maryland basketball game where Caitlin
Clark was playing, was Maryland playing Iowa, I think February of 2024. But again, that's -- you can check that out if that's what we're talking about.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: University of Iowa.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is it the Hawkeyes?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Could it then be that University of Iowa is the Hawkeyes? Could that be it?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PEREZ: And Isa, that Senator, is the same one that called Jack Smith a dirtbag. And he was trying to -- he was trying to -- he was trying to
essentially connect Jack Smith with this DA down in Atlanta. And in so doing, really kind of stepped on his own message, so-to-speak, because that
was not true.
This was -- he was talking about the Atlanta Hawks. He was not talking about Iowa Hawkeyes game, which is what Smith said he went to. There was
never any connection between those two investigations, Isa.
And so, that sort of gives you a sense of how this went today. Smith, to my surprise, actually held his own against very difficult questioning from
Republican members of Congress. And, you know, a lot of people are asking, you know, why are they even doing this hearing?
We are just a few weeks away from the Midterm elections. And you would think, I think members of the Senate would want to be focusing on other
things than relitigating what happened during these investigations. But here we are. That's what we're doing.
SOARES: Yes, and this is why I ask you my first question, Evan, why the purpose of this, right? Because, you know, not only did Jack Smith hold his
own. He really defended his position to try and -- to prosecute the President. And he really didn't hold back.
I mean, we played a clip of it, but he said, "our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in serious
crimes against our nation", and goes -- go on. I mean, how -- do we have a sense of how this hearing has been received by the President? Like you say,
when we're 35 days away from Midterm elections, speak to that kind of politically?
PEREZ: Yes -- no, from the politics of this, it really doesn't make sense to you or to me that this is the way the members of Congress would want to
spend their time. But there is this one aspect, which is if you go on the MAGA part of the universe of the MAGA internet, the events of what Jack
Smith was overseeing, which was investigations of Donald Trump is still something that animates the President's supporters.
And so, I think for some Republicans, they think that maybe getting those people to remember what they view as a victim, the victimization of Trump,
is something that might get them to show up to vote and maybe forget about the gas prices, forget about inflation, forget about the Iran war.
Perhaps, that is the play here. I'm not sure that, that is the way it works. But we shall see in a few weeks. I think one of the other things --
one of the other aspects of this that I think is fascinating is that Jack Smith is under investigation by the current Justice Department.
There is an investigation down in Miami that is looking at this -- the conduct of this investigation as well as the earlier one into the Russia
interference of the 2016 election. So, you know, not only are we relitigating 2020, but here I am also still reliving 2016. I'll never, ever
get out of that timeline it seems like.
SOARES: Yes, look, I think the political context, Evan, that you --
PEREZ: Yes --
SOARES: Brought in, it's vital, of course, because given the time we're in, 35 days away from Midterms and what that means, as we know, as we've seen
the strategy from the White House in the last couple of days to bring President Trump to the forefront. Thank you very much, Evan, as always,
great to see you. Thank you --
PEREZ: Great to see you. Thanks.
SOARES: We're going to stay in the United States -- thank you, very welcome. We're going to stay in the United States because a disturbing
development in the handling of undocumented migrant children in the U.S.
Dozens of children are attending deportation hearings in immigration courtrooms, but without an attorney representing them. Our Priscilla
Alvarez has more in this exclusive report.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): Migrant children are increasingly going through immigration court alone. The place where an
immigration judge will decide if they stay in the United States or they're removed.
[14:25:00]
That was the case in a Texas immigration courtroom today, where 25 children appeared before an immigration judge, many without attorneys. That included
an eight-year-old, a nine-year-old, a 13-year-old from Honduras who was ordered deported.
Again, he did not have an attorney, and during his back and forth with the immigration judge, he said, quote, "I have no one. I have nothing", as he
burst into tears talking there about Honduras, his home country. Now, there was also a three-year-old who played with the mic.
His attorney beamed in remotely. Now, in some of these sketches that you'll see here, there are adults that are sitting with the children. Well, those
are caseworkers. They are there to supervise the children, not to provide them legal representation.
And it is becoming more challenging for children to get legal representation after the Trump administration allowed a contract for legal
service providers to lapse. That was a contract that subcontracted to 100 legal service providers around the country.
Now, the administration has since struck another contract. However, multiple sources I spoke with say that is not enough. There is a large
population, hundreds of unaccompanied migrant children who need help in the courtroom, as well as through the immigration process.
And these are children who crossed the U.S.-Mexico border alone or were brought into custody after a family member or guardian was detained by ICE.
Now, these are children that are in shelters that are operated by the Department of Health and Human Services.
And in a statement, an HHS spokesperson said, quote, "under the Trump administration, ORR remains committed to ensuring that every unaccompanied
illegal alien child has legal representation in the immigration court.
But as was the case in Texas, there are still multiple children, very young children who are continuing to go through this process and face deportation
on their own. Priscilla Alvarez, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOARES: Well, we are hearing from an attorney representing one of the seven men accused in a civil lawsuit of an alleged gang rape at Cornell
University fraternity back in 2024. A former student filed a civil lawsuit earlier this month.
And now prosecutors say that the allegations in that complaint are significantly different from the woman's statement to police two years ago.
Cornell is an elite Ivy League school in Upstate New York. The local District Attorney says a grand jury will review the case to see if any
charges are warranted.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEW VAN HOUTEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY FOR TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK: She went to the police because she knew it wasn't right, and the police
investigated it. They found -- they sat down with her and an experienced investigator who was trained in sexual assault and trauma-informed
investigations, sat down with her and took her statement that was incredibly detailed.
She made over 20 handwritten annotations to it, which means that she was being very careful and thorough and complete with the information she gave.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, Jeremy Saland is an attorney representing one of the seven men accused in the civil suit. He tells CNN that his client did not engage
in sexual activity with your accuser, nor commit any other crime he's accused of, including snorting ketamine off her body. Have a listen to
this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEREMY SALAND, ATTORNEY FOR CORNELL LAWSUIT DEFENDANT: I don't see any way that there's a case against him ever gets indicted before a grand jury,
because again, nobody will put him in any type of sexual touching or intercourse at all. Period.
And no credible person and no honest person, and based on the testimony that was already -- I already heard. And so, at that time, if it's
necessary, I'll give to the prosecutor a copy of that, that ketamine test to corroborate and confirm that it was valid.
And it would have -- and it confirms there was no drugs when we learned of this incident in these allegations.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Right, let's put all these threads together for you. Our Gloria Pazmino has been on the story from day one. She joins me now live from New
York. So, Gloria, just bring our viewers up to date on this because I saw before coming on that we haven't -- now have the New York AG, right?
Attorney General reviewing Cornell's University response to these rape allegations. Just what is the significance, first of all, of this?
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Isa. That is the latest development in the story today. The State Attorney General confirming to
CNN that her office is reviewing the Cornell response to these reports of sexual assault.
And that's important because the State Attorney General, Letitia James, here in New York, has previously looked into other universities and how
these institutions have responded to allegations of sexual assault on their campuses.
So, they're on the very early stages, the -- an official investigation has not been launched yet. They are reviewing what's available right now to
determine whether an investigation needs to be launched. So, that's the latest on that front.
But I think the sound that you just played from both the District Attorney and one of the defense attorneys for this case, it really just puts in
context the importance of the consent argument, right?
[14:30:00]
I think that's going to be central to this going forward. Because part of what the district attorney is arguing and defending himself from is that he
didn't file charges back in 2024, because when Jane Doe reported this incident, she said that she had participated in this activity, both the
consumption of alcohol and drugs that she had done so willingly.
Now, we're getting a different story from her civil lawsuit, right? And her attorney, Jane Doe's attorney, has argued that it's actually not that
different from what she tried to report back in 2024. And I want you to hear directly from him talking about this concept of consent, because it's
going to be central to what, if anything, can be prosecuted here in New York. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
THOMAS P. GIUFFRA, ATTORNEY FOR "JANE DOE": I don't know how anybody who was grossly intoxicated and drug can consent to anything. I mean, the fact
is she went to the Cornell University police to file a complaint because she believed she was a victim of a crime. If this was consensual, she
didn't want it to participate. She wouldn't have gone to the police in the first place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PAZMINO So, I think that last point from the attorney is also resonating a lot, right. No one goes to the police to tell them about a night of
consensual sex that they had the night before, right. And her attorney is arguing that she went to the police because she felt something was wrong.
She felt that a crime had happened. And that was the intention of her reporting, which, of course, puts the spotlight back on the university and
how they handled the internal investigation.
I want to get to a statement that we have from the Chi Phi fraternity. They are the fraternity that these seven members are associated with. They have
issued a statement condemning the allegations. And they said, quote, "We are aware of the lawsuit concerning an alleged incident in 2024. While we
cannot discuss the specific allegations during pending litigation, we take this matter seriously. Our responsibility is to approach this with care for
those affected and respect for a fair legal process."
I should mention that the fraternity at this stage continues to be suspended from campus. They were suspended shortly after the incident and
they remain suspended. As of today, that was one of the conclusions that came out of the internal investigation that was conducted by Cornell.
SOARES: Gloria, I know you'll stay across the story for us. Appreciate it. Thank you very, very much. Gloria Pazmino there for us in New York.
And still to come tonight on the show, the U.S. says it believes foreign actors were behind a suspected terror plot at an airbase in the U.K. We'll
have the details after this short break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:35:00]
SOARES: I do want to take you straight to the White House where U.S. President Donald Trump is speaking right now. Let's just have a listen.
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: The people sitting and standing behind me. I just think it's an honor to be involved with this group of very, very
brilliant people. And I thank you very much. Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE).
TRUMP: Well, we're doing one thing. We're going to be signing a document today at about 5:00, renaming artificial intelligence. Because it's not
artificial. We all agree on that. And we're going to be renaming it superintelligence. Officially renaming it. And that'll come out at 5:00
today.
But there was a lot of commonality in this room. It was pretty amazing. And all for the good. Really amazing.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is it the belief of everybody that you're meeting with today that no guardrails, no regulation of A.I., superintelligence as you
call it, is necessary?
TRUMP: Well, there's a belief that there should be tremendous self- regulation. And we automatically have regulation with the Department of Justice, the FBI, all of that. But the self-regulation is very important.
There's something else that was discussed and that's local communities. This is a group that loves local communities. They love our country. And
they're going to work with local communities for the data centers in particular. And they're going to work to make the community happy.
That might be supplying oil and gas. It might be supplying education. It may be helping teachers along financially, helping people along
financially. And they've all agreed that that's a very positive -- nobody really thought of it. And it's a very positive thing. So, you're going to
see data centers are going to be very popular because this is the group and they're the ones that want it. And they're also the ones that want to see
communities that are safe and happy. And they're going to make communities very, very happy. Otherwise, they'll be forced to go overseas or other
locations.
But even in America, there are so many people that want data centers. You know, the areas with data centers have become very rich. People have become
very rich. Their taxes have gone down, not up. And a lot of good things have happened. But these people and others, having to do with the data
centers that you've been reading so much about, I think they're going to do things for the community that will be really financially beneficial and
otherwise beneficial.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- plans to go public while it reigns a safety concerns? And did the IPO come up during your --
TRUMP: Well, we're going to be putting out a statement in a little while, summing up some of the things that we did. But there's a great -- it is an
unbelievable feeling in this room. It's sort of a feeling of love for our country. And they want to do the right things. These are people that love
our country, I can tell you that. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you.
SOARES: You have been looking there at the U.S. president meeting with A.I. leaders, executives, top A.I. executives, of course, as many of these
executives warn of A.I. agents going rogue and concerns of the safety fears. The president said that today they're going to sign a document
around 5:00 p.m. Eastern time renaming A.I. superintelligence. I don't know what that means in terms of policy other than a name shift. He said there's
a lot of commonality in this room.
But we do know prior to going to hearing from the president, we spoke to our correspondents, A.I. correspondent, our White House correspondent,
saying really on where the two sides diverge.
[14:40:00]
We have President Trump, who believes and still believes, as you heard there, that these companies to self-regulate, and A.I. companies really
want to see guardrails put in place on a winder policy note as well. He said there will be more data centers. And he ended there, as you heard,
there's a feeling of love for our country, wanting to do the right thing.
So, in terms of policy, not much other than a name shift. We'll stick to what else comes out of that meeting and bring you the very latest as soon
as we have any more.
I do want to turn our attention to right here in the U.K. because President Donald Trump and his cabinet members are questioning the U.K.'s handling of
a possible terror plot at a British air base that's hosting U.S. bombers used in operations against Iran.
British authorities released five men on bail on Monday, if you remember, just a day after their arrest near the base in Fairford. Police confirmed a
short time ago there were no explosives were found at the scene and that the investigation could continue. President Trump has said that releasing
the men isn't what you would have done, his words, while his administration insists a foreign actor was involved without providing any details.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Suffice it to say that what happened, what almost happened, what could have happened in the U.K. over the weekend
is a very serious situation. It's one that clearly involves the hands of a foreign actor. I won't get into great detail about that yet.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOARES: Well, let's get more from Tobias Elwood, served as chair of the U.K.'s select defense committee and is author of "Ten Steps to Prevent
World War III." He joins me now live from London. Tobias, thank you for staking with us as we had to take the President Trump there on their A.I.
meeting.
I do want to get your thoughts first of all on what you make of the differing narratives that we've been getting from London and Washington
because roughly this time yesterday, you would have heard this, Tobias, we had President Trump saying that he was surprised that the fine men had been
released on bail. Your thoughts?
TOBIAS ELWOOD, FORMER. DEFENSE SELECT COMMITTEE CHAIR, U.K. HOUSE OF COMMONS AND AUTHOR, "TEN STEPS TO PREVENT WORLD WAR THREE": Well, good
evening. Yes, this does feel like a plot out of Slow Horses, if you're familiar with that box set. Given the drama over the last 72 hours, an
English village evacuated, counterterrorist police called in, even as you've just mentioned, the U.S. president offering commentary.
I mean, there is a bigger picture here which we should highlight, that when this incident is placed into context next to the increased cyber-attacks,
the threats to undersea cables here, drone incursions over our military bases, Britain is finally coming to terms with how threats to the homeland
are rising, but we are not doing enough to keep the nation safe.
We seem to have got lucky this time. A quick-thinking farmer near the airbase was able to raise the alarm. The police moved in very swiftly
indeed, believing that a major terrorist attack was unfolding. It turns out that there were no explosives in the vehicles. We still don't know what
these men in balaclavas were doing. We still don't know if there is a connection with Iran, but perhaps this incident was deliberately staged to
trigger an alert, a sense of panic across Britain, to take up government bandwidth. We of course had to respond.
Perhaps it was an orchestrated act to see how the police would respond, what protocols would be followed in preparation for a future attack. But
what does not make sense, and you mentioned this in your introduction, is the American President's comments, claiming that these subjects were being
tracked for some time, and Marco Rubio's comments that there is an Iranian connection here.
So, this parallel narrative with Washington has left many here very, very confused indeed, especially now that these five have been released.
SOARES: Yes. And I'll get to the preparedness in just a moment, because not just for the U.K., but indeed for Europe. But look, on that last point
there, Tobias, I mean, both countries, the U.S. and U.K., are part of the Five Eyes. Our viewers will know they share extraordinarily sensitive
intelligence, right, from counterterrorism to cyberattacks. I mean, is it possible that the Americans have information that the British can't yet use
publicly or can't corroborate? If so, then why jump the gun?
ELWOOD: So, I think that's the polite reply. They don't have any extra intelligence, because as you've touched on, the Five Eyes community share
that intelligence. MI5, MI6, GCHQ, we provide that. We see America as Britain's closest security ally. But there is a Trump factor that you have
to recognize here. He likes having the final word. He likes to prove that he's on top of the situation. And I think he did jump the gun, and Marco
Rubio probably felt he had to follow suit as well.
[14:45:00]
Donald Trump remains angry that Britain didn't support the United States when Donald Trump chose to bomb Iran. And he's made comments about the
sovereignty of the Falklands and so forth. It does test the relationship, which I'm sure will endure, but does make it very, very difficult when
operationally things are still unfolding here in the U.K.
SOARES: Yes. And there's so much, like you quite rightly said, that we do not know as of yet, and lots of commentary. Could it be Iran? Could be
someone else? But if it is state-directed, whoever may be behind it, I do want to know what kind of questions are being asked about preparedness,
because you were the chair of the House of Commons Defense Committee.
Just speak to the challenges, of course, with this, what we have been seeing, we've been reporting here on the show, kind of the evolution,
Tobias, of modern warfare, right? Speak to that. It's not just confined, no longer confined to the battlefield and the challenges that poses for
governments.
ELWOOD: Yes, I think that's exactly right. We've endured, or enjoyed, in fact, three decades of relative peace since the end of the Cold War. We've
entered a new era of insecurity where the character of war has changed fundamentally. It's become very cheap, indeed, through drone warfare. We've
seen that in Ukraine. But Britain hasn't responded, and that's why I stressed it is the homeland security that we're particularly concerned
about.
We have a pretty sizable Army, Air Force, and Navy, conventional forces, but that's not where warfare is conducted anymore. It's asymmetric. It's
grey zone. It's attacking our critical national infrastructure. And it's here on British soil. And don't forget that Iran has spent decades
preparing for this type of activity, and they'll be using people and connections and so forth in order to disrupt, to cause economic discord,
societal disruption, and to get government to be completely distracted.
Don't forget today is the start, or this weekend has been the start, of the Labour Party Convention. So, very, very timely indeed, actually, to show
and indeed embarrass Britain, given where we stand with our defense posture.
SOARES: Such a very good point. Very good point there. Tobias, always great to get you on the show. Tobias Elwood there, joining us live from London.
We're going to take a short break. We'll see you in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOARES: In the occupied West Bank, more than 100 Israeli settlers attacked a Palestinian family in Jalud overnight, storming their house, and then
setting it on fire.
[14:50:00]
As you can see, their soldiers were on the scene, ordered by a court to escort the family back to their home. The IDF says settlers threw rocks at
security forces, attacking them as well. Several officers were injured. Our Jeremy Diamond has more feed from Jerusalem.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Just over two months ago, the Toubassi family were driven from their home in the occupied West Bank by a
group of Israeli settlers. Then, Monday night into Tuesday, the Israeli military finally escorted the Toubassi family back to their home, following
an order by the Israeli Supreme Court.
But moments after they arrived at their home, which they found had been damaged by the Israeli settlers, they came under attack once again. More
than 100 Israeli settlers stormed the area, pelting the home with stones. Some of them actually stormed into the house and attacked the family, as
well as Israeli border police officers who were on the scene. Some of the settlers even set the home on fire, as well as a car that belonged to the
family. The family had to be escorted out of the area in an armored vehicle by the Israeli military.
This is, of course, just the latest instance of settler violence, which has been exploding across the West Bank in recent months. The Israeli prime
minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, condemned the violence, but once again he sought to downplay it, attributing this violence to the actions of a,
quote, "handful of rioters," even though the Israeli military itself said that there were more than 100 Israeli settlers involved in this attack. Of
those, only two of the settlers were actually apprehended by Israeli authorities.
And what's happening in the West Bank is one of several issues driving the campaign in Israel right now. At the heart of it, of course, right now is
this issue of what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was told, what he knew and what he failed to act on in the days leading up to the October 7, 2023
attacks on Israel. His former Shin Bet director, Israel's domestic intelligence service, says he is now going to sue the Israeli prime
minister for defamation after Netanyahu tried to shift blame for the warnings before October 7 to this former Shin Bet director, Ronen Bar.
Bar is now firing back, saying that the Israeli prime minister was warned of a, quote, "impending disaster in an unprecedented manner ahead of that
attack."
Jeremy Diamond, CNN, Jerusalem.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOARES: We're going to take a short break. See you on the other side.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:55:00]
SOARES: Well, for Alaska's brown bears, packing on weight gives them a better chance of surviving their six-month hibernation. Every fall, rangers
at Katmai National Park track the bears as they bulk up on salmon for winter. And the bigger the bear, the better. The finalists have been
chosen, and voting ends today.
To pick this year's chunky champion, head over to explore.org to vote for your favorite fat bear. Number 89, nicknamed Backpack, is one of the
favorites, or number 910 -- 110, I should say, nicknamed the Dancing Queen. I'm not sure if that's a Dancing Queen or Backpack. Either way, very
content they're scratching his ears.
That does it for us for this hour. Make sure you vote, by the way, on time. Voting stops at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. A lot of people fascinated with Fat Bear
Week here on my team. I'll say no more.
That does it for us for tonight. Do stay right here. "What We Know" is up next with CMAC.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:00:00]
END
