Return to Transcripts main page
Laura Coates Live
Barred Trump Volunteer States Problems In Key Battleground State Of New Hampshire; Harris Allies Kick Off Reproductive Rights Bus Tour; Recipient Of Trump Clemency Back In Legal Trouble; Judge Rules Trump Can't Use Isaac Hayes Song At Rallies; Musk Attacks Harris With Help From Artificial Intelligence; Brandi Chastain Takes On The Pay Gap. Aired 11p-12a ET
Aired September 03, 2024 - 23:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[23:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
LAURA COATES, CNN HOST: A new surprise in the 2024 race right as it kicks into high gear, what a now barred Trump volunteer is saying about the campaign's chances in a key battleground state. Plus, it was a controversial clemency when Trump granted it in his final hours of his presidency when now the person who was commuted could be headed back to prison. And soccer legend Brandi Chastain looks for a new victory by tackling an old problem, talking with us tonight about her fight to reduce the pay gap.
Friday, the first 2024 ballots get sent out Friday. Now, process that for a second, people. Forget 63 days to go and leaning in after Labor Day and waiting for the debate even on Tuesday. Friday, the first 2024 ballots get sent out Friday in North Carolina. And if this wild race goes on like it has been, we all might need to do this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNKNOWN: Hold on to your butts.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: Well, who knows what could happen next? Well, there's already a new twist tonight over what state the Trump campaign thinks it can actually win or maybe not win. It's now barring a top volunteer from any further work after he emailed supporters, apparently, that Trump was vexingly pulling out of his New Hampshire race in a sense to focus on other battlegrounds. He's in the race still, of course, but not focusing the same way. The Trump campaign says that that is not true and that they still have resources on the ground in New Hampshire.
One thing is for sure, while one camp is calling themselves the underdog, Trump is trying to juice electricity of his own campaign, putting out a memo tonight arguing that it has the momentum in this race. And while it's certainly close, the new polls suggest that he has some work to do. It shows Harris is more favorable and less unfavorable than Trump, and not by small margins.
Now, Trump will get several opportunities this week alone to try to change that perception with events in three battleground states. Now Harris, for her part, will be in New Hampshire tomorrow, laying out more of her economic policies. And all of this in the lead up to the big event one week from today, the first Trump-Harris meeting face-to- face and debate, and maybe the only one.
Learning just how seriously, by the way, Harris is taking it, sources tell CNN that she will travel to Pittsburgh Thursday to prepare and stay there until traveling to Philadelphia for the debate on Tuesday.
Joining me now, national politics reporter for "The Wall Street Journal," Sabrina Siddiqui, also CNN political commentators Shermichael Singleton and Ashley Allison. So glad to have all of you here. First of all, that Friday date is still in my mind.
(LAUGHTER)
Forget -- I mean, Friday is the day of things starting to come into view for a lot of people. But Shermichael, there's this top Trump volunteer that's now barred from the campaign in New Hampshire. We're hearing a reporting. They emailed supporters -- they emailed supporters that New Hampshire is no longer a battleground state for Trump, and he is pulling out effectively. What does that say about the state of mind, you think, for the Trump campaign, if they're not going to focus resources there?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I don't believe it. I mean, I've worked on three presidential campaigns, a host of other campaigns, I have never known in my history of electoral politics a volunteer having that level of access to internal campaign strategy. That's something that's only reserved for the very highest levels of a campaign at this capacity. So, I personally don't buy what this person is saying.
COATES: Well, Sabrina, I'm going to ask you this point because it's -- every state is going to be so important. Battleground states, at least seven of them, right?
[23:05:02]
We know this full well. The poll, look at this polling. It's got Harris having some momentum in this. It's the newest national poll. It's showing her with a narrow lead. It seems to be outside the margin of error as well. And she'll actually be in New Hampshire tomorrow for an economic plan unveiling in more detail. The fact that this poll is this way and this reporting coming out, where does your mind go in terms of the momentum and who has it?
SABRINA SIDDIQUI, NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL: I think that there's no denying that the momentum has been with Vice President Harris since she stepped into the race. That's what our polling at "The Wall Street Journal" as well as these other polls that you point to have suggested. But at the same time, as you point out, this is ultimately going to come down to or could come down to tens of thousands of votes across a handful of key battleground states.
And one thing, because you mentioned Vice President Harris unveiling her economic plan, that we've seen continue to be a trend, is that a majority of Americans are still ranking the economy, jobs, inflation as their top issues. Trump tends to perform better on those issues than Harris.
But one thing that has been really interesting is she has been closing that gap compared with where President Biden was. So, even as voters are complaining about the cost of living, about everything being much more expensive price-wise at the grocery store, gas prices, you know, a lot of those day-to-day concerns, they're not necessarily blaming Harris in the same way that they were blaming Biden, even though the overall economic trajectory has actually been good under this administration's watch.
So, I think that's why Harris wants to stay focused on the economy and then, of course, on reproductive rights, which our poll at "The Wall Street Journal" showed is, you know, the third top issue but also the issue that most voters see as the biggest potential deal breaker.
COATES: Well, you know, I know Shermichael is doubting the veracity of this story.
(LAUGHTER)
But we have multiple sources reporting that is, in fact, true, this happened, that the person was barred for having emailed some things out, that it's actually accurate information. When you hear this and think about New Hampshire as a key state and the prospects that somebody would focus alternatively on other areas and think, this is not where I'm going to devote my resources to, what is that indicating to you as a strategist?
ASHLEY ALLISON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, just knowing that ballots are going out, I kind of like do open my mouth a little bit.
(LAUGHTER)
COATES: Friday. (INAUDIBLE) it on Friday?
ALLISON: This is happening.
(LAUGHTER)
Okay, ready or not. But I do think there are instances in national polls where resources are pulled down in states when the margin -- the point margin starts to spread. And that is not -- I remember in 2016 with Hillary Clinton in my beloved state of Ohio, surrogates were coming less.
COATES: Uh-hmm.
ALLISON: Merch and swag was coming less, um, the amount of door, like, paid canvassers, that there are tales that people who have been in the game, paid or not, volunteer or staff member, can tell when a campaign is coming down in one state and surging in another.
And what it tells me is that they don't think they can win New Hampshire. Donald Trump is not slated to travel to New Hampshire right now. But it also tells me that they're nervous about some other states and they're moving money from New Hampshire someplace else.
So, where is that going? Is it going to the blue wall? Is it going to North Carolina? Is it going to Florida where Kamala Harris right now is doing her reproductive healthcare.? It's like, where does that money from north or from New Hampshire move to other battleground states, which is also a tell that they are nervous about other places as well?
SINGLETON: Let's take Ashley's hypothesis. Let's say they are redirecting funds. That does happen on campaigns. It also could be that they're looking at other places where they could potentially close the gap.
Maybe their internals are showcasing they're more competitive in a place like Pennsylvania, or maybe they're looking at Georgia, Wisconsin or Nevada or Arizona and said, okay, wait a minute here, we're now only a point or two behind. So, you could use those dollars not necessarily because of concern, but maybe the expectation that, hey, if we spend more here, we can change the dynamics.
ALLISON: The only problem with that response to this hypothetical is that before Kamala Harris is in the race, Trump was hypothetically leading in all of those states. So, he is seeing that his -- where he was positioned in the race against a Joe Biden is just not the same against a Republican.
COATES: Well, here's a hypothetical that I think is offensive. Ready for it? It's what Senator J.D. Vance had to say today when he talked about what a potential commander-in-chief, as in Vice President Kamala Harris, could be, and the prospect, hypothetically, of whether people would join the armed forces. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. J.D. VANCE (R-OH), U.S. VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We really are on the brink of serious readiness issues because nobody wants to put on a uniform and serve in Kamala Harris's military. This is a person who wants the United States Army to be about gender inclusion, ridiculous diversity politics instead of about serving your country. If you're a person thinking about joining the military, you're probably not going to want to sign up if Kamala Harris is the potential commander-in-chief.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: What do you make of it? I remember hearing the DNC speech and Vice President Kamala Harris talking about the lethality of the American Armed Forces.
[23:10:00] What do you make of this comment and this tactic given how prevalent conversations around Walz's military service have been, obviously Senator J.C. Vance's as well, and now this?
SIDDIQUI: You know, one thing that we've seen is not just that you've had this boost in enthusiasm for Vice President Harris because of her replacing Biden at the top of the ticket, but what's also happened simultaneous to that is that President Trump and his campaign, which includes his running mate, J.D. Vance, have struggled to really figure out how to effectively go after Vice President Harris.
So, a lot of what they've been doing is resorting to some of these more personal attacks or making it more about competence or some of the -- obviously, a lot of the attacks have been -- you know, there has been this underlying racial or. You know, misogynistic undertone to a lot of the attack lines they've used against her.
And then now, you also have these comments about the military that are not really rooted in any kind of fact and also tie into a lot of the general, you know, attacks that Trump has made against members of the military.
So, it's not entirely clear what the strategy is. I know Republicans that I've spoken to in my reporting would much rather they just focus on making a policy argument.
(LAUGHTER)
Keep talking about the economy, keep talking about inflation, you know --
SINGLETON: I would. I would.
SIDDIQUI: -- talk about your actual proposals.
(LAUGHTER)
Don't just make these, you know, statements that are not necessarily doing anything to win over any voters. And if anything, they risk turning off the types of moderate, suburban voters that they need, the independents, who are increasingly shifting toward Harris in a lot of the polls we were just talking about.
COATES: This is more than just the fear-mongering, right? It's essentially saying that America will be less safe under potentially Vice President Kamala Harris, that people aren't going to join the armed services. Think about all the references to patriotism at the DNC as well and, frankly, the RNC as well. I find this pretty stunning as a tactic.
But then there's -- but then again, I'm stunned again today because there is this big race in Montana, as you know, and it's one of the places that Trump actually went to first. And now, "The New York Times" is reporting that Tim Sheehy, who is a Republican candidate for Senate in Montana, he used racial stereotypes when he was speaking about Native Americans during private fundraisers last year. It was caught on tape. Listen to one clip where he describes participating in roping and branding cattle on the Crow Reservation. Listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TIM SHEEHY, REPUBLICAN MONTANA SENATE CANDIDATE (voice-over): I rope and brand with them every year down there. So, a great way to bond with all the Indians out there, while they're drunk at 8 a.m. and you're roping together.
(LAUGHTER)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Now, a spokesperson for Mr. Sheehy's campaign did not respond to the "Times" request for comment. This is a very hotly contested race, Shermichael.
SINGLETON: Yeah.
COATES: I can't imagine this would be not only not helpful but obviously and objectively offensive to make a reference.
SINGLETON: Yeah, I mean, look, he's leading right now, I think, according to 13 polls by three and a half percent. Native Americans represent, I think, 6% of the entire state population. This isn't helpful.
You certainly give Tester and Democrats writ large the opportunity to use that audio clip in commercial ads targeted at Native American voters trying to turn him out to say, hey, this is a guy that could potentially represent you in the U.S. Senate using this type of offensive language, racist language. Do you want this person? If not, you need to turn out and vote.
So strategically speaking, you need to apologize quickly, swiftly, make amends, maybe do something to showcase that you recognize how awful the comments were to move forward. But stuff like this and a tight race could potentially make a difference if the strategist on the other side can figure out how to utilize it to their advantage.
COATES: Ooh, an apology tour with an epiphany added in 2024. Can you imagine?
SINGLETON: Unlikely. Unlikely.
ALLISON: Unlikely.
(LAUGHTER)
I mean, it is highly offensive, the remarks that the candidate said, and it is an extremely close race. I guess -- I'm just like, keep talking, people. Keep showing us who they are so that the voters really get to make an informed decision. If that is what you think Native Americans are, people who -- who their community has suffered from alcoholism on reservations because of some of the plights that this country has inflicted on the folks who have been living on this land since day one. So, go ahead, tell us what you think about them and then let a voter make an informed decision.
I'll just also say, in Montana, it's not just Native Americans who would be offended in that, it's the neighbors of Native Americans, the people who want us to go to some of our higher ideals. And so, when you see someone, particularly like a Sheehy, who already is a question mark, real Montana, if there is such a thing, against a Jon Tester, it could be a fault that he can't overcome.
SINGLETON: You see, that's the strategy Democrats will use, which Ashley just laid out, and that's the problem for Sheehy.
COATES: Oh, are we telling of history? That's a strategy. All right, thank you, everyone. So nice to have you all here.
Look, the Harris campaign kicking off the fighting for reproductive freedom nationwide bus tour in none other than Donald Trump's Palm Beach County backyard, backed by harrowing miscarriage stories like of my next guest, who just as she was getting ready for her daughter's fourth birthday party and nearly 11 weeks into her pregnancy, she knew something did not feel right.
[23:15:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KAITLYN JOSHUA, DENIED TREATMENT FOR MISCARRIAGE: Two emergency rooms sent me away. Because of Louisiana's abortion ban, no one would confirm that I was miscarrying. I was in pain, bleeding so much, my husband feared for my life. No woman should experience what I endured.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: Kaitlyn Joshua joins me now. Kaitlyn, thank you so much for joining us. I was so moved by the statements that you made. I think so many people were. And just thinking about that experience, Kaitlin, I mean, you were turned away from not one, but two emergency rooms. I mean, what happened next? How did you even manage to overcome what happened?
JOSHUA: Yes, and thank you again for having me tonight. All I can say was I was adamant about trying to get at least some type of confirmation as to whether or not I was miscarrying.
So, fall of 2022, when my husband and I found ourselves in a healthcare crisis, as you stated, at 11 weeks pregnant, I knew that something was wrong. I went to one hospital where I was told, I can't confirm at this moment whether or not you're miscarrying, but I'm sending you home with prayers. The second hospital stated, questioned me, rather, are you even pregnant, this is just like a cyst to me, and sent me home basically saying that I had to take Tylenol and that was the only thing that I can receive in that moment.
I knew because I was educated on that and almost 11 weeks pregnant that I was definitely should have received -- should have received a DNC procedure, some type of medication abortion, in order to mitigate that miscarriage but also to not compromise my future fertility. And to be denied that not once but twice really showed me in real time what it is like to live under Donald Trump's abortion ban and the overturn of Roe v. Wade that summer.
COATES: To hear you describe being sent home with prayers, a Tylenol, a cyst, I mean, as a mother who has gone through two pregnancies, thinking about how scared I would have been and how much it would have been incumbent to try to be my own champion in a moment of extraordinary vulnerability, is just unspeakable, Kaitlyn.
And this is so personal. It is just a heart-wrenching journey. What has compelled you to even speak out because this is deeply personal and one could not blame you if you wanted to keep it to yourself? I'm glad you did not.
JOSHUA: I appreciate that. And you're right, it is deeply personal. At times, I kind of ask myself, oh, Lord, what have I signed up for, just because, of course, you hear so much in terms of how people conceptualize abortion care and understand the complexities of it or not understand the complexities of abortion care, and that part is always really hard to digest.
But I do know as a woman of color, as a Black woman, I would be remiss if I did not speak about these stories, stories coming out of the deep south, especially in Louisiana, in a place with that such an egregious abortion ban. I'm not just speaking for myself, I'm speaking for thousands of women that have dealt with this since the overturn of Roe v. Wade. That has been exacerbated since the abortion ban in our state.
But most importantly, I know that I am bringing a contribution to a story that talks about Black maternal health care, which is already so alarming in our country. We definitely have seen how that has played a role in the abortion ban. I know that there are plenty of women out there that I -- that live in abortion ban in 22 states. Donald Trump talks about this often.
What I'm yelling to the rooftops is that we don't want this to happen, all 50 states. My story can very well be your story. And we don't need that. We don't want that. Let's do what we need to do in order to restore Roe and do even more in trying rights in our Constitution so that there is no abortion ban in any of the 50 states.
COATES: Kaitlyn, thank you so much for sharing this deeply personal story because I think so many people need to understand what is really the face and the journey of those who are just trying to seek medical care, particularly in your circumstances. I really appreciate it. Thank you.
JOSHUA: Thank you.
COATES: Ahead, he was a convicted murderer granted clemency by Trump, even though it was not recommended by the Justice Department. Now, that man is back in legal trouble. We will explain why, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: New reporting tonight, a former convicted felon, Jaime Davidson, who was granted clemency in the waning days of the Trump administration, sentenced to three months in a domestic violence case in Florida.
Back in 1993, Davidson was convicted of murder for his role in planning a robbery that led to the death of an undercover police officer in Upstate New York. Now, Davidson's clemency upset the late police officer's family. And according to "The New York Times," some White House officials objected to the commutation at the time.
I want to bring in the reporter who broke the story, Judd Legum. He joins me now along with CNN senior law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe. Thank you both for being here. This is a fascinating story of how it has evolved. What have you learned about where we are right now with this commutation and now this charge?
JUDD LEGUM, AUTHOR AND FOUNDER, POPULAR.INFO: Well, there's some additional legal trouble now for Mr. Davidson. He was convicted in May on this trial, on this allegation that he strangled his wife during a domestic dispute in her apartment and is now appealing that conviction.
But at the same time, he's running into even more serious trouble in federal court where he could be subject to a violation of his supervised probation and could end up back in jail, federal prison, for many years. All of that right now is being held in abeyance while they pursue this appeal of the state conviction.
COATES: And it wasn't a pardon, it was a commutation, right, Andrew? And so, people might be scratching their temples as to why this particular person, who would be implicated in a crime that occurred against an undercover officer, why would that be somebody that Trump would have given that commutation to.
ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST, FORMER FBI DEPUTY DIRECTOR: If they're curious about that, they should be.
[23:25:00]
This case is a perfect example of why former President Trump, who was known to have essentially ignored the clemency process -- there is an Office of the Pardon Attorney within the Department of Justice. They receive requests for clemency. They do investigations on those people to determine if they are worthy of a pardon or a commutation from the president of the United States.
President Trump ignored that office and often just spoke to friends and advisors and celebrities to get recommendations of people who they thought they wanted pardoned. This is a perfect example of why you should not do that. You end up pardoning the wrong person and taking on great risk as a result. COATES: You know, I should note that a spokesperson for Trump told CNN, "President Trump believes anyone convicted of a crime should spend time behind bars, unlike Kamala Harris," he says, "who supports eliminating cash bail."
As you have articulated, though, this is not the normal process of how one actually gets to a president for a commutation, which is a lessening of the sentence as opposed to, say, a pardon fully. This happened in the waning hours. I think it was the last day of his presidency. I think it was January 20th. You can imagine what was going on 14 days earlier in that run.
But when you look at this case, this necessarily wasn't foreseeable to Trump, to be fair, that he'd be involved in another crime. But now that he has been, what impact does that commutation have? Anything?
LEGUM: Well, he still has a commutation for that crime. So, he was serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. That maintains -- but once you get the commutation, you have a five-year period of supervised release, basically the federal version of parole. And that is what is going to be now at issue when this goes back to federal court, and he could actually find himself, having just been released, spending a couple of decades in jail, back in federal prison as a result of this crime.
By the way, he mentioned the Office of the Pardon Attorney. Mr. Davidson did actually seek a commutation from the Office of the Parton Attorney twice and was denied both times.
COATES: It went right to then President Trump. How -- how would he have access? I mean, this is the idea -- most people think about fairness and a kind of due process. How did he have direct contact with or at least access to the president?
LEGUM: We don't know exactly, but we do know that his attorney also represented Donald Trump, Jr. So -- and his attorney's husband is also very well connected and represented other members of the Trump Organization. So that probably got his foot in the door.
COATES: Elbow rubbing indeed. Andrew, when you think about how often we hear the phrase soft on crime and how often this has been used as political ammunition during campaigns in particular, whether somebody is soft on crime, whether they believe someone should be released, this factors into it conceivably.
MCCABE: Absolutely. Absolutely, it does. I mean, on a kind of an ethical and an effective level, former President Trump now has to bear responsibility for the fact that this convicted narcotics trafficker and cop killer was out on the street because of his judgment and decision to release him, and he now has committed a crime against his partner.
And, you know, let's be honest, by ignoring the normal process, by ignoring the work of the pardon attorney and taking this on entirely himself, he now has no one else to blame. Were this the product of a recommendation by the pardon attorney to grant clemency to this person? He'd have a little bit more room to explain, hey, you know, this was the recommendation, I followed the recommendation. He can't say that now. This is all on him.
COATES: It's the lingering why question. Judd, Andrew, thank you both so much.
Ahead, it was a big feature at Trump rallies. Well, now a judge says --
(MUSIC PLAYING)
-- the Trump campaign can't use what you're hearing in the background right now. It's an Isaac Hayes song, and his son joins me, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: God bless you all. Go out and vote. God bless you all. Thank you.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
Thank you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: That was how Trump ended his campaign rallies, but not anymore. Today, a federal judge ruled the former president and his campaign cannot use that song written by Isaac Hayes and David Porter, "Hold On, I'm Coming," at rallies. It comes after the estate of the late R&B artist and songwriter and icon, frankly, sought an emergency injunction to stop the Trump campaign from using the song, saying they do not have approval. An attorney for Trump spoke to the media after today's ruling.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RONALD COLEMAN, TRUMP ATTORNEY: The campaign has no interest in annoying or hurting anyone. If the Hayes family feels that it hurts or annoys them, that's fine. We're not going to force the issue.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COATES: With us now, Isaac Hayes's son, Isaac Hayes III, and his attorney, James L. Walker, Jr. So nice to have both of you on this evening. Let me begin with you here, Isaac, because --
ISAAC HAYES III, SON OF ISAAC HAYES: Yeah.
COATES: -- the judge ruled that Trump can no longer use the song, "Hold On, I'm Coming." They denied a motion to force the Trump campaign to take down any previously recorded uses of the song, though. Are you satisfied by this result?
HAYES: I'm absolutely satisfied by this result. We wanted injective relief just based on the fact that Donald Trump was continuing to use the song after we told him not to use the song. He actually served notice that he was no longer supposed to play the song in his rally. So, this is definitely an outcome that I'm pleased about.
COATES: And why is it so meaningful to you, more broadly, for this song and your father's legacy not to be used in this way?
[23:35:03]
HAYES: Well, my father lost the rights to his music a year before I was born. It took us 56 years just to get this copyright back, and we got it back in March of 2022. As soon as we get it back in May, Donald Trump starts using it without our permission at an NRA rally in Houston, you know, moments after the Uvalde mass shooting. So, I was definitely not pleased about that. I sent out a tweet about that. Later, a cease and desist went out.
So, it's important because, you know, we have to fight to get these copyrights back. A lot of artists get taken advantage of. And I want to make sure that people understand how important owning your publishing is for situations like this.
COATES: I mean, 50 years to lose a copyright in this work that others were likely profiting on, James, is a story of far too many artists, particularly of that particular generation, and ongoing today. I wonder, from your perspective, James, what else are you looking for from the Trump campaign? Because the songs have been played. They've been associated at different points in time. Is it too late to course correct, and what are the next steps?
JAMES L. WALKER, JR., ATTORNEY FOR ISAAC HAYES III: Oh, no, it's not too late. I mean, they tried a creative argument today of free speech and also trying to say fair use, but we rejected that as did the judge.
What's going to happen now, Laura, is we're going to go through some 50 uses that we've seen since June when they got the letter. We sent the letter, BMI sent the letter, which is a music society that collects royalties. We're going to go through these 50 plus uses and determine how much they owe the Hayes family. And if we can't settle it, we'll go on the trial. But I think the move today is let's figure out how to settle this.
COATES: Because each instance would be an infringement, essentially, allegedly, and there would be a licensing fee that would have been owed. Really quickly, though, if you had this license, would you still have the power to be able or if you had given the license to him or anyone else, would you still have the power to be able to withhold the ability to perform the song if you didn't like who wanted to use it, if it was more broadly available to have a license?
WALKER: Well, yes. The way it works is BMI gives you what's called a blanket license. And they have a catalogue of songs in this blanket that you can use at your rallies. Isaac Hayes and Isaac Hayes III, the estate of Isaac Hayes, notified Trump's team they no longer could use this song. It's a political rally, political exceptions to the blanket license that allows you to pull a certain song out.
The difference I want to point out is when you see other artists doing it, say Celine Dion, some of the others who have complained, they don't own their copyright. Mr. Hayes, Jr. here -- excuse me, Mr. Hayes III here was fortunate that he took control of the copyright. He gave the termination notice. So, he sets the groundwork for who can use it and who can't use it.
COATES: Very important point. Thank you for explaining how this was actually able to be authorized or not. I mean, Isaac, your father, he wrote this song, but it was the duo Sam and Dave who performed it. Now, Sam Moore, who's one half of Sam and Dave, has come out in support of Trump using the song and actually suggested in his foreign statement filed with the court by the Trump campaign that he is opposed to what you're doing now. How would you like to respond to him?
HAYES: Well, I understand Mr. Moore has his political views, but for me, this is a non-political situation. This is about the fact that someone was using copyright without our permission. It was more about the character, the nature of Donald Trump, a person that has been found liable of sexual abuse, that said a lot of disrespectful things about women, especially Black women.
And I know for certain, as a brother to seven sisters and my father was a father to seven daughters, he would not approve of Donald Trump using his music to the grave and disrespect women in that fashion. So, Sam's comments are fine, but they're not politically-motivated, and I have no, you know, no further comment to say anything to Sam.
WALKER: Laura, may I point something out?
COATES: Go ahead, please.
WALKER: Sam does not own the copyright --
COATES: Uh-hmm.
WALKER: -- and I want your viewers at home to understand a lot of people sing songs, but they don't own the songs. So, he can have an opinion about the song, and we respect him as the singer and the legend that he is. However, the Hayes family owns the copyright, so they get to determine whether or not Donald Trump or any other politician can use the song at a rally or a fundraiser or anywhere else because they own the copyright.
COATES: And as you know, intellectual property rights, you have to police them. Otherwise, you could risk losing some of the rights that are corresponding to what you have. Isaac Hayes III, James Walker, Jr., thank you both so much.
WALKER: Thank you.
HAYES: Thank you.
COATES: Elon Musk amplifying attacks against Kamala Harris, all with the help of artificial intelligence, and it appears to violate his own platform's policies. Kara Swisher is here to talk about it, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: Elon Musk ruffling feathers again on X. This time, the X CEO reposted an account which included a screenshot amplifying misogynistic content that suggests only -- quote, unquote -- "high status males to run the government." It comes as Musk's attacks on Vice President Harris are growing.
Now, on Monday, Musk posted this AI-generated image on a social media platform that depicts Harris or someone who's supposed to look like Harris as a communist, wearing a red uniform complete with a hammer and sickle on her hat. Now, that fake, and I do mean fake image and false statement depicting Harris as a communist, the post has been viewed nearly 70 million times. Musk's post suggesting women shouldn't take part in democracy had been viewed more than 19 million times.
[23:45:02]
X did not respond to a CNN request for comment. With us now, CNN contributor Kara Swisher, also the host of the "On" and "Pivot" podcasts. Kara, so good to have you. First of all, I mean, where do I begin? How about the sexist books (ph)? This one, at this point in time?
I mean, this is the type of thing that is used in the dark corners of message boards. It has been amplified --
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yeah.
COATES: -- by his 196 million followers. I don't want you to try to get into his head, but I do. Why does he want to tell people these statements?
SWISHER: I think he's -- it's eugenics. I mean, it's a version of eugenics that he was pushing, right? And that men are more superior than women, presumably. All kinds of weird stuff around DNA and stuff, genetics, it's strange. It's so old school, but, you know, he has managed to amplify it in a really horrific way. And the way he does it is to say things like interesting, interesting observation and things like that.
But it's just pushing eugenics, which is, you know. It's repulsive and I don't think he cares because he wants attention, a voice upon himself, which is why he's fighting with almost everyone on the planet at this point.
COATES: You know, if he were not himself and a user, I mean, there are some guidelines, right? You've got the communists post.
SWISHER: Sure.
COATES: There was no community note. There was no fact check.
SWISHER: Yeah.
COATES: It was obviously a fake picture. It doesn't even really look like her, but they're wanting it to look like her. That actually violates the company's guidelines. Not that it matters if you're Elon Musk, apparently.
SWISHER: No, it doesn't matter. He can do anything he wants on his platforms or change his opinions like he's doing in, you know, attacking Brazil and then giving into India or Turkey. It just depends on his whims. And that's where we are at this point. It's whatever comes into his addled head at this moment at any time. Then he just tweets it. He has so many followers. And, you know, he games the system. A lot of reporters have written about how he forces his -- his information on others.
COATES: Hmm.
SWISHER: You know, he's essentially become a, you know, you know, the MAGA rage machine. I think that's what he's trying to do. Even back in March when I said he was going to back Donald Trump, because it became clear to me that's where this was headed, you know, they denied it and said they wanted to be neutral. But he has no interest in being neutral. He's using it as a megaphone for all kinds of strange and odd things, including these crazy ideas about certain alpha males being more superior and they should run the government, I guess.
COATES: Okay. I mean, I have to look at -- first of all, I do wonder if it in fact is a strategy or it's reflexive provocateurs coming together, who knows what it is? But I mean "The Washington Post" released an article detailing the billions that investors have lost since he took over.
SWISHER: Yeah.
COATES: And they say the company's valuation went from $316 million to $88 million. So, as far as high-status males running things --
SWISHER: Yeah.
COATES: -- looking at corporations, it tells you a whole lot.
SWISHER: Yeah, right into the wall. Yeah, he's driving it right into a wall constantly.
COATES: But why? But why?
SWISHER: Because he can. It's -- you know, rich people buy yachts or they buy a giant communication service. He doesn't care. He doesn't care about it. This is what he wants to do with his money. You know, it's also affecting his other very good businesses, whether it's Tesla or Starlink or other things he's working on, which have a lot of really interesting implications for the future.
Tesla is a groundbreaking auto company. But now, it's falling behind as other competitors ramp up as is inevitable. But he certainly not -- doesn't have his eye on the ball there, and he's way behind. They're trying to sort of do some hand-waving, robotaxi thing. But Waymo, which is owned by Google, is way ahead of him, way ahead of him. Others are catching up with Tesla, and they're losing market share all over the place.
I mean, this is just a rich man's folly. And we've seen this before, of course, in history. But it's a real -- it's really something to see. But he's hoping to gain power through it. He might do it. It's a big -- it's a high risk, high reward strategy, I assume.
COATES: I mean, it's one thing if a rich man is trying to build his own ships in a glass bottle. This has consequences for everyone else, right?
SWISHER: Yes, it does.
COATES: And thinking about that, which I have no idea how one puts a ship in a bottle, but I'll just digress in a different conversation.
SWISHER: Okay.
COATES: But there was an update today, by the way, Kara, on Brazil's ban of X. You mentioned Starlink, satellite-based internet service provider also owned by Musk. It is backtracking. Says it will now comply with a Brazilian Supreme Court order to block X. Is that surprising?
SWISHER: No, because he was -- you know, he's a bully. So, he bullies and he didn't win. He thought -- I suppose the Supreme Court wouldn't back this judge. He has been attacking relentlessly. You know, these are the rules of Brazil, and he's got to follow the laws of Brazil. He's not immune from laws.
And -- and so, they've just told him, forget it, you know. They -- and he has to comply because what they do is they -- it would affect the business there and the ground stations that they actually have in Brazil. And if you want to -- if you want to operate in Brazil, you operate by their rules, and these are their rules.
And, you know, some of them -- some people think they're too much, but it's their country and they are very worried about misinformation there, as are many countries. And so, lots of people, including the Telegram CEO in France, you know, a lot of tech companies are finally being held accountable for certain behaviors and practices, which is something I've talked about a lot.
[23:50:02]
But now, it's happening elsewhere. Not in this country, but elsewhere. COATES: Well, maybe it will come on over the pond at some point in time. Kara Swisher, we will see.
SWISHER: It's harder here. We do have the First Amendment. Just remember that.
COATES: We do, which is a good thing. And then there's congressional work on trying to figure out about that Section 230 and what it can really mean. Leave it to the bureaucracy to be quite on pace with technology every single time. Kara Swisher, nice talking to you.
SWISHER: Thanks, Laura. Bye.
COATES: Up next, huge growth in women's sports has many people aiming for a new goal, getting rid of the gender pay gap. One of them is Brandi Chastain, and she joins me, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[23:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COATES: A tale as old as time, frankly, for women in sports. Demand for these athletes is rising, but the pay stays the same. That's the case with the National Women's Soccer League. But some players are now off the field and in the boardrooms, and it is making all the difference. Soccer icon Brandi Chastain, the co-founder of new team Bay FC, she's making deals to up the pay for her players and, frankly, it is needed.
Earlier in August, NWSL and the Players Union did sign a collective bargaining agreement that will bump up minimum salaries over the next six years. But even still, those numbers leave women earning less than the men. In the Bay Area, San Francisco, the median home price is $1.2 million bucks. Compared to other careers in the area, $37,000 is simply not enough to get by.
Joining me now, two-time World Cup champ, two-time gold medalist, National Soccer Hall of Famer Brandi Chastain. Brandi, I see your smile of humility. Save it. We think you're amazing. Don't even try it over here. Thank you for coming. I appreciate it. Talk to me about the deals you're making.
BRANDI CHASTAIN, FORMER SOCCER PLAYER, OLYMPIC AND WORLD CUP CHAMPION, CO-OWNER OF BAY FC: It's good to be with you.
COATES: Glad you're here. Talk to me about the deals you're making and what you're doing to ensure your players will get a more equal pay.
CHASTAIN: Well, I think what's so spectacular about Bay FC is that we came into this as myself and the three other founders, Aly Wagner, Leslie Osborne, Danielle Slaton, with this idea that our club would be player-centric, that we would lead with the concept that we need to give our players the opportunity to be as great as they can be. And that's not just, can we give them a great training pitch and a wonderful practice facility and a great place to play? But also, we need to take care of them as a whole person. What are the things they're interested in off the field? You know, how can we facilitate their interests in, whether that's business, medicine, teaching, whatever it is.
But we also have been very strategic in the partnerships that we are building within our team with the likes of Visa. They have historically shown how to lead globally in the pay equity space. They have been a supporter of U.S. Soccer for many, many years. I'm proud to say that I've been working with them for a long time. And they stood up to say, we will only do business with you if you make the space equitable.
COATES: Hmm.
CHASTAIN: And I think people thought that they were bluffing and they simply said, we'll walk away. And so, to make relationships like that and to give our players an opportunity to earn more money outside within the rules of, you know, the salary cap and what they can make and what they can maximize, Visa is helping us do that.
And for us, that is -- just honestly, the most important thing we can do is we see that we have this deep well of talent and intellect and passion and skill, and there's no reason that we should not be facilitating ways for them to earn more and to, you know, do things outside of the playing space that will enhance their lives going forward when they leave our team.
COATES: I mean, Deloitte is predicting over a billion dollars in revenue for women's sports this year alone. That'd be, by the way, up 300% in 2021. We've seen successes for women's soccer, for hockey, for basketball.
CHASTAIN: Right.
COATES: Just to name a few. What do you see as the future for women athletes, knowing that this revenue generation has increased 300%, really, and yet you still have these lingering issues of the pay gaps?
CHASTAIN: Yeah, this has been an ongoing conversation for decades, and I mean, I've been in soccer for five decades now and we're still having the same conversations. However, we are moving the needle. And what -- what I think we have finally -- I think we are tackling systematic or systemic issues, right, within the workspace.
And, you know, you don't chip away at that in one swing. And so, it has been -- you know, I look at our U.S. women's national team, I look at the national team that helped find that pay equity relationship with U.S. soccer, the Megan Rapinoes. You know, that is so critical. We are moving in the right direction, and we are making that change.
We see this uptick. You said it. You know, we have Sydney, Simone, Anna, Suni, Sophia, Alyssa, Lindsey in the Olympics and playing in women's professional sports that are truly making an impact. [00:00:03]
And I think what we've seen in women's soccer specifically is now there's this interest because we see that the business works and the business is going to lead the way. And before, it may have been seen as like, oh, we love women's sports, it's a charity. It's not a charity. It is a business that we have sponsors, the media writes. And things are changing. And we are very proud. And as a Bay FC co- founder, I am proud about what it is that we are doing for our players on a daily basis.
COATES: So important to think about it. You've got to mention unbelievably talented players as well. Thank you so much, Brandi Chastain. I'm glad to see you in the boardroom.
CHASTAIN: Yeah, thank you so much. And let's go, Bay FC!
COATES: There you go. Well, thank you. And thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" starts right now.
