Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Lashes Out At Iran Over Strait Of Hormuz: "Dishonorable"; First Lady Renews Epstein Focus After Trump Urges U.S. To Move On; NASA Prepares For Artemis II Splashdown After Historic Mission. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired April 09, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JULIE DEVANEY HOGAN, MOTHER: --but all of the destruction that's caused when a child loses their parent young, that anticipatory grief, that goers grief, is the grief I carry now, as I navigate stage four. I'm a student now of my children's grief, like I'm studying to prepare to leave them, which sounds so terrible. But I want to use this time to do everything I can.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: So join me in about 15 minutes, at CNN.com/AllThereIs.
That's it for us. CNN's "THE SOURCE" starts right now.
JOHN KING, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight, President Trump accuses Iran of violating their ceasefire agreement.
I'm John King in for Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Two days now since President Trump announced a pause in U.S. strikes in Iran, and two days before the Vice President JD Vance is expected to lead high-stakes negotiations in Pakistan.
The U.S. and Iran, though still can't agree on what they've agreed to. That translates into this. The Strait of Hormuz remains at a standstill, with 20 percent of the world's oil stuck in a holding pattern. Shipping companies telling CNN, it is simply too risky to send that cargo through.
The President venting his frustrations this way: There are reports that Iran is charging fees to tankers going through the Hormuz Strait - They better not be and, if they are, they better stop now.
The President following that up with this: Iran is doing a very poor job, dishonorable some would say, of allowing Oil to go through the Strait of Hormuz. That is not the agreement we have.
Iran opening the Strait, you will recall, was the President's big demand in return for a ceasefire. And that has not happened. And yet you'll notice, you'll notice this, it's important, at least for now, no threats from the President about ending the ceasefire or calling off those planned peace talks. Insight perhaps into how much the President wants and perhaps needs these talks to happen to get himself out of a jam.
Another complication? Israel launched fresh strikes against Hezbollah targets in Lebanon. And Hezbollah in turn fired on Israel. It comes after a massive bombardment by Israel yesterday, that the Lebanese health ministry says killed more than 300 people.
President Trump telling NBC News Today, quote, I spoke with Bibi and he's going to low-key it. I just think we have to be sort of a little more low-key. The President then adding, he thinks Israel is, quote, Scaling back its operation in Lebanon.
My Republican source tonight, Congressman Don Bacon of Nebraska. He sits on the House Armed Services Committee. He's also a retired Air Force brigadier general.
Congressman, grateful for your time.
You initially said, smartly, it'll take 24, 48 hours to get a sense if this is a real, true ceasefire. We're about 48 hours in. How do you see it?
REP. DON BACON (R-NE): It seems that the missile firing and combat operations have decreased significantly today. So, that would be a good sign for the ceasefire.
On the downside, the estimates I'm reading is, between 5 to 9 percent of the normal shipping is going through the Straits of Hormuz. So, we're looking at less than 10 percent. So, we need a lot of progress there.
But my real concern is we're going to eventually, probably have to make peace with a regime in Iran that hates us, will never make long- term peace with us. They're going to be weakened because we've decimated their air force, their navy, and many other parts of their military. But in the end, it will be likely that this regime will survive. They'll rebuild with Russia and China's help. And so, what I see is we're going to have a short-term, maybe five years of a weakened Iran, but it will be a threat once again.
KING: Is--
BACON: That's how I foresee it.
KING: Forgive me -- forgive me for interrupting. Help match that up with what we hear from the President of the United States. Just today, he told NBC News, he's, quote, Very optimistic a peace deal is within reach. And he calls the Iranians, quote, Much more reasonable when dealing with them privately.
You seem a lot more skeptical, A, that they can be trusted, and B, you know, if the United States says, as they say, the White House, a complete and total victory. Iran, it may be buried, but Iran still has its enriched uranium. As of now, it says it is in charge of the Strait of Hormuz. Where are we?
BACON: I don't think it's a total victory. A total victory would be a new regime, a government that represents the people, that wants peace with its neighbors in America, and doesn't want a nuclear weapon. I don't think we have that.
We have remnants, probably three tiers down, I would say, of the IRGC or the Mullah Ayatollah government of Iran. I think the top two layers have been pretty taken out.
[21:05:00]
But you still got the hardcore Shia mindset that's going to govern Iran. That's what -- the way it appears. And that means that, though they have no air force, no navy, maybe 5 percent of their air defenses. I think their nuclear production capability has been badly damaged. But they have spent fuel that they've made previously that can still be used. So, there's still a threat, but I think it's quite a diminished threat.
But five years from now, Russia and China will be working to rebuild this capacity in Iran. And I foresee this, I think short-term, good, but in long-term, we still got a problem.
KING: If that's what you believe, should the President call off these talks? Should he say, We have more to do? There's more military -- since once you -- once we got here, whether you support starting it or not, this is where we are, and we have more military objectives we must achieve, so that it's not a five-year rebuild, it's a 10- or a 15- or a 25-year rebuild. Is that what you would recommend?
BACON: If it's clear that we have good targets to hit, I would -- I would hit them. I'm not sure that we do.
I think we've hit all the major targets that are -- that are there, so that -- I think the only way to get a regime change, just to get to your point, John, is boots on the ground in Iran, and it's probably the only way to probably sort of knock off this government. We're not going to do that. We don't want to put a 100,000 troops in Iran. There's no appetite for it here, no appetite for it in the White House.
So therefore, unless a miracle happens, and this government collapses? That could happen. But I think it's unlikely we're going to be living with a regime that hates us, but a very weakened regime, and they're going to work hard to rebuild, and I think Russia and China will be there to help them.
KING: That regime that you say hates the United States, right now says that it controls the Strait of Hormuz, and if you want to pass through it, you have to pay a fee, essentially, to its military.
Is that an acceptable ending?
BACON: It is not. I think if they keep doing this? And right now, like I said, between 5 and 9 percent of the shipping is going through the Straits today compared to normal. But if they will insist on tolls and blocking, then I think we have to go back into combat operations until they buckle.
We believe of freedom of navigation in the seas, and we cannot allow Iran to control those Straits and to charge tolls. And the idea that we would work with them on charging tolls is ludicrous. That will not happen either.
KING: It's possible, everybody's blustering to try to establish leverage in public position before they go into these talks in Pakistan.
Is the administration telling members of Congress privately anything different from what we are seeing, publicly, which seems to be that, Yes, we have, I guess you could call it a ceasefire, but it seems very fragile, and there are giant questions, including the Strait of Hormuz, and whether there can finally be free market passage back and forth through it.
Are you getting more information than we see publicly?
BACON: Not right now, because this week we're back in the district. I do expect it, when I get back on Monday, that we'll get an update.
I have zero doubt though, that Speaker Johnson and, I would say, Hakeem Jeffries on the Democrat side are probably getting updates. I would believe that's 99 percent likely. So, they're getting the intelligence updates and information from the White House, and I expect to get that Monday, when we return.
KING: So, your assessment is, we have -- we're going to have -- we've set them back militarily. The regime itself probably has to get its sea legs, but it's still an Ayatollah, still an Islamic fundamentalist regime, in charge of Iran. And you see five to 10 years, where China and Russia will be going in there to try to help them rebuild and spread their own influence.
So, as the United States deals with that, the President of the United States has said, I want to pull out of NATO, or I'm going to at least retreat from NATO, because he doesn't have the constitutional power to completely remove the United States from NATO.
When you hear a conversation like that, the United States pulling away, distancing itself with a key alliance. And couple that, with your idea, your view, that China, Russia, others who we would consider bad actors, are going to rush in there to help. How does that weigh in?
BACON: Well, I'm a Reagan Republican. I think NATO has been the best alliance in the history of mankind. I mean, it's been very effective, and it's helped America become -- be the world power.
NATO has helped us be the number one power on this planet, and it's in it -- only one time has NATO declared war. That's after 9/11, when we were attacked. And these NATO countries have fought by our side in a lot of different capacities, maybe not under the auspices of NATO, but as individual countries that are part of NATO.
And so, maybe just the topline? America without NATO is a weaker country. We're better off with NATO by our side. And so, I would like to see the President think about long-term and our history here, and invest in NATO. And you got to build relationships. You can't denigrate the leaders, make fun of their spouses.
[21:10:00]
And the real damage that I -- that's manifesting itself right now, the root cause of this, I really believe, is the threats against Canada, and the threats against Greenland. Most of these NATO countries in Europe were extraordinarily offended by these threats towards parts of these countries that are part of NATO, and it's really weakened us. It's going to take a while to recover this.
And, again, we should be investing in these relationships, building them up. Because if we did that, when we had this troubles in the Straits? These, our allies, would be much more quick to come to our side and help us out. But we've lost a lot of trust, and we're going to have to rebuild it.
KING: Congressman Don Bacon, appreciate your time, sir. Thank you.
BACON: Thank you.
KING: My Democratic source tonight, the first Iranian American Democrat elected to Congress, Representative Yassamin Ansari of Arizona.
Congresswoman, grateful for your time.
I want to start. You have a unique perspective. Do you agree with the President's assessment that this regime, the people the administration says it is going to sit down with and negotiate in Pakistan, are they much more reasonable than the prior regime, in your view?
REP. YASSAMIN ANSARI (D-AZ): Well, where I disagree firmly with the President is that he himself, and Pete Hegseth, and Karoline Leavitt, have actually referred to this as a new regime, which is absolutely not the case.
It is looking like the regime may end up being more hardline and more repressive than it was previously. Of course, 86-year-old Ali Khamenei, the Ayatollah was killed. But his son was appointed.
Now, whether or not negotiations are successful, and whether or not those who are involved with negotiations on the Iranian side are serious about it, I think, is a different question than whether or not the regime is hardline and repressive towards its own people.
Very devastatingly, we know that the regime has already restarted executions of protesters from the mass protests in January. They are accusing many of being spies, because of this war. And based on conversations that I have had with family, and with people inside of Iran, they're very worried about the repression being even worse than it was before.
KING: Looking forward, from a policy perspective, and what can Democrats do to press the President's hand. Your Democratic leader, the House Minority Leader, Hakeem Jeffries, saying today that, when Congress gets back next week, here in Washington, he wants the party to force another vote to limit the President's power to wage war.
You co-sponsored the version that didn't get enough votes, last month. Number one, do you expect any different result? And let's assume, I don't know if it's a safe assumption, but if they do have some sort of agreement come out of Pakistan, you still believe that's necessary, and why?
ANSARI: To be clear, I think we should have been forcing War Powers Resolution votes as often as possible. Donald Trump embarked upon an extremely reckless, illegal war, and America lost. America lost more than a dozen service members. We are not any more safe. In fact, we are arguably less safe than we were before.
Of course, the Strait of Hormuz was closed, and gas prices shot up here in the United States. So economically, it was very difficult for many, many Americans, and that's why this has been so unpopular with the American people.
We've caused extreme devastation across the region, thousands of senseless lives lost.
And I found the reporting from The New York Times to be incredibly disheartening to see how we got into this war in the first place. The fact that Donald Trump did not listen to the assessment of the U.S. intelligence community, when they said that many of the recommendations or plans that were put forward by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were, quite simply, they used the word, farcical, and they were not going to pan out.
And I think that is exactly what we've seen. The same regime in place, more repression, and no positive outcome for Americans at all.
I think the negotiations are important. I think that we need to end this war immediately to get Americans out of harm's way.
And I think in the long-term, I think it is important that we do whatever we can with the international community, to support Iranian people and their goals, in -- a better future for that country. I think we've really played with people's lives here, in the decisions that were made, and the harm is going to last for generations.
KING: And you have said that you believe one of the ramifications should be, you want to introduce Articles of Impeachment against the Defense secretary, Pete Hegseth.
You posted a video, on social media, explaining your reasons for that. Most of that video, though, talks about things the President has said, including the President saying he wanted to wipe out the civilization, which you called, you know, Threatening them with annihilation is a monstrous war crime. Why impeach the Secretary and not the President, if you believe what you believe?
[21:15:00]
ANSARI: Well I think the President should be impeached as well. And I stand with not just Democrats, but many Republicans. As you know now, non-elected Republicans thus far have shown the courage to speak up, people like former Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens. I mean, the backlash that Donald Trump has seen and the breaking apart of the MAGA coalition over this is very serious. They've called for the 25th Amendment.
Pete Hegseth, I think, needs to be impeached, because even prior to this war, he has put America at grave risk, and put our national security at risk. Whether you look at the Signalgate scandal, where he shared classified information and put American service members lives at risk by sharing classified information through Signal. By committing crimes with the double-tap strike on the boats in the Caribbean. And now with the war in Iran.
Look at the -- look at the first day of this war, a tragic massacre of over a 160 school children. In any other time, this would have been the most significant scandal we could have imagined. Even during the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, something like this did not happen for years into the wars, and they were treated with the seriousness that they've deserved.
We've already started -- stopped talking about this. That is horrendous. I mean, we have become so, I guess it just becomes so normalized, the gravity of these massacres, the murder of people in Lebanon, and Iran, and across the Middle East, that it doesn't even strike, it doesn't even strike up in regular conversations.
So, I will keep talking about this, and keep sounding the alarm, and keep calling for the removal of these individuals, because I think they are unfit for office, and we need people with much more expertise at the helm of such an important department in our country.
KING: As you know, this is obviously a critical global security issue, a major political issue here in the United States, that you were offended and you called out people on both sides of the aisle who made TACO jokes, Trump Always Chickens Out, when the President announced he was going to have the pause.
A lot of Democrats say, Well, that's fun. He did it again. He blinked.
Why do you think that is so reprehensible?
ANSARI: Because it's a good thing that Donald Trump did not follow through with his threat to, quote, Ensure that a whole civilization will die on the evening of April 7th. I didn't want to see that outcome happen. And so, to me, it is, this is not a joke, right?
And the whole TACO, it is a joke. When people say, Trump Always Chickens Out, to me, it's poking fun, it's making fun and light of the threats that he makes, no matter what the topic is.
The reality is that Donald Trump follows through on many of the horrendous things he says he's going to do, and it's harmed our country, and it's harmed our national security, and it's made people less safe, and it's hurt our economy. And so, I just -- I just don't think it's a -- it's a laughing matter, and I don't want to be egging on the President to execute on some of these horrific things that he says he'll do.
KING: Congresswoman Ansari, grateful for your time. Thank you very much.
ANSARI: Thank you so much.
KING: Thank you.
Up next for us. The first lady, Melania Trump, makes a surprise speech, blasting what she calls, lies, about her ties to Jeffrey Epstein. Did her husband get a heads-up?
And the next critical test for NASA's Artemis II mission may be the most dangerous. What we're watching for ahead of the crew's splashdown.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: An extraordinary and surprising statement from the first lady, Melania Trump, today, putting the spotlight back on the Epstein scandal, an issue that has consumed much of President Trump's second term.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MELANIA TRUMP, FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today.
The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather, I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation.
I have never been friends with Epstein. Donald and I were invited to the same parties as Epstein from time to time, since overlapping in social circles is common in New York City and Palm Beach.
To be clear, I never had a relationship with Epstein or his accomplice, Maxwell.
I have never had any knowledge of Epstein's abuse of his victims. I was never involved in any capacity - I was not a participant, was never on Epstein's plane, and never visited his private island.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Speaking about Epstein for the first time, the first lady suggested the speech was necessary to dispel fake images and rumors online about her alleged connection to the late convicted sex offender.
A person familiar with the matter told CNN, Donald Trump was aware his wife did plan to make a statement.
But the President himself told MS NOW, he didn't know anything about his wife's statement.
[21:25:00]
He has, of course, called the Epstein scandal, a hoax, and has encouraged the public and lawmakers to move on.
But the first lady today took a very different approach. She called on Congress to keep investigating.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
M. TRUMP: I call on Congress to provide the women who have been victimized by Epstein with a public hearing specifically centered around the survivors. Give these victims their opportunity to testify under oath in front of Congress, with the power of sworn testimony.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: My political sources tonight.
Kate Bennett, former CNN White House correspondent, and the Author of "Free, Melania: The Unauthorized Biography."
And with Paul Begala, a Democratic strategist.
And Brad Todd, a Republican strategist.
Kate, I'll start with you with the first very easy, simple, one-word question. Why?
KATE BENNETT, FORMER CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, AUTHOR, "FREE, MELANIA": It's hard to say why, with Melania Trump, sometimes. There's not necessarily a why.
But I will say that a first lady doing a statement like that from the Cross Hall of the White House is something no one has ever seen. And by the way, she's also the only one who can go on TV and speak out openly against something that will probably not make her husband pretty happy. But it's classic Melania. It's why I named my book "Free, Melania" because she's just about the freest person in Trump's orbit.
KING: There were some of the rumors. I mean, you can find anything on the internet, right? And if you're in national politics, at this point in your life, I understand she's didn't run for office. But you have to understand that there's just about anything on the internet, if you look. But there was a 2002 email, released by the Department of Justice, part of the Epstein files. She signs an email, Love, Melania. And Ghislaine Maxwell calls her Sweet pea.
She was also previously photographed with them quite a bit, as she says, at social events.
Do we know anything about their relationship that she should be nervous about, or worried about, that she would do something like this?
BENNETT: Not of anything that I found. And in fact, I do know -- understand that in that circle, in those orbits, of course, everyone hung out at some point, if you're a high dollar value person, in New York or Palm Beach, with despicable Jeffrey Epstein. She may be doing reputation management. There may be something coming along the pike, we don't know.
But also keep in mind that Melania Trump is the only Trump who has really successfully won a lot of money in a defamation case, that was against the Daily Mail, in 2017, for them writing a story that alleged she was an escort. So, she's the winner on this. She'll fight.
KING: So Brad, we're seven months, a little less than that, away from an election in which, if you had to make a bet today, you would not bet on the Republicans. And the Epstein files' a small piece of it, at least with some Trump voters who think he and, more importantly, others around him, promised to released everything. And for some reason, they seem to be foot-dragging on that.
The President wants the country to move on. Listen to how -- his wife said, Have a hearing, give the survivors a hearing. The President says this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I think it's really time for the country to get onto something else, you know. Now that nothing came out about me, other than it was a conspiracy against me, literally, by Epstein and other people. But I think it's time now for the country to maybe get on to something else.
It's like this is all they're supposed to be doing. And frankly, the DOJ, I think, should just say, We have other things to do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
KING: Mixed messaging, to say the least, from the President and the first lady. Helpful? Harmful?
BRAD TODD, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST, CO- FOUNDER, ONMESSAGE INC.: Well, it's been nine months since I was first asked about Donald Trump and the Epstein case on CNN. That's almost half the midterm cycle. We have less than that left to go before the election. I think that the President does have to move the party on. Sometimes the whole, We need to move on. Well you have to move the -- move it along. And clearly, it's not quite reached that threshold yet.
I think the first lady's comments today that Congress should hold a hearing for the survivors, should be cheered. Democrats who have been pushing for this should cheer that. That's perhaps the biggest victory the survivors have had, in the public policy arena. They certainly didn't get it while Joe Biden was president. They hadn't gotten it so far with President -- under President Trump.
So, I think the first lady should be recognized for that. She's a private citizen. She has no role in anything that the DOJ has done to this point. And so, this is a chance for the country to turn the page. But it's going to take people in both parties recognizing that.
KING: Top Democrat in the Oversight Committee says he agrees. He'd love to have that hearing. He'd like to schedule it. He's also said he's going to hold Pam Bondi to the contempt citation, even though she's no longer Attorney General. They're supposed to hear from the Commerce Secretary, Howard Lutnick.
From a Democratic perspective, is it, Carry on, gentlemen. Press the questions? Or when you have something like this happen, it's just going to stir a whole conversation up in the Republican circle, you just say, Let's just let them do this themselves?
PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, they need to have this hearing that the first lady called for. And the Democrats have been calling for. And the Republicans have been stalling, I don't know why. So, she should be applauded for that.
And I say, as a Democrat, nobody thinks Mrs. Trump did anything wrong in the Epstein thing. And I don't scroll the internet the way maybe some others do, so I have no -- and so -- she seems to me to be a completely innocent party here, and it's terrible, people say.
[21:30:00]
I had no idea, though, why kick it? That's kind of a mystery to me. I thought, like a lot of people thought, the Iran war was to distract from Epstein. But now apparently Epstein is going to distract from the Iran war. Both are terrible for Trump, because they fracture the MAGA base.
Now, even the first lady thinks Trump is wrong about -- not that he's done anything wrong.
KING: Yes.
BEGALA: But he's wrong about not wanting to get the truth out about Epstein. So, he's -- it really does hurt Trump and the Republicans, because it fractures his previously very loyal MAGA base.
KING: And yet, saying to give survivors a hearing if that's what they want, it's hard to argue with that. However, a lot of the survivors have said that they believe the Trump White House is foot-dragging on being fully transparent of letting everything out there. I guess maybe it's their -- maybe they're suspicious of the source of something.
But some of them are pushing back. This is part of their statement: Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein have already shown extraordinary courage by coming forward, filing reports, and giving testimony. Asking more of them now is a deflection of responsibility, not justice. First Lady Melania Trump is now shifting the burden onto survivors under politicized conditions that protect those with power.
It goes on essentially saying, No. Essentially, the survivors are saying, Your White House -- not Melania -- but your husband's White House has not fulfilled its promise yet. So, this in my words, not theirs, Leave us alone until you do your piece.
BENNETT: Yes, I think -- but let me just say this. During the first Trump administration, the East Wing never spoke to the West Wing. There is, unlike any other administration, there is no coordination between the two houses, right?
So, it's also why -- and she said this before, I'm independent, I tell him what I think. I don't always agree with him. She said it so many times. For whatever reason, she was reading the comments, and maybe wanted to come out and say, Nothing to do with this. But to attach her to what the West Wing is doing and the President is doing about Epstein, I think, is not right, because what she does is very uncommon.
KING: So, help me. This is a genuine question. I've been doing this for 40 years. I don't know whether to make too big a deal of this or not, in the sense that we know such little about her. She's much less -- less-public-profile first lady than we've had in the last 25 or 30 years.
To your point, there's clearly tension between her shop and his shop. We don't have to get to, you know and -- but she doesn't do a lot, and then she pops up today with, like -- everybody was shocked, the first lady wants to -- first, she's going to give a public statement, and then it's going to be about this.
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: My first response was, I don't really care, do you? She's a terribly unpopular first lady. Fairly or not. Harry Enten did a piece on this, this week. She's 12 points underwater. Hillary Clinton was very polarized, and was 25 points above five points above-water. Mrs. Obama and Mrs. Reagan were 50 points above-water. So she's historically unpopular. Again, I'm not--
TODD: I think--
BEGALA: I haven't -- I got no problem with her. I don't know why.
KING: Not my job to defend her. BEGALA: Right.
KING: But I think she's carrying the--
BEGALA: I suspect it's the last name.
KING: She's carrying his -- she's carrying his baggage right now.
BEGALA: It's the last name, not the first lady.
KING: Yes.
BEGALA: That's important.
BENNETT: Well, it's also the statute of limitations for how long a wife has to carry on with this.
KING: But is there -- is there a Republican candidate or officeholder who, like, would call you up and say, Hey, can you poke around and find out what this is? Or do they just think, Well, I don't know.
TODD: I think everyone's surprised. She's an enigma in many ways, even inside the Republican Party.
I think she's also not gotten quite a fair shake from the media. Most first ladies exist in a halo. They get tons of fluffy coverage. She has gotten none of that benefit. And frankly, she's done nothing to make it not so. I think that that's surprising, and that may be partly what she's trying to exercise her political capital here, what she has, is to move ahead of this and take it on her own terms.
KING: And they -- I think we'll end it on the enigma part, and we'll see where it goes--
(CROSSTALK)
BEGALA: But it is her husband who needs to testify.
KING: Right--
BEGALA: He's named in those files more than Jesus Christ is named in the Bible, more than Harry Potter is named in the Harry Potter books. Still no evidence of wrongdoing that I've seen. But he needs to testify.
KING: All right. We'll continue the conversation.
Paul Begala. Brad Todd. Kate Bennett. Thank you. Appreciate you all coming in.
Up next for us. You don't want to miss this. Artemis II returning to Earth at 24,000 miles an hour. My next source, the former astronaut, here to talk the dangerous final phase of this historic Moon mission.
[21:35:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: We are less than 24 hours out now from witnessing one of the most dangerous parts of the Artemis II mission, the return to Earth. Right now, in the Pacific Ocean, NASA/Navy teams preparing for the Orion capsule's splashdown. That of course, after a historic 10-day mission around the Moon.
The biggest concern is the crew's heat shield. That's the critical layer at the bottom of their spacecraft that's supposed to keep the astronauts safe as they soar in at nearly 24,000 miles an hour, while the outside of the capsule heats up to 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit. That's about half the temperature of the surface of the sun.
My source tonight is Chris Cassidy, former NASA astronaut, and Navy SEAL.
Chris, grateful for your time, especially at this moment.
You've had three space flights. You've experienced three splashdowns. Take us inside what's happening right now. How are these astronauts preparing for this?
CHRIS CASSIDY, FORMER NAVY SEAL AND NASA ASTRONAUT: Well, John, great to be--
KING: Walk us through the physical, mental preparation. Sorry.
CASSIDY: Absolutely, John. Great to be with you.
You know, it's an exciting time there. The mission has gone so well up to this point. One humongous hurdle and risk to put behind them, and that's the re-entry through the atmosphere, as you said, and splashdown. You got to have a parachute. If you make it through the atmosphere successfully and the parachute doesn't work? There's -- all of those are critical pieces in the chain that are being tested and run through the paces throughout this whole mission.
Right now, what they're doing, that night before is really critical to an efficient re-entry day. Re-entry day happens very quickly. I looked briefly at the timeline tomorrow. When they wake up, they've got an hour or so of prep, and then they're right into kind of checklist items, and that time can get away from you.
[21:40:00]
And there's so much thing -- so many activities you have to do to turn, basically, your RV, for the last 10 days, back into the rocket ship it was on launch date, to survive re-entry, and 3.5gs to 4gs that they'll experience, and all the equipment needs to be tied down in place. So, there's a lot going on. So they're intensely going through the checklist, I'm sure, right now, making sure when they go to bed tonight, they're ready to wake up and get after it.
KING: Everybody at home is saying, Idiot, why did you wait to ask this question? So, let me ask it. What's it like going 25,000 miles an hour in the atmosphere? What does that feel like? I can't ask you to simulate it, but I assume it's not smooth?
CASSIDY: There's a -- there's a whole lot going on, on that day. Normally -- your body feels acceleration and deceleration, so you certainly feel the launch and you feel the re-entry. But the rest of the time, while you're floating through that, your body is experiencing zero-G as the spacecraft is traveling, you can't sense that speed. You just have a sense, visually, when you're in Earth orbit.
I'm really curious about, since they have just the blackness of space out the window and two celestial bodies kind of far away, could they sense that speed in the transition between the Moon and Earth?
But tomorrow, as they -- as they approach and start getting that, the atmospheric re-entry, and the G-forces start to pick up, you go from the luxury of zero-gravity to the intensity of 3.5gs, 4gs on the re- entry process. It's significant load on your body. And it was shocking.
I remember, on my last space flight, I thought, OK, I'm not going to look at the G-meter. I'm going to say -- I'm going to look at it, when I think it's about 1g. And I looked at it, it was about point 0.2g. So, I was way off.
KING: Wow. OK.
The biggest concern, as you know, is the Artemis II heat shield. The scientists today expressing confidence it will hold up, even though there have been some concerns because of previous missions, the unmanned missions, one of the shields, which got pockmarked a little bit.
What are the risks? And is that something that you actually talk about up there? Is that something you have to deal with pre-mission, because you just got too much to do at that moment?
CASSIDY: Well, I'm sure both. But pre-mission, certainly the crew, and the smart engineers and Management at NASA writ large, that's our contractor base and our civil servant workforce, all discussing the merits and the risk trades of to look -- to go or not. And certainly, we went with go. And so, there was an acceptance level, where we were in the risk posture for the heat shield.
But now, it's game day. Tomorrow, it has to work. On the crew side, they're going through their procedures, I'm sure, making sure they know every contingency and what they can do. But if the heat shield doesn't work, there's no second step in the checklist that you can take. It has to work or not. It's very binary decision.
KING: It has been amazing seeing all the amazing images. What are you -- but we haven't learned anything yet. Victor Glover was talking about that, saying we have so much we're bringing back, I don't even know what we have, what to process. What are you most excited about learning?
CASSIDY: For me, I can't -- since I have the luxury of knowing the four of them, I can't wait, at some point -- they're going to be busy for the next several months -- but at some point, I'll see them. I can't wait to talk to them, look in their eyeballs, and see the enthusiasm and excitement that they're -- that they're sharing the stories with.
One of the things that -- I think it was Reid said last night, or maybe was Victor, when you came around to the terminator of the Moon, and as the Earth was disappearing behind it, you could see the terrain of the Moon casting its shadow on Earth.
And as he described that, like, Wow, that must have been amazing.
KING: Yes.
CASSIDY: So, hearing stories like that firsthand from them, I can't wait.
KING: Record that conversation. A lot of people would wish they could have it. You're a lucky man.
Chris Cassidy, grateful for your time tonight. Really important. Thank you so much.
And you can all be there tomorrow, as the astronauts splash down. "Mission To The Moon: Artemis II Returns" live coverage begins right here, Friday, 07:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on CNN, or you can also watch on the CNN app.
Up next. Kaitlan's conversation with the award-winning journalist and writer, Tom Junod, on his revealing new book.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: He's profiled politicians and A-list celebrities for major magazines, like Esquire and GQ, including people like Frank Sinatra and Mr. Rogers. The latter inspired a movie that starred Tom Hanks. And he writes about sports in his current role at ESPN.
But now, the award-winning journalist and writer, Tom Junod, has his own story to tell. His new memoir, "In the Days of My Youth I Was Told What It Means to Be a Man" tells the story of his childhood and his complex relationship with his larger-than-life father, Lou.
And Tom Junod is my source tonight.
And I'm so happy to have you here.
And I was laughing, as we were introducing you, because one funny part of your book, for people who haven't read it, is where you talk about pronouncing your last name. TOM JUNOD, SENIOR WRITER, ESPN, AUTHOR, "IN THE DAYS OF MY YOUTH I WAS TOLD WHAT IT MEANS TO BE A MAN": Yes.
COLLINS: And when you first had this, this voicemail set up in your first job that you had, and your mom called and said, That's not how we say our last name.
It was a part of the book that I just -- I found so funny.
JUNOD: Yes, she went full Brooklyn on that, she said -- because I had changed it from Junod to Juneau (ph), and she said, Don't put the Ritz on me.
COLLINS: I loved that so much.
But I just think, I mean, this book has so much insight into your family, obviously, not just your father. Your mom. Your siblings. Yourself.
JUNOD: Yes.
COLLINS: But as someone who you'll be known to people for your profiles of these iconic people. I wonder when you realized that your dad was the subject that you had been kind of circling this whole time.
JUNOD: Well, I mean, I think that -- I think I've always knew that my dad was larger than life, and sort of an overwhelming presence from, I mean, really from the time that I was a little kid.
[21:50:00]
But it was only sort of, as I've been doing the book, that I sort of realized that everything that I've written, and there's been a warm-up for this. I wrote about Frank Sinatra Jr., the story of the overshadowed son. I wrote about Tony Curtis. I wrote about, you know, and then -- you know, I wrote three stories about my dad himself. So, like, everything was sort of like a warm-up or a prelude for this book.
COLLINS: Yes, but you talk about how you write about your dad's fashion tips, and how you kind of put this celebrity touch on him.
But I thought what you wrote about in the book was really interesting, saying, Now you're kind of peeling back other layers and showing more of your father--
JUNOD: Yes.
COLLINS: --who was this larger-than-life character, had this swagger.
JUNOD: Sure.
COLLINS: So clearly, you read from the first page, he was a traveling handbag salesman, and he had all these maxims that he lived by. He had many women in his life. But I thought, so interesting of this was how you portrayed your father before and how you portrayed him in this book.
JUNOD: Yes, so everything -- you know, I wrote about him for GQ. I wrote about him for Esquire. I wrote about him for ESPN. I wrote about his gambling, for ESPN.
But there comes a time when everything else is a, you know, is a prelude. And I just decided, with this book, that I was going to tell the truth about my dad.
The thing about my relationship with my father is that I knew the truth about him from the time I was a really little kid. My dad -- my dad had an affair with one of my first friend's mother, when I was, like, 3-years-old. And there's only so much you can process as a 3- years-old. But I mean, I was -- I knew it, and I knew it because I was so sort of like attached to my mom at the time.
And so, I was really quite aware of my dad's flaws, as I was aware of his self-proclaimed magnificence. And this book just became this moment of truth for me, a moment of literal truth, where I just decided to say, Hey, I'm going to -- I'm going to tell this story once and for all.
COLLINS: I mean, after a life -- a lifetime of keeping his secrets, what was it like to--
JUNOD: Yes.
COLLINS: --to reveal them?
JUNOD: It was -- you know, it was not -- it was not an easy go. I wrote a first draft of this book that was something like 230,000 words, that I wound up throwing away and going back to it.
And the thing that -- the thing that sort of enabled me to write the book, is that I began to write about not just my dad, but about me in relation to him, how much I loved him, how much I feared him, how much I sort of protected him, even when I started writing about him, and that sort of, that decision that finally said, Hey, you need to -- you need to say this, you need to say this once and for all.
And I think that that's actually been a really powerful thing for me, because right now, I mean, we're talking about these secrets. I just did an event here in Jackson, Mississippi. And you wind up talking about things, and talking about things makes them easier to live with.
COLLINS: This line that you wrote in the book stood out to me. You said, I have to figure out a way to be a man by becoming a human being.
As your father had given you so many lessons in how to be a man and what that looked like throughout your life.
JUNOD: Yes. Right.
COLLINS: Why was that a challenge for you? What did that look like for you?
JUNOD: Well, because my father's idea of being a man, a lot of it had to do with surfaces. Like, for instance, like I'm reading -- I'm wearing cufflinks, like, right now, I'm wearing my father's pocket square right now. I'm wearing -- one of my father's rules was, always wear white to the face. I'm not wearing white to the face, but I'm, you know, I'm wearing a dress shirt.
And so, that's what my father -- those -- you know, he prescribed things that were very, very surface-y. He would say -- he even used the words like, Learn my secrets. But what he meant by learn my secrets were like, how to clean your -- he literally, like, taught me, like, how to clean my navel.
And so, what I had to learn was how to be honest with myself, how to be honest with the people around me. And that was definitely something that my dad really wasn't.
COLLINS: Tom Junod, the book is truly fantastic. I think everyone should read it. The book is "In the Days of My Youth I Was Told What It Means to Be a Man." Thank you for joining me.
JUNOD: Thank you so much, Kaitlan.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
KING: Up next. Young men will be automatically registered for the military draft, starting in December. But don't freak out. We'll have the details next.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
KING: Young eligible men will be automatically registered for the military draft pool starting in December. But don't worry, it's not as dramatic as it sounds, and it's not new, and it has absolutely nothing to do with the ongoing war with Iran.
Men ages 18 to 26 already, of course, have to register for the Selective Service, in case there's a draft. The automatic registration rule already in place in 46 states and territories. But Congress passed a measure, late last year, that will implement this practice now, nationwide, and that's what starts in December.
[22:00:00]
So, just to be clear, there's not a draft happening. Congress would have to approve of a draft before one ever took place. And some of you might remember this when you signed up, not all registered men would be enlisted to serve, if there was one. There would be a lottery, followed by physical, mental and moral evaluations for those selected.
Appreciate your time tonight. Hope you have a wonderful evening.
But stay with us. The news continues. "CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
