Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Vance On When Iran War Might End: "I Wouldn't Call It A War"; Courtroom Tensions Flare Over Holdout Juror In Clancy Trial; Fox News Abruptly Ousts Maria Bartiromo. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired September 03, 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)
KURT BUSCH, AMERICAN MOTORSPORTS RACING DRIVER: --you picked up on it. It's hard to describe.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: It's beautiful.
BUSCH: It is. It's poetic in a way.
COOPER: To feel that--
BUSCH: Right.
COOPER: --what a beautiful thing to have had.
BUSCH: It was pretty special.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: You can listen to the full conversation with Kurt Busch, wherever you get your podcasts, or watch the entire episode right now at CNN.com/AllThereIs.
That's it for us. Thanks for watching. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now. I'll see you tomorrow.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. When the Vice President says a war isn't a war. And why that matters.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
Six months into the Iran war, and this week has seen a return to active fighting. U.S. bases in Jordan, Kuwait, and the UAE, Bahrain, and Iraq, have all been targeted since just Tuesday.
Just yesterday, the United States conducted its own multi-faceted operation that involved striking nearly 60 military targets around the Strait of Hormuz. Those targets included Iranian air defense and communication sites, radar systems, and its mine-laying capabilities. At the same time, U.S. naval forces were escorting ships through that danger. We've described what is happening in the Middle East, since February, as a war. Because that's what it is: armed conflict between two nations. But the United States government has still not officially declared it one, which matters.
It matters to the family of the late U.S. Air Force Major John 'Alex' Klinner, who was killed in an aircraft crash over Iraq, back in March. This week, his widow Libby shared on social media that her family was not eligible for some benefits because, she says, the U.S. hasn't officially declared this a war.
In the Briefing Room today at the White House, I asked the Vice President, JD Vance, about what the Trump administration will do to ensure that his wife and their three young children get the benefits they deserve.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The widow of an airman who was killed in the Iran war says she's having trouble getting some of the benefits that they are -- they should have access to because it has not been officially declared a war. Can you and the President personally ensure that the family of Alex Klinner gets all the benefits that they deserve, given he died serving the country?
JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Yes, so, what's her name? You said his name is Alex Klinner?
COLLINS: Yes, He was an airman who was killed in the plane that went down over Western Iraq.
VANCE: So, what I'd say, Kaitlan, is please, if you -- especially if you have the private contact information, we will reach out to her directly as soon as this is over and make sure that she gets what she's entitled to.
Obviously, you know, our heart breaks for every single person who lost their lives in this -- in this operation. And you know, as much as our heart breaks, I can't possibly fathom a young widow, what she's feeling and dealing with it. And so, we want to be as helpful as we can and ensure she gets everything that she's entitled to. So, we will certainly work that on the backend as soon as that.
And my message to her would be, We love you. We're grateful for the sacrifice, and we very much take very seriously our commitment to get you what you need to get.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Tonight, a spokesperson for the Air Force tells CNN that officials spoke with Mrs. Klinner on Monday, quote, To ensure she is receiving all eligible benefits that she and her family are entitled to, as well as ensure all her questions are fully addressed. Department of the Air Force officials have also confirmed that all eligible combat theater benefits were included in the arrears of pay she has already received. A spokesperson says, the Air Force is committed to providing continued support for Mrs. Klinner, and all the families of the airmen who died in that March crash.
In the Briefing Room today, back there, when I followed up with the Vice President, about the timeline of this war overall with Iran, he actually contested even calling it a war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: In terms of the war and the timeline, given this administration has put timelines out there before, what you just said about no negotiations happening with Iran, will this war be over by the time of the midterm elections?
VANCE: Well, Kaitlan, again, I don't -- I wouldn't call it a war. Right now, there is no active shooting. I recognize there is -- there have been places where this has flared up. Major combat operations -- again, major combat operations lasted for about six weeks, and since then, we destroyed, of course, their nuclear facilities with Midnight Hammer. With Epic Fury, we destroyed their defense industrial base for producing weapons, and also a lot of their conventional military, and then we made it harder for them to rebuild that nuclear program.
[21:05:00]
But when you ask when will this end, you're asking me a question, like, when will the Iranians stop shooting at ships? I think the reality is, I don't know the answer to that question. You would have to ask the Iranians. When will the Iranians shooting at ships stop having an effect on world energy markets, and the answer is it has less effect day by day.
So, what we're going to do is not depend on the Iranians behaving responsibly or negotiating in good faith. What we're going to do is use the tools that we have at our disposal to ensure that the American people, one, never have to deal with the threat of an Iranian nuclear program, and two, that world energy markets are properly supplied.
COLLINS: But so it's up to the Iranians when this war ends?
VANCE: Well, if the Iranians keep on--
COLLINS: I mean, initially, you said four to six weeks.
VANCE: But -- but Kaitlan, if the Iranians keep on shooting at commercial ships, again, we have, I think, a responsibility. But certainly, we're the only ones with the capability to ensure that the Iranians are not destroying world energy markets.
And our attitude is we're not going to set an artificial timeline because -- let's just say, hypothetically, let's say, I told you three months, say I told you three days, OK? And then the Iranians start blowing up oil and gas ships, and the United States is the only country with the capability to ensure that those oil and gas ships get to market. Well, what I would say is, it would be irresponsible for us to write out our strategy and our timeline for an Iranian nation that simply cannot honor its commitments and cannot stop shooting at commercial ships.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, Vice President Vance may not want to call this a war. But at nearly the same time that he was saying that to me, in the Briefing Room, the President was saying this in an interview that was airing on British television.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Now we have a war with Iran.
We've defeated their navy. We've defeated their air force. We've defeated them. Their leaders are gone. Their everything is gone. Just about there. You know, we just hit them again last night.
BEV TURNER, ENGLISH TELEVISION PRESENTER: Yes.
TRUMP: And we took out their radar.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My congressional source tonight is the Co-Chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus. New York Democratic congressman, Tom Suozzi.
And, sir, I mean, obviously, when it comes to this, do you believe it matters if the administration describes this as a war or not?
REP. TOM SUOZZI (D-NY): I mean, it's really irresponsible. I mean, there are people dying. There are bombs being fired. Everybody's life is being upended. We see what the effects here domestically, with oil prices going up so dramatically, gas prices at the pump. It's just irresponsible.
This is serious business. This is like, this is life and death business. And the problem I have with all these -- you know, we hear these rumors about we may not have enough munitions. We're losing senior personnel at the Pentagon. This is really serious stuff, and nobody's talking to each other.
The administration is not reaching out to Congress, and working with Congress, to advise them what's going on, to help work together. Some of the greatest minds in the country that know this stuff pretty darn well, to work together, to actually address the very real problems we're facing in our world.
COLLINS: But you're a Democrat who works with a lot of Republicans. I mean, hence by the name of being the Co-Chair of the Problem Solvers Caucus. Do you think that Congress, though, has just totally abdicated its role in the Iran war?
SUOZZI: I think that the Republicans have not done enough to hold the President accountable. I think the Democrats want to work with the administration to try and figure out a way to get us out of this war.
I mean, when this first happened, I'm of a certain age, I first voted for the first time in 1980, in the Iran hostage crisis, and I was like, Yes, these guys are bad -- these are bad guys. We got to get these guys. And they've been saying, Death to America, all these years. And that was my emotional reaction.
But I'm a member of Congress. So, I go to a briefing and I listen to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of State, and different military leaders. And it's like, Hey, but what's the plan? Do we really have a plan here? Doesn't sound like we have a plan.
And then we hear about the Straits of Hormuz, and it's like, Wow, shouldn't we have thought of that before? And it's just been no plan.
And then the President attacks our allies because they won't team up with us. You're supposed to talk to your allies before this and work together.
This is serious, sophisticated, life and death world issues that require serious people to work together. Not semantics. You know, I wouldn't call it a war. The Vice President. I mean, that's just irresponsible. This is -- this is -- yes.
COLLINS: Judging by what you heard today, do you think this war will be over by the midterm elections?
SUOZZI: No. No. I mean, there's probably a great desire by this administration, unfortunately because they want to try and do something in time for the elections. They want to try and affect the gasoline prices. But that's no way to conduct international relations.
And it should really be -- you know, I grew up at a time when people said politics have to stop at the water's edge. And to do that, you have to communicate with each other. You have to figure out, this is our shared goals to work together. Not my way or the highway, I'm going to shove it down your throat. And we need people to work -- this -- we need people to work together to make our world safer, to build relationships with our allies, defeat--
COLLINS: You know, Dem--
SUOZZI: --defeat our strategic adversaries.
COLLINS: Well, and your party is trying to make the case that you guys should be in power in November.
[21:10:00]
And you wrote in an op-ed this week, saying, that you believe your party should reject the rise of the Democratic Socialist candidates that we've seen.
But we have seen the rise because Democrats are voting for them. So, I mean, is this not what -- it's the will of the Democratic voters who are saying that these are the candidates we want to have?
SUOZZI: Well, that's happening in the deep blue states. I mean, the same as you see MAGA Freedom Caucus people in deep red areas, you're seeing the rise of the DSA on the deep blue areas.
And the reality is that the status quo is not working. People are not happy. And the President, when he first ran, tapped into that anger that people have. And Zohran Mamdani in New York City tapped into people's economic anxiety. And they say -- they both have the same sort of message, which is, The system's not working for you. Let's blow the whole thing up.
The leftists want to get rid of capitalism. The President doesn't think democracy works, and it just wants a strong chief executive without talking to the Congress or the Supreme Court. So, these two great systems of capitalism and democracy are under threat from the far left and the far right. That's not the answer.
I'm not defending the status quo. The status quo is broken. We have problems in the United States of America. But we need to work together, as we have throughout our history, to fix those problems, to address the real problems in people's lives. When we don't do that, we end up with these extreme voices taking over the conversation in our country, which is what has happened.
COLLINS: If there are Democratic Socialists in your caucus, if Democrats retake the majority, can you work with them?
SUOZZI: Listen, I say every day I'll work with anybody. I say I'll work with the President. I'll work with Republicans. And I'll certainly work with Democrats. I'll work with anybody who is a person of goodwill who wants to actually solve problems and make people's lives better.
And that's what everybody in politics should be doing. It shouldn't be about your party or your label. It should be about what can we do to make people's lives better, make people's lives more affordable. Because people are freaking out right now about how expensive everything is in their lives, whether they go to the gas pump or the grocery store.
And the policies of this administration. There's five things that are making prices higher that everybody knows are part of this administration. Tariffs. Everybody knows that tariffs are making things more expensive. That's this administration's policy. The war. Everybody knows that's this administration's policy. It's making gas prices higher. The debt. The debt is causing higher interest rates. That's just the reality of the situation. Energy prices, health insurance, all directly related to policies of this administration that said they would reduce prices on day one.
COLLINS: Congressman Tom Suozzi, thank you as always for joining us tonight.
SUOZZI: Thank you.
COLLINS: Appreciate your time.
Also joining us tonight is the Republican who is running for governor of California. That's Steve Hilton.
And thank you, sir, for being here.
When it comes to what we heard from the Briefing Room today, do you think your voters, people in California, care whether or not it's called a war?
STEVE HILTON, (R) CALIFORNIA GOV. CANDIDATE: No. I think you got it exactly right, Kaitlan. Which is the important point is what actually happens in the real world, and if the labeling of what's going on denies someone the benefits they're entitled to, then that's a problem. And you raised it, and it looks like it's going to be fixed. I think that's what matters: what happens in the real world.
But I just want to say, I completely agree with what the Congressman just said, which is that people want problems solved, they want people to work together. That's my attitude in this race, and will be as governor. I probably will be working with a Democrat -- strongly Democrat legislature.
But I would just add one thing to his list of things that are driving up costs across the country. Here in California, it's the Democrat policies that have given us the highest cost of living, highest housing costs, highest gas prices, electric bills, and so on in the country. And that's what I'm fighting to change.
COLLINS: Well, gas prices are obviously extra high in California. That is in part because of California's policies. But they are high because of the war in and of itself.
HILTON: True.
COLLINS: And when the month before the war started in California, I think it was $4.64. Now it's $5.78. But when you hear from the Briefing Room today, I mean, do you believe that's Democratic policies in California that drove that price up, or is it the war with Iran?
HILTON: Well, even with the war -- you're completely right. It's elevated prices across the country, across the world. But you can find gas prices today in other states, in Arizona, just across the border.
Actually, California-produced oil sold just across the border for $2 less than you buy it here. So, while it's correct that the war has elevated prices, and of course we want to see that come down. Even without that happening, there's a lot we can do here to lessen the pain, especially on working people and small businesses who are really suffering as a result of these high energy costs, not just gas, but electric bills as well.
COLLINS: There's also another issue that is playing in a lot of races, but also something that you've talked about a lot in your campaign, which is AI data centers and the backlash that we've seen growing to them across the United States. [21:15:00]
This is what the Vice President said today, when he was questioned about the polls that show seven in 10 Americans don't want an AI data center in their community.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VANCE: I've seen the same polls that you're talking about, that the political backlash over data centers, a very large chunk of it, not all of it, of course, but a very large chunk of it, is that people associate data centers with, My neighborhood's going to get worse. In particular, my power bills are going to go up.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: You've said that data centers are essential. Do you think that there should be federal guidelines on this, so that all states are working on the same playing field?
HILTON: No, I think we've got far too much federal guidelines and policies and regulations on everything. The whole, you know, the 10th Amendment of the Constitution is very clear, that things that aren't in the Constitution should be decided at the state level, and that's the genius of our country, that you can try different approaches.
The problem we have here in California -- we're leading the AI revolution. All of this is generated from within our state, and I strongly support that. It's an iconic and important industry right now, basically keeping our budget afloat.
The problem is the jobs that are associated with this leading AI revolution from California, they're all being created in other states, in Texas, in Arizona, Ohio, everywhere but here because, we've made it so expensive to build anything, to run a business. That's what I want to change.
One last point, Kaitlan, on this. I made an announcement yesterday in the spirit of what the Congressman was talking about. We just saw in San Francisco, the very first instance anyone can track of a human being, being fired entirely by AI in a store, in a retail store in San Francisco that's run by AI.
I just think that's completely unacceptable. We can't have that kind of dehumanization of the workforce. And actually, on this, I found myself in agreement with a union leader here in California, and against the Chamber of Commerce. I think that we've got to be really careful. We want to lead the technology and AI revolution, but we can't be led by it.
COLLINS: You're agreeing with a lot of Democrats in the last five minutes.
Let me ask you--
HILTON: I know. I'm going to get in trouble. COLLINS: We moderated your debate, obviously as you -- when you were running for governor, and everybody was on that stage.
The President is taking credit for you being on the ballot, this November. I have to ask you about something he told battleground Republicans who were running for House and Senate seats, last night, at the White House.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: And I'm really going to be in particular interested in Congress and the Senate. I love you, governors, but good luck, you know. If you happen to be in the audience, we'll give you a shout-out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Do you want the President to come and campaign for you? Doesn't sound like he's offering.
HILTON: Well, I -- no. I'm not sure they -- they see my race as on the target list, to be honest.
Look, as I've said before, I appreciate the endorsement. It's an honor for me, as a new American citizen, to be endorsed by the President. I think it's a useful thing to have a governor who's got a good working relationship with the administration, rather than what we have now, which is this very antagonistic relationship, Gavin Newsom and the Attorney General constantly fighting and suing the administration. I think that's not helpful for California.
But I think that in this race, we're already closing the gap with my Democrat opponent. We're going to keep going in that direction, with a very clear message about how we're going to cut your taxes, lower gas, make our state Cal affordable. That's what's going to do it for us here in California, I think.
COLLINS: Yes. Well, let's say the fight goes back and forth between the federal government and California.
Steve Hilton, thank you for joining us here on THE SOURCE tonight.
HILTON: Thank you. Great to be with you.
COLLINS: And up next. We are following breaking news because there's a rare loss for Republicans tonight, as Missouri's Supreme Court has just blocked that state's new congressional map, two months from the midterms, and President Trump is not happy. We're going to have a legal source weigh in right after this.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: We're following breaking news tonight, amid a major setback for President Trump and his party in the battle for Congress and who controls it. As the Missouri Supreme Court has just unanimously blocked the state's new congressional map that was backed by the President and Republicans, and sought to erase a longtime Democratic seat.
The justices have ruled that the map can no longer be used in this November's election, and are now leaving it up to the voters to decide whether or not it will be used in future ones.
The President is responding tonight by lashing out at the court, writing on social media, quote, "The Missouri Supreme Court just ridiculously ruled in favor of changing the maps back to what they were a long time ago. It's called, Ancient History. The problem is, according to Legal Scholars, that not only was the ruling horrible, ridiculous, and unConstitutional, but there won't be enough time to change the map back with the Election coming up in a very short period of time. The Election Process, as usual, is being disturbed in America," the President writes.
CNN's Senior Legal Analyst, Elie Honig is my source on this breaking news.
Elie, you're a legal scholar. Do you agree with the President?
ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASST. U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, FORMER STATE & FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, Kaitlan, I certainly do not adopt the rhetoric, but I think the President raises a valid point here, which is the outcome of this case leaves the voters of Missouri and the candidates in an essentially unprecedented and bizarre scenario.
[21:25:00]
Now, here's why: Missouri, after the 2020 census, had eight congressional districts, which were broken down into six Republican- leaning districts, two Democratic-leaning districts. During the mid- district mid-decade redistricting that happened, that was changed to a seven-to-one map. That new seven-to-one map was used last month, during the state's primary election.
And now today, the Missouri Supreme Court says, Sorry, that had to go to the voters first for a referendum. So, for the general election, coming up in November, you have to go back to the six-to-two map.
How does that work? Where are voters going to vote? They're going to be voting in different districts for the primary and the general. How about the candidates? What happens to the candidates who won those primaries? The map's not going to match up between the primary and general, and the Missouri Supreme Court does not even begin to address what people are actually supposed to do on the ground. So, it's a practical mess in Missouri now.
COLLINS: So, if the court doesn't address it, what happens?
HONIG: Well, the administration certainly will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court can take cases from the state Supreme Court. Whether the Supreme Court will take the case, I don't know. On the one hand, it's not really a federal issue. This has to do with nuances of Missouri state laws, about referendums and how you change your maps. On the other hand, there is a really important legal principle called the Purcell Principle, which says, We should not be changing, altering, messing with the way that we vote too close to an election.
And here we are, 60 days out, and suddenly Missouri has gone from a set procedure to chaos. So, that may be a reason why the Supreme Court may want to take this.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, speaking of the Supreme Court. The administration, the Trump administration tonight, on a separate matter, is appealing to them, again. They're asking the justices, Elie, to let the Postal Service move ahead with the President's plan to restrict mail ballots. It would basically change how mail-in voting is done in this country.
But the justices just ruled on this last week. So, how does this work? Will they take this up again? Or are they going to say, Thanks, but no thanks?
HONIG: Right. So, the challengers to the President's executive order, which are led by a group of Democratic states, got the case up to the Supreme Court last week.
The Supreme Court, however, said, We're not going to hear it now because we think the things that the Democratic states are complaining about, that there could be disenfranchisement, that this is the President infringing on the state's ability to run their own elections. The Supreme Court said, It's premature; we're not far along enough yet.
However, here we are 10 days later, and now a couple things have happened. The Postal Service has issued a final ruling, which moves the ball forward. And we learned today, from this court hearing, that the Postal Service actually has a computer portal to start putting the President's executive order into place.
And so, now the argument that's being made is OK -- by the states -- Now we're far enough along. Now this needs to be blocked. Now the harm is imminent.
And it looks like the Democratic states are going to win there, and that's why the administration is now going to ask the Supreme Court to step in again, and they're going to ask the Supreme Court to once again say, It's too late.
But again, Kaitlan, it's the same principle, just going the other way. We're going to end up with total chaos here, right? If the Supreme Court allows the President to partially install his plan, with the Postal Service coming up with lists and special mailers, that too will create chaos.
So, if they're consistent here, they will put the kibosh and end both of these attempts to throw things into chaos here, two months before the midterms. But we'll see how that plays out.
COLLINS: Supreme Court Justice Elie Honig, glad we have you here tonight.
HONIG: Thank you. Never get confirmed.
COLLINS: You might.
Up next here for us. Speaking of legal developments. There were some incredibly stunning moments in that Lindsay Clancy trial today. The defense, her attorney, is claiming there is one juror who they say refuses to listen to the law. Still, no verdict. So, what happens now when court resumes tomorrow morning? That's next.
[21:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, there is still no verdict in the Lindsay Clancy trial, as tensions boiled over in court today. Lindsay Clancy's attorney is now arguing that one juror is preventing them from reaching a unanimous verdict, and he's actually asking the judge to remove that holdout.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KEVIN REDDINGTON, CLANCY DEFENSE ATTORNEY: That there's one juror who refuses to listen to the law that you've given him or her on reasonable doubt, and I suggest respectfully that the soft instruction that you gave them, saying at the sidebar, Can you listen to the law as I instruct you, does not focus on the issue.
And if we come back here in a half an hour with a mistrial because of a -- because of a juror that has just spurned the instructions of this court, it's a shame. It's a real shame.
My motion is to remove this juror that refuses to listen to your instruction on reasonable doubt.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: The judge there, William Sullivan, declined to remove that holdout juror and instead instructed the jury to keep deliberating. They did, and they went home. And when court resumes tomorrow, the judge is expected to question that lone juror.
All of this drama unfolded today, after there had been 35 hours of deliberations, and the judge ordered jurors to go and speak with him one by one at the bench, just a few inches away from Lindsay Clancy and her attorneys, who had also approached the bench earlier.
[21:35:00]
Lindsay Clancy, of course, is accused of murder, after strangling her three children, her young children, in 2023. And prosecutors argue, she knew what she was doing and that she had planned it. But her attorneys say she can't be held criminally responsible for their deaths because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis.
COLLINS: Joining me now are my legal sources.
Casey Jordan, who is an attorney and a criminologist.
And Carl E. Douglas, who is a defense attorney in the O.J. Simpson murder trial.
And Carl, when you look at this, and this judge questioning the juror tomorrow, is that typical from your experience?
CARL E. DOUGLAS, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY, DEFENSE ATTORNEY IN O.J. SIMPSON MURDER TRIAL: No, it's not, Kaitlan. It's a very unusual setting.
This is a circumstance, though, where Clancy's (ph) lawyer, Mr. Reddington, suggested that there was a note that said 11 of the jurors had decided, and one refused to follow the law about reasonable doubt. So, that's why the judge took each juror one by one to sidebar. And I guess, tomorrow, the judge will intend to question that lone juror. But I think there's going to be some decision one way or another coming tomorrow.
CASEY JORDAN, ATTORNEY & CRIMINOLOGIST, HOST, "CRIMINAL APPEAL" PODCAST: Yes.
COLLINS: Casey, how do you see this? I mean, we've been talking about this and thought--
JORDAN: Yes.
COLLINS: --did not think I don't believe that either of us that by Thursday this would still be happening, the trial would still be going on.
JORDAN: And this jury is tired. And you can tell from the note from the foreperson that they're very frustrated. And it's not that this is just a person who truly believes in guilt. I mean, the note made a statement: this person refuses to listen to the letter of the law as you've instructed it.
In other words, I believe that this holdout juror has voiced doubt, reasonable doubt, has participated in deliberations, and still, at the end of the day, is saying, Well, yes, I do have some reasonable doubts, but I'm going to vote guilty anyway. That has to be, in my estimation, the foundation for why this statement is coming to the judge.
The judge lined up all 12 people. Can you follow my instructions? All 12 of them said, Yes. Which means that the holdout juror, either it's possible that this person is a stealth juror who just doesn't care about the letter of the law, who's going to vote guilt, no matter what, or perhaps doesn't have the intellect or capacity to follow the judge's instructions. It could be a matter of intelligence, good faith or bad faith. That's what the judge wants to find out at 09:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. COLLINS: And so, Carl, when they're back in the courtroom. I mean, the judge came in and basically read them the instructions again.
And just so for people who weren't inside the courtroom today, didn't know what the judge said to them, this is exactly what he repeated, again, to these jurors, who've been deliberating for over 30 hours now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
Voice of JUDGE WILLIAM SULLIVAN, PLYMOUTH COUNTY, MA SUPERIOR COURT: In this case, I've told you that every person is presumed to be innocent until they are proved guilty, and that the burden of proof is on the prosecutor.
If you evaluate all the evidence and you still have a reasonable doubt remaining, the defendant is entitled to the benefit of that doubt and must be acquitted. The evidence must convince you of the defendant's guilt to a reasonable and moral certainty, a certainty that convinces your understanding and satisfies your reason and judgment as jurors who are sworn to act conscientiously on the evidence.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I mean, do you agree with Casey here, Carl, when you listen to that, in terms of what is going on with this one juror?
E. DOUGLAS: It sounds like it as well. Yes, Kaitlan.
One thing to remember: we lawyers would spend weeks, months trying to understand in law school, these very complicated decisions, and we are trying, as lawyers, to communicate that to jurors who don't have that understanding.
I myself, after 45 years of being a lawyer, was on a jury just a couple of months ago, and it was a fascinating experience. It made me a better lawyer, but it taught me the importance of trying to simplify messages, to be very mindful of the jurors' time and watch out for sidebars because jurors don't like all of those things going on that is not in their presence.
But it is indeed a unique circumstance, and the judge is trying his best to be fair, especially when you have the jurors disclosing what the split is. I think Casey would agree, you're not ever supposed to expose the split because that might put pressure on the lone juror, and I think that will be one of the concerns that Judge Sullivan will try to deal with tomorrow.
COLLINS: That's such a good point, Carl. Because before this, we didn't really have a lot of insight, or any insight, into what was actually going on inside that deliberation room.
And so, Casey, now that we do know it is split a 11 to one. First off, does that surprise you that that's where these jurors have come down after listening to this? JORDAN: It doesn't -- it doesn't surprise me because I watched this whole trial, and I believe the defense absolutely had a better game than the prosecution did. So, I have predicted that it would be not criminally responsible.
[21:40:00]
And we are, you know, we are at the finish line, and if a 11 jurors are -- and that is why Kevin Reddington is basically like, I don't even want a mistrial, I want you to get rid of this holdout. Because he believes clearly that this juror is acting in bad faith.
And if that juror is eventually removed and an alternate comes in, who knows? Doesn't mean that the next one is automatically going to rubberstamp the other 11. The next one could be a holdout as well.
COLLINS: Yes.
JORDAN: So, I mean, it's a nailbiter. We won't know until tomorrow how this plays out. But nobody wants a mistrial. So much has been put into this.
COLLINS: Casey Jordan. Carl E. Douglas. Great to have both of you here tonight with your expertise. Thank you for joining us.
E. DOUGLAS: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: Up next. We're getting more reporting on what was a shocking exit from Fox News today. What we're learning about why the President's longtime ally, Maria Bartiromo, was abruptly shown the door. That's ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:45:00]
COLLINS: Tonight, Fox News has abruptly fired the longtime anchor, Maria Bartiromo, who is one of the President's closest allies at the network. It was a pretty unceremonious exit with no televised sign-off or real acknowledgement, beyond a terse statement thanking her for her 12 and a half years of work at the network.
Sources have confirmed to CNN tonight what Status, the media newsletter, first reported, that Fox News leadership ousted Maria Bartiromo because she disclosed confidential information to the Trump White House.
Brian Stelter is CNN's Chief Media Analyst, who's here with more reporting on what happened.
And Brian, what are you hearing about this?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Well, this has been shocking to the worlds of both media and politics today, and it speaks volumes about Maria Bartiromo's status in the right-wing media world and in the Trump White House, that JD Vance was immediately asked if she would become White House press secretary, and that is not an entirely far-fetched thought.
But as we piece together what happened here, Kaitlan. Keep in mind what I learned back in 2023, when Tucker Carlson was rather similarly abruptly pushed out of Fox News. That was another shocking Fox departure. And the story that came out on day one was not the full story. So, I just -- I want to acknowledge that, and caveat what we've learned so far about Bartiromo.
But there are some similarities between Carlson's ouster and Bartiromo's ouster. There were multiple factors behind the scenes, where the executives were kind of getting tired of this larger-than- life star and perhaps uncomfortable with some behind-the-scenes behavior.
So, go back to July. Think back to that primetime speech we saw from President Trump, with conspiratorial allegations about election fraud and claims from 2020.
The next morning, it was fascinating how Fox didn't touch it, didn't follow up. Here are some of the headlines from the next morning: Quote, "Trump's Favorite News Show Totally Ignores His Election Fraud Speech."
Well, now we might know why. Because there was an internal memo, some sort of directive sent out to some of the staffers at Fox, telling them not to go down Trump's rabbit hole, not to follow up on his conspiratorial claims.
Well, Maria Bartiromo wanted to anyway. She wanted to cover those claims on the air. She was told not to. And apparently, she sent that directive, that memo, that email or text message, and she showed it to her friends inside the Trump White House. Maybe a screengrab of a text message was sent over to the Trump administration, and then word of what Bartiromo did, sharing that with the White House, got back to Fox Management.
Here's how our former colleague Oliver Darcy, now at Status, described this in his reporting tonight. He said, Bartiromo not only effectively betrayed her employer, but also disclosed confidential company information, violating the terms of her employment agreement.
So, that's the claim from sources coming from the Fox side. We have not yet heard from Bartiromo about this. She has not commented, and she hasn't posted anything to social media. But clearly, something happened that caused Fox to sever ties with her.
COLLINS: I mean, Brian, you've covered media for a long time. Were you shocked by this today?
STELTER: I was stunned because Bartiromo has seemed to be invincible and untouchable at Fox.
Think back, again, to 2020 to the election fraud lies. Bartiromo was the first person on Fox to stoke the lies about Trump winning an election that he lost in 2020. She was the one that started all the craziness involving Dominion, causing Dominion and Smartmatic to sue. We remember that Fox settled with Dominion for three quarters of a billion dollars in 2023. But Smartmatic is still suing Fox. Six years later, there is still litigation going on about those election lies. And now, all the people that were named in that Smartmatic lawsuit, are out. Lou Dobbs was named. Well, he passed away. He was canceled, and he was -- passed away. Jeanine Pirro, she now works in the Trump administration. And Bartiromo, now she's out at Fox. So, there's a part of me that wonders if Fox is preparing to settle that Smartmatic lawsuit. But so far, there's no indication that that's actually what's happening here.
But it just goes to show how complicated and twisted those election lies have been for Fox News. They've been very expensive. They've been a huge headache. And that might say something about 2026 as well.
As we look to the midterms and all the concern about how Trump might try to meddle in the midterms, Fox is putting out, essentially, by firing Bartiromo, making a statement that it's not going to tolerate that kind of conspiratorial crap on the airwaves.
Listen, Fox is pro-Trump in many other ways, but I think in some ways, Kaitlan, they might be drawing a line, not just in the past, but maybe in the future here.
[21:50:00]
COLLINS: Well, and I mean, Brian, I was sitting in the Briefing Room today. We were waiting on the Vice President to come out when this news came out.
STELTER: Right. Right.
COLLINS: And obviously, we -- they haven't replaced Karoline Leavitt yet, and it was a real question in that moment, and -- of whether or not that these two are related.
And when the Vice President came out later, he seemed surprised by this, and he was asked if she was becoming the next press secretary, and he kind of laughed and said, you know, To my knowledge, no. But he kind of caveated it because I think that is a, you know--
STELTER: Yes.
COLLINS: --a smart move in the Trump White House that you don't really know what the President could potentially announce.
STELTER: And keep in mind, Bartiromo knew about her departure a few weeks ago. This was worked out in August. It only leaked out and was announced today. But Bartiromo has had some time, potentially, to talk behind the scenes with her friends in the White House, including the President. I bet Trump will weigh in on this at some point.
And already, you do see some MAGA media figures saying, Hey, Fox is trying to cover something up. They're trying to bury the truth.
So, you do have an example of a divided America here, with Bartiromo departing in part because she wanted to promote Trump's conspiratorial claims, and Fox refused to let her.
COLLINS: Yes. I mean, to be fair, the White House isn't even really talking about the claims that the President made in the speech that night either, anymore, and no indictments from the Justice Department.
STELTER: That's a great point. That's true.
COLLINS: Brian Stelter, great to have your reporting.
STELTER: That's right.
COLLINS: Thank you for joining us tonight.
Up next. It is time for what we saw behind the scenes this week in Washington. You won't want to miss it.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Here's a look behind the scenes of a busy week in Washington.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
TRUMP: I'm not affected by the election. Number one, I'm not running, my party is running, and I'm going to help my party.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Monday, August 31.
TRUMP: Ultimately, prices are going to come down. Now, will it happen before the election? I can't tell you that. But it probably went up because of Iran.
VANCE: There's something about Abdul El-Sayed that is very, very evil.
COLLINS: Do you want to respond to what the Vice President said today?
ABDUL EL-SAYED, (D) MICHIGAN SENATE NOMINEE: Let me tell you what's evil. Evil is the idea of starting wars when there's peace. The idea of stripping away people's health care when they absolutely have no other option. What's evil is to do that so that you can pass a tax cut for billionaires. What's evil is putting a data center that people don't want in their backyard despite them. What's evil is corrupting yourself because you want a little bit more power.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Tuesday, September 1.
COLLINS: Breaking news this hour, as Iran says that it has launched new attacks, targeting U.S. forces, after the United States struck Iran earlier today.
If you're on the ballot in these key states coming up. Look at how much gas prices have gone up there since the start of the war. How do you feel about that?
SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Look, I think you call the White House and tell the President, We got to figure out something here to give the American people some type of reprieve.
MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Republicans have not had the backbone, to say exactly what you said, in public.
COLLINS: Thank you both for being here.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Wednesday, September 2.
TRUMP: That guy got two and a half percent.
They gave a little love tap, but it was a very heavy attack last night, and we're prepared to do another one anytime we want.
We're doing really well with Iran, and I want to thank Pete and all those people. They're doing -- that was great. We now control the Hormuz Strait.
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: The President signaling that this new phase of combat would be brief lends credence to recent reporting that U.S. forces in the region and elsewhere are stretched very thin.
Is there any concern at the White House tonight about Hegseth's leadership?
COLLINS: While some White House officials believe there's a real silo in between what happens at the Pentagon and the White House, knowing what's going on at the Pentagon, obviously the relationship between the President and Hegseth is what would matter the most at the end of the day. And as evidenced by what he just said about him 20 minutes ago, Jim, he still has his backing.
Multiple Pentagon sources voicing their concerns to CNN about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's leadership.
What is your assessment of what's happening inside the Pentagon right now.
FRANK KENDALL, SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE (RETIRED): In a word, it's dysfunctional.
He's doing active harm to the Department of Defense. It's not past. It's active harm.
All the firings of general officers, about 25 now, I think, removing people from promotion lists, both of these are totally unprecedented. The climate of fear that's been created is very palpable. It's affecting everybody and how they work. It's affecting the quality of advice that's being given. People are afraid to say something that's not going to be approved of.
ON SCREEN TEXT: Thursday, September 3.
BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: We're standing by for the first White House press briefing in more than 40 days. Vice President JD Vance will be taking the podium to answer reporters' questions. VANCE: All right.
COLLINS: Will this war be over by the time of the midterm elections?
I wouldn't call it a war.
But when you ask when will this end, you're asking me a question, like, when will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?
[22:00:00]
I think the reality is, I don't know the answer to that question. You would have to ask the Iranians.
COLLINS: But so it's up to the Iranians when this war ends?
VANCE: Well, if the Iranians keep on--
COLLINS: I mean, initially, you said four to six weeks.
VANCE: But -- but Kaitlan, if the Iranians keep on shooting at commercial ships.
Let's just say, hypothetically, let's say, I told you three months, say I told you three days, OK? And then the Iranians start blowing up oil and gas ships, and the United States is the only country with the capability to ensure that those oil and gas ships get to market. Well, what I would say is, it would be irresponsible for us to write out our strategy and our timeline for an Iranian nation that simply cannot honor its commitments and cannot stop shooting at commercial ships.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COLLINS: Thanks so much for joining us here on THE SOURCE tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
