Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Continues Red-State Swing With Stop In Alabama; NY A.G.: Cornell Rape Case Now An "Active Criminal Investigation"; Elon Musk Threatens To Sue Over New "Musk" Documentary. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired October 02, 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]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: And at any time on any screen or mobile device, you can stream this show live, or any CNN program on demand. Scan the QR code on your screen, or go to CNN.com/Watch to learn more.
That's it for us. I hope you have a great weekend. I'll see you Monday.
"THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight. New reporting on those pro-Trump ads that taxpayers are funding, including one that depicts the President as a gift from God.
I'm Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.
With just 32 days to go to the midterm elections, tonight, President Trump's campaign blitz to boost Republican candidates has taken him to Mobile, Alabama.
Now, the President won my home state by 30 points just two years ago, and it's also where the future president held his first mega rally more than a decade ago. Back then, he was the reality TV outsider, promising to drain the swamp in Washington, D.C. This time, he's a two-term president who right now has historically low approval numbers, according to our CNN Poll of Polls.
And following yesterday's rallies in Texas and Oklahoma, Alabama marks the third stop in a row, in territory that Republicans probably didn't imagine, even just a few months ago, we'd still be talking about right now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: They said, Why are you going to Alabama? Why are you going to Oklahoma? Why are you going to Texas? But you know, especially in the last two, in Texas because we have to win that race, Ken Paxton has to win.
(CHEERING)
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: But here you're going to win your races. But in the case of Oklahoma and Alabama, I'm here to say, Hello, I love you, and I'm coming really as a sign of respect.
(CHEERING)
TRUMP: I'm asking you to pretend that I'm on the ballot. Here's what happens: when I'm not on the ballot, we don't do well.
When I'm on the ballot, we kill everybody.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, while the President takes that message on the road to deep red states, he's also doubling down on a flurry of campaign ads that are funded by the federal government. Yes, by taxpayers. Three of them have already been airing on networks, including CBS, CNN, Fox, Fox News, and MS NOW.
The White House argues they are public service announcements. But you can decide for yourself what, if any, announcement there is beyond heavily promoting the President.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (voice-over): This lion, is the king of the jungle, huge mane.
Every once in a while, the lion has to show the jackals who he is.
TRUMP: In all the chronicles of the ages, never before has any nation celebrated so magnificent a triumph as this one. We are the freest people on earth.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Freedom at the White House on Donald Trump's birthday. What an event.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Welcome to UFC Freedom 250.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, according to Maggie Haberman and her colleagues at The New York Times tonight, they're reporting this. Quote, that "President Trump personally instructed his budget director to use taxpayer money for TV ads praising him and his presidency, setting in motion a $20 million contract that used funds from the Department of Homeland Security."
Now that follows reporting from my colleague, Kristen Holmes, earlier this week that Trump was personally driving these video ads, including helping select the pictures and the videos that were used.
The Times reports tonight that on a meeting, back on August 7th, inside the Oval Office, as advisers were waiting on the President to approve money from his Super PAC, to help Republicans in the midterms, that quote, During that meeting, the president was much more interested in looking at videos of himself. He turned to his aide, Natalie Harp, and asked her to show the group inside the Oval the type of imagery that he favors.
Now, the results are a series of commercials that look and sound like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And on June 14th, 1946, God looked down on his planned paradise and said, I need a caretaker. So God gave us Trump.
And then his oldest son turns and says, Dad, let's make America great again. Dad, let's build back a country to be the envy of the world again.
So, God made Trump.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Hmm.
My political sources tonight are:
Former New York City Mayor, Bill de Blasio.
Former Trump campaign manager, Bill Stepien.
And CNN's Chief Data Analyst, Harry Enten who, yes, you heard laughing in the background.
Bill Stepien. God made Trump?
[21:05:00]
BILL STEPIEN, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN MANAGER: This is a gray area. Think about this. He's not promoting himself for office. He's not promoting somebody else. The White House Counsel's office, whose job is to keep him out of trouble, approved it. The FCC approved it. And stations, which can reject ads, and they've rejected Trump's ads before, are airing it. So, there's a gray area that politicians who wrote these laws, he's taking advantage and playing it.
COLLINS: Do you think it's a public service announcement in what you just saw there, and if so, for what?
STEPIEN: I think the White House Counsel approved it. I think the FCC has approved it. And I think this network is airing the ad.
COLLINS: Right, but what's the public service announcement?
STEPIEN: Trump is manna from heaven.
BILL DE BLASIO, (D) FORMER NEW YORK CITY MAYOR: There's no public service in that ad. There's not -- there's nothing that helps people. There's nothing that instructs people, offers them support. When you think of a public service announcement, it's supposed to be something that informs people of something available to help them, or an emergency, something that they need to do to address a challenge, a danger. There's none of that there. And on top of it, it is clearly the worst kind of self-aggrandizement when the American people would like to see their public servants do something for them.
I'm stunned. I'm stunned that there's nothing in the Republican Party anymore that allows for checks and balances. Because if you said to me, a month before an election, $20 million in taxpayer money, while people are hurt and struggling to pay the bills, how do you think the average American feels about that use of their taxpayer dollars? You'd like to believe that some people in Republican Party would say, Mr. President, we can't run that ad. That's not right. But no one, no one will speak up.
COLLINS: I guess, my question is, why are they using DHS money for this? I mean, Trump has a lot of campaign money that he could be using. $20 million actually is pretty small compared to what he has in his coffers. So, why use money that's intended for DHS?
STEPIEN: $400 million in a Super PAC, to your point. They clearly feel like they're on firm ground, where they feel like the juice is worth the squeeze. They're making -- they must feel pretty comfortable with their standing because they do have the funds to pay for this privately.
COLLINS: Harry.
HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: I mean, look, whether or not it's legal or not -- look, I'm not a lawyer. My father was a judge, but it doesn't get passed down through the bloodline. But what I can say is, it comes at a time in which President Trump's net approval rating on corruption is 35 points underwater, according to Reuters/Ipsos poll.
We are a far cry from the 2016 election, which Trump, of course, was in fact boosted by the idea that I'm going to clean up the swamp. Now the American people believe he is a member of the swamp. I'm not quite sure ads like that and the money that's being spent on it will dissuade them from that new image they have of him.
COLLINS: Do you think these ads are designed to help boost his image, given how bad his approval numbers are?
ENTEN: I mean, look, I think that they are. I'm not quite sure that they will do it. All we've seen is the trendline is that Trump is going in the wrong direction at this point. If in fact the trends hold up, he'll be the least popular president going into a midterm election, while frankly on record.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, what I was thinking about was when Kristi Noem caught so much crap on Capitol Hill for running ads that were also promoting her. And the White House -- I mean, obviously it wasn't Trump, which is a big reason why the President didn't like it. But they didn't sit well with the White House because they were using DHS money to promote the secretary. DE BLASIO: Well, no, I think it didn't sit well with the White House because the only person they want promoted is Donald Trump. I think there was also some angst that Kristi Noem was trying to draw attention to herself when, in their view in the White House, there's only one person to talk about.
But the point you are making, I agree with a 100 percent. It should never be comfortable for public servants to spend taxpayer dollars to promote themselves. Not even the inkling of trying to help people in any way, just promote themselves? That should never be good. A month before an election, it's see-through, it's a political ad being paid for with taxpayer dollars.
COLLINS: You're right that Trump is not on the ballot. He's saying, Pretend like I am because that's the only time that we can be successful tonight. Why do you think he's in Alabama tonight?
STEPIEN: I went back and looked at Barack Obama's calendar in 2010, this week. Do you know where he was? He was in New Jersey, Illinois, campaigning for the seat.
COLLINS: How did that work out for him?
STEPIEN: Exactly. He lost -- the Democrats lost that seat. He was in Maryland two times, and he was in Delaware promoting Chris Coons, who won by 17 points. This is what a midterm calendar looks like. It did for Joe Biden. It did for Barack Obama. It does for -- it does for Donald Trump too.
COLLINS: Is that because being in the competitive states is not helpful to the competitive candidates, or what's the reason, do you think?
STEPIEN: I think at this point in the campaign, what a campaign wants most is money, and Donald Trump is delivering $400 million out of his Super PAC. The RNC is flush with cash. The DNC is in debt. I think these stops are fine and helpful. But what campaigns want is money at this point in time, and no one's delivering that like the President is.
COLLINS: Well, and he's going to Texas a second time next week. That means he'll have been there twice in the last week. Obviously, helping promote Ken Paxton, who he did call a pain in the ass yesterday when he was in Texas.
ENTEN: Look, the President does make me laugh from time to time with his pure honesty in terms of how he feels about certain people. We'll put it that way. It's certainly when it comes to Ken Paxton.
[21:10:00]
Look, Texas is in play. Texas hasn't elected a Democratic senator since 1988. This could very well be the year. We're seeing the polling over and over again.
But the question I just have to ask is beyond the money, which the President can absolutely deliver. In a state like Texas, he's double digits underwater in a state he won by double digits, last time around. I'm not quite sure, beyond the money, he can be particularly helpful. In fact, all the polling that I see shows that he's a net negative when candidates are associated with his name.
COLLINS: What do you -- what's y'all's assessment of that race and him going there twice?
DE BLASIO: What -- we're seeing something astounding in Texas. It's not just the Senate race; it's the governor's race too. Democrats, for years, have talked about what if Texas changes. This actually might be the moment.
And I want to give James Talarico special credit for having a campaign that's not just based in populist, progressive values and a clear economic message, but he's also bringing his faith to the campaign in a very positive, very constructive way. By the way, so is Adam Hamilton in Kansas. So now we have this fascinating phenomenon: progressive messaging mixed with the language of faith, sincere language of faith. Adam Hamilton is a minister.
You're seeing something we have not seen honestly in a long time from the Democratic Party that could be transcendent. If it works in Texas -- they say, in New York, if you can make it here you can make it anywhere. If that message from Talarico works in Texas, it could work anywhere in the United States.
STEPIEN: This is not Texas of the 1950s. Ted Cruz won by two points in 2018. Cruz is better than obviously Paxton. Talarico is better than Beto O'Rourke was. So, this is not Texas of the yesteryear. Kansas, four of the last seven governors have been Democrat. So, these states are not ruby red. I think we have to separate myth from political reality.
COLLINS: I mean, it always is Lucy and the Football for Democrats when they talk about Texas. No offense. Do you think that they could actually win potentially?
STEPIEN: He's been ahead in the last 11 polls, Talarico.
ENTEN: He's going to -- to me, he could put together the magic formula, right? Where you've seen those suburbs in the South trending more Democratic, whites with a college degree.
What the Democrats have been losing is they've been losing Latino support. But now we're seeing among non-white voters, we've seen James Talarico is doing roughly about 30 points better than Kamala Harris did two years ago in some of the polling that I'm seeing. You put those two together, and you have an equation that very much could work for the Democrats.
COLLINS: Trump also seems worried about the Republican candidate in North Carolina. That's Michael Whatley. This is what he -- I mean, seems worried -- he said, I am worried.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: I am, because he's a great man, and I am worried about him. I hope he wins. He's a great -- he's a great man. He was a great leader for the whole Republican Party when I won.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: What do you -- what's your read on Michael Whatley in that race and how that's shaping out?
STEPIEN: If Democrats win that race, and it seems like with the resource redeployment, Republicans may be reading tea leaves there. If Democrats win, they won with candidate recruitment. I mean, this is a governor, super popular. He won in 2016 when Trump won his state. He won in 2020 when Trump won his state. He's a superb candidate.
DE BLASIO: And this is -- I'm going to be honest. This is one of the best years I've ever seen for Democrats in terms of candidate recruitment. And I want to be self-critical. A lot of times we shot ourselves in the foot, not choosing the kind of candidates who could really resonate with the voters of the state.
Roy Cooper is an amazing candidate. But we look across the board: Talarico. Mary Peltola and her connection to the people of Alaska. Sherrod Brown. I mean, you've got an extraordinary crop. That's one of the big stories this year that the Democrats -- and I mentioned Adam Hamilton, I think could be an amazing, a transcendent figure. The Democrats have finally figured out how to go deeper and find those candidates who are like the distillation of their states and can win in a way others never could.
COLLINS: Do you think Democrats have a real chance of winning the Senate?
ENTEN: Absolute -- real chance? Oh yes, I would think they have a better than 50 percent chance at this point. And that is far different. If you would have asked me at the beginning of the year, Harry, you think that the Democrats are going to win? I'd have said, Yes, you know, maybe, but Republicans are clear favorites. That is not anywhere we are today.
And I will note, it's not just North Carolina where I think Republicans are saying adios in Bolton Town. It's Georgia, which was supposed to be competitive at the end of the -- at the beginning of the year as well, they're no longer competitive there either.
Instead, we're talking about Kansas, which last had a Democratic senator, when my father was -- what was like, 5-years-old or something like that. My father was born in 1927, to give you an idea. That was basically the last time that a Kansas had a Democratic senator when he was yay high.
COLLINS: Your dad was born when?
ENTEN: 1927.
COLLINS: OK. ENTEN: My father, if he was still alive, would be 100-years-old next year. He had me in the 60s. Regardless, you put Kansas, Texas--
COLLINS: Sorry, I'm just doing some math really quickly.
ENTEN: There we go. That's what I'm here for. I'm the stats guy, right?
DE BLASIO: You turned out good.
ENTEN: I think I turned out pretty good.
Texas, Kansas, that's what we're talking about right now. We're not talking about Georgia and North Carolina. And I think that says everything that there needs to be said about this election cycle.
COLLINS: Do you agree with that, or what's your sense of it? What are Republicans saying about this privately?
STEPIEN: I mean, they have to pretty much run the table in a selection of states to pick up the Senate. But they could -- I mean, the jobs numbers was -- we saw what they were today. The economy is not.
COLLINS: They were soft.
STEPIEN: They were soft. Candidly, if the job numbers were great, I don't think it really wouldn't make much of a difference. I think people feel what they feel, and the numbers are -- and feelings are baked in.
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: Yes, if the White House is going to spend that taxpayer money, do you think it would be better-spent on ads that talk about affordability or the economy. I mean, you don't really -- showed a picture of the desert, I believe, and then Mount Rushmore. It wasn't really -- it didn't seem to be in tune with what we're hearing from voters.
STEPIEN: I don't make the ads. I don't make the ads, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: You used to.
STEPIEN: I don't anymore.
COLLINS: OK.
Bill Stepien--
DE BLASIO: But people do not want to see a desert right now. It's a bad omen.
COLLINS: Bill de Blasio. Harry Enten. Great to have all of you here. Thanks for joining us.
Up next. We have an update on the Cornell University investigation. The New York Attorney General Letitia James has just been named as the special prosecutor. There's now an active criminal investigation. And President Trump weighed in for the first time to her appointment.
[21:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, President Trump is weighing in on the Cornell University rape case and lashing out at a familiar political enemy.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETER DOOCY, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: What do you think about New York's governor appointing a special prosecutor in the Cornell rape case, Letitia James?
TRUMP: Well, Letitia James is a corrupt person. She's totally corrupt, and I can't imagine it. And I feel badly for whoever she's looking at because they won't get a fair shake. Letitia James is a corrupt person.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Well, what New York Attorney General Letitia James is looking at are those allegations by a former Cornell student that seven members of the university's Chi Phi fraternity raped her in 2024.
Governor Kathy Hochul here in New York, who named James as the special prosecutor on that case, criticized what she says was a botched investigation, and says that she hopes that James can unravel the investigation's failures.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. KATHY HOCHUL (D-NY): According to new reports, she could not have been clearer that she was 100 percent confident that she had been raped. Yet, shockingly, those words never made it into the account that the Cornell police sent to prosecutors. The attorney general then declined to pursue charges after reviewing that incomplete account and never interviewing her.
This woman, this young woman, had already endured something that is utterly unspeakable, and then at every turn she was failed by people and institutions with an obligation to protect her.
LETITIA JAMES, NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL: A comprehensive investigation of this nature takes time, but my office is committed to seeing it through. This is now an active criminal investigation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: I want to bring in:
CNN's Gloria Pazmino, who's been covering this story.
And New York Times reporter, Emma Goldberg, who has new reporting from her time on Cornell's campus.
And also, our CNN Legal Analyst, Joey Jackson.
And I'm so glad to have all of you here.
Gloria, I think, one question is, how does the attorney general start this investigation? Do we have any indication of where she'll begin?
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean, she's essentially going to have to start from scratch, right? She's going to have to go in and see what is there for her to gather.
And I think it's important to note that as a result of the governor's executive order, Tish James and her office now has the power to go in, conduct interviews, collect evidence, look at recordings, videos, phone calls, anything that might be out there that is relevant to this case.
And not only does she have the power to gather that information, she also has the power to potentially bring that in front of a grand jury. We don't know if that's what's going to happen. If it's presented in front of a grand jury, we don't know what the outcome of that is going to be.
And you heard her there saying that this takes time. You know, she's going to have to talk to a whole lot of people. It's not just Jane Doe and the seven students. You have Cornell University administrators, Title IX investigators, witnesses, friends, the fraternity members that have been accused, the members of -- the friends of Jane Doe. So, a lot of people that are likely going to have to be contacted, likely interviewed, and probably why it's going to be a while before we see an outcome.
COLLINS: Emma, you've been on the campus. What is it like? What are you hearing from students when you've been on the ground?
EMMA GOLDBERG, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Thanks, Kaitlan.
I got to campus, to Cornell, on Monday afternoon, and I actually just came straight back from campus right to here. So, this is my first stop back.
It's a really explosive brew of emotions, I would say. Students are grieving. I think there's a lot of students who feel anger that is directed at the administration because, they want to know how is it possible that the case was handled in this way and that no one was yet criminally charged.
I think what a lot of students said to me is that they vividly remember being on campus, in the fall of 2024, and getting an email that said, Crime alert: a sexual assault had been reported. And what students told me is that they assumed that that was handled, that the students were fully disciplined, and that most likely those who were accused had been removed from campus.
So, I think there was just a real shock, in the last few days, to learn not only had no one been criminally charged, but some of these students are still walking around, and one of them was even confronted angrily on campus this week by a female classmate.
COLLINS: One of the students who's been accused?
GOLDBERG: Yes, that's right.
COLLINS: Do we know what happened in that moment?
GOLDBERG: There's a video of it that was filmed and is circulating on social media. But it shows, I think--
COLLINS: Wow.
GOLDBERG: --the angry confrontation where students still see some of these -- some of these accused walking around campus and they want to know how is this possible? What happened?
COLLINS: And what are you hearing about the faculty at Cornell? I know you have new reporting on that too.
PAZMINO: Yes. It's interesting to hear Emma talk about what the students are feeling. Because, I think, many of the feelings that are being felt among the students are also shared by the faculty.
[21:25:00]
And I spoke to faculty tonight. There's a real sense of frustration. There is anger, there is disappointment, and there's a feeling among some faculty members that the university's response, up until this point, has been focused, frankly, on the PR of it all. Right? They're treating this like a public relations problem. And in many ways, it is. Right? They're treating it like bad press, bad stories.
But faculty is frustrated by the fact that that response does not address the concerns and the needs of students in this moment. And so, they're sharing this frustration about the fact that, this is a campus that's feeling traumatized, confused. They have questions, and they feel like the administration of the university, so far, has not done enough to say to the student body, Hey, we know what's happening. We see what's happening. Here's what we're going to do about it.
COLLINS: Yes.
PAZMINO: And perhaps more interestingly, Kaitlan, there's also been email communication that's been sent out to faculty, directing them to direct their media requests to the communications office. Some faculty has interpreted that as essentially the administration asking them not to talk to the press. And for the moment, they're also fundraising -- suspending their fundraising efforts for a few -- for a few days. I think that timeline is interesting because I think it's going to be a few--
COLLINS: Yes.
PAZMINO: --more than a few days until this is over. COLLINS: Joey. I mean, obviously, Tish James here is someone who has been -- you know, investigated the President. That's why he responded the way he did as he was leaving the White House today.
She was also asked at that press conference about a post that she made, before she was appointed, and I mean, probably didn't realize that she could potentially be appointed, where she was saying what this young woman has been through and forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I'm holding her in my heart and in my prayers.
Does that -- she was asked about essentially whether or not that'll affect the investigation. Do you think it has any bearing on it or no?
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: So, depends who you ask, Kaitlan. Right? I mean, obviously her detractors are going to say that she formulated an opinion in advance, how dare she, now we're expecting an independent investigation? Or you can view it as people have opinions. The issue is, does that opinion color the investigation here?
She's tasked with conducting an investigation, which is thorough. Number one, why is that important? Because in any investigation, you want to get the facts, what happened. And we know the local prosecutor did not do that.
And so, once you get the facts, it's going to be up to her and her team to distill the information: who did what, when, where, how, why, to who, and in what regard, consensual or otherwise, was intoxication involved? Was it not? Was ketamine involved? Was it not? Was there a willingness or an unwillingness? All that has to be unpacked. And so, she has to be driven by that.
In addition, once that happens, she could have the following view: she could say, Listen, we cannot prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. That's the metric. If you're a prosecutor, you're going to present a case that you think you can prove. If you don't believe you have that, then you shouldn't be presenting it.
In the event it's presented to the grand jury, there'll be a number of options, and the options don't affect -- don't reflect her opinion. They'll reflect the evidence. What are those options? We have multiple potential defendants here. Who did what? Is what they did criminal? Is one person criminal and the other not? Did any of them engage in any criminality, or did none of them? Did all of them? And so, I think they have to parse that out.
And when they engaged in whatever acts they engaged in, what was the actual victim's state at the time? Was there mental incapacity in terms of her not being able to consent or not? Was she seemingly intoxicated or under the influence that they would be knowing that that's the case, and Hey, we shouldn't be engaged in this.
So, what am I saying? Buttoning this up, I'm saying that whatever her opinions, ultimately the outcome will be driven by the facts as they're uncovered, and that may or may not be presented to the grand jury. And a grand jury, if it's presented, will be tasked with determining what, if any, criminality any of these young men engaged in, or did they not engage in any criminality at all?
COLLINS: Well, and Emma, to your point about the text that student got -- students got, two years ago, and the assumption that school officials handled it properly. I mean, looking back at that, that seems to be a huge part of this in terms of the accountability calls that we are hearing directly from students tonight.
GOLDBERG: Absolutely, Kaitlan. I have interviewed more students than I can count over the last few days. And one thing I've heard is a lot of students have said actually, they weren't entirely shocked by the original allegations themselves because, there are a lot of students who say that they've experienced sexual misconduct on Cornell's campus.
[21:30:00]
The university itself did a survey that found 35 percent of undergraduate women at Cornell said they'd experienced non-consensual sexual experiences during their time there.
So, students were saying, this -- they weren't entirely shocked, and yet they thought that the details of this case were so horrifying that they assumed that more had been done, to discipline those involved. And I think that is feeding some of the sense of outrage.
COLLINS: Yes.
Emma Goldberg. Gloria Pazmino. Joey Jackson. Great to have all of you here tonight on this very important story.
Up next. There is a new hours-long and years-in-the-making documentary on Elon Musk, and it's premiering this week, next week. Musk is already threatening legal action over it, though it's not exactly over what you might think. The filmmaker, Alex Gibney, will join me right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:35:00]
COLLINS: It's a documentary that the richest man in the history of the world and one of the most consequential figures in modern political history is now threatening a lawsuit over.
Over the course of nearly four hours, "Musk" chronicles the rise of Elon Musk. From growing up in the closing years of apartheid South Africa, to maneuvering to become one of the most powerful, ruthless, and sometimes head-scratching tech moguls in the world. All of it is told from the eyes and ears of family, co-founders, government officials, and even the mothers of his children that knew him best.
One of them is conservative influencer, Ashley St. Clair, who speaks in this new clip from the film.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ASHLEY ST. CLAIR, CONSERVATIVE INFLUENCER: If you were to ask someone on the right what they think of Elon, he's a free speech god. And someone on the left, he's just someone who sends hateful tweets and he's lost his mind.
Both are very comforting, but both are completely insufficient to the immense amount of power and influence he has.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: In the years creating the "Musk" documentary, the world's first trillionaire has called the director, Alex Gibney, everything from a, quote, horrible human with zero integrity, to a bitter old man who created what is, in his words, a hit piece.
Now, days away from its release, the veteran filmmaker Alex Gibney is my source tonight, whose new documentary "Musk" hits theaters in New York and L.A. on October 9th, and nationwide on October 16th.
And thank you for being here.
ALEX GIBNEY, DIRECTOR, "MUSK": Thanks.
COLLINS: I mean, this was a long time in the making.
GIBNEY: Yes.
COLLINS: And as you were putting this together. You started working on it in 2023.
GIBNEY: Late 2022, in fact.
COLLINS: Late 2022. It has this moment leading up to the 2024 election where we saw just how much of an impact, kind of framed as this make or break moment for Elon Musk. As you were putting this together, what did you make of the stakes of that election for him?
GIBNEY: Well, the stakes were high; couldn't have been higher. But I mean, the truth is, we had almost come to a conclusion of the film in early 2024, and then when Trump was nearly assassinated and Musk hitched his wagon to Trump, HBO encouraged me to dig deeper, follow the story and keep going. And it was clear that now the stakes were enormous, and the idea that he would roll $300 million of his fortune behind then-citizen Trump was important.
COLLINS: Well, and obviously a good gamble for him because we saw the influence he wielded in the beginning of Trump's second term.
I know people look back at DOGE now, and I think some people think, Oh, it's just a failure. Didn't actually accomplish what it was set out to accomplish.
You actually kind of have a different framing of it that it kind of worked exactly as he intended because, he was able to affect some of the exact agencies and entities that were investigating his companies. GIBNEY: Yes, I think one of the key reasons that he hitched his wagon to Trump was because he was facing investigations on all sorts of his business, including a criminal investigation by the Department of Justice.
And I think DOGE really had two goals.
One was to destroy, and I mean that literally, destroy the regulatory state, but particularly the agencies that were going after or looking at him.
And the second goal, I think, is underappreciated. Because a lot of the DOGE boys, those young kids, 18, 19, 20, from Tesla or SpaceX, they came into agencies and they didn't know anything about the agencies. But they knew a lot about tech and a lot about IT and data, and they got super-admin status in the IT data of all of the federal agencies, which meant that they have the ability to see things that one entity is not supposed to be able to see.
And so, the question is like, what has happened to all that data? It would have been if -- if it has gone to SpaceX or Tesla, as some people allege, it would have been as easy as dropping a computer file into a folder. That's all the data on Americans.
COLLINS: Wow.
As you were doing this, was there anything that really stunned you? That maybe you didn't expect when you started putting this together?
GIBNEY: I think, you know, I had been told a story about Musk, about who he was, and I felt a little bit by the end like Toto pulling the curtain and seeing the levers behind a guy who had assiduously created an image of him that really wasn't real.
[21:40:00]
And indeed, there became a greater and greater unreality around Musk and his businesses, even as he accreted more and more power, and that kind of astounded me. Because what I got to at the end was a guy with enormous power, and no idea of what to do with it.
There's a moment in the film where somebody asks him, OK, you've got all this power. You've got Starlink and SpaceX and Tesla, and xAI. What are you going to do with it all? And why did you do it? And he can't answer the question. And now that's a terrifying thing.
COLLINS: And what do you think the answer is?
GIBNEY: I don't think he really knows, to be honest with you. I think he's accreted this power, and he doesn't know quite what to do with it. But he wants us to continue to give him more power. You listen to the discussions he and these other AI barons are now having, about the existential danger of AI. And yet, their solution is, The four of us will just get together and we'll figure it out. I don't think so.
COLLINS: Well, I mean, and he's in really -- he gets in these remarkable battles where, I mean, right now he's in one with Ed Bastian from Delta because Delta is not using Starlink on its flights. I think it's the only airline -- it's the only Big Four airline that is not doing so. He said this week that he thinks the CEO will lose his job over this. He was going after him, talking about putting AI models on Delta flights because they can't access internet if they're -- if they're on a Delta flight.
I mean, when you look at the power that he does have and how he wields it, what stood out to you?
GIBNEY: That it's ruthless, and now it's tethered to the President of the United States. I mean, Starlink -- there are members of the State Department who are literally going and pressuring countries to adopt Starlink.
So, if you have that kind of economic power, as he has, he's virtually a trillionaire, and you have these businesses, and you're essentially backed by a ruthless President of the United States, whose Department of Justice really is a kind of revenge mechanism, you're really in a very uncomfortable, for us, citizens, situation of running a kind of crony capitalist empire.
COLLINS: I mentioned what he said about you. Not very nice.
GIBNEY: Not very nice.
COLLINS: He said that you assembled a hit list of pictures.
GIBNEY: Interested in pictures, yes.
COLLINS: The pictures of what?
GIBNEY: Of me. No he--
COLLINS: Oh?
GIBNEY: That his followers post online.
COLLINS: Well, he says that you put together a hit list of people to talk about him who have an ax to grind or don't even know me but still have an ax to grind. Claims you have zero integrity.
What's your response to that? And did his power make you hesitate in making this?
GIBNEY: His power did make me hesitate in making this, though I started it before he had helped to elect Trump, which gave him extraordinary power. But I mean, I performed an investigation.
The truth is that when I started this film, you know there was a -- I admired much of what Musk was doing and had done. You know, I owned a Tesla Powerwall. I had Tesla Solar Panels on my house. And so, I found him a kind of intriguing entrepreneur who didn't always play by the rules. And in some ways, I thought that was a good thing.
So, I didn't start out with an agenda, but one of the things I discovered as I tried to talk to people -- and by the way, I talked to over a 100 people, and it wasn't a hit list, I mean, and -- and by the way, I made it a point of talking to people who knew him very well, like his first wife, like his lover who bore one of his children, like the person who actually was the founder of Tesla, as opposed to Elon Musk, one of the people who helped found SpaceX. Samantha Power, who was the head of USAID. So, I talked to a lot of people, and I talked to a lot of people in Silicon Valley. I did my job, as a filmmaker and a journalist, to try to understand.
By the way, I should also point out that I included a lot of Elon Musk in the film, saying things that I disagreed with. In other words, I acted the way he's supposed to act, as a kind of free speech absolutist.
COLLINS: Do you think he'll watch it?
GIBNEY: I don't think so. I think he's more comfortable criticizing it, not watching it. His lawyer threatened to sue me without having seen a frame.
COLLINS: Alex Gibney, thank you for joining us.
GIBNEY: Thanks, Kaitlan.
COLLINS: And it's quite a remarkable documentary. It's out in theaters, "Musk." New York, and L.A., October 9th. And nationwide, October 16th.
Thanks so much for joining us on that segment.
Up next. We have new reporting when it comes to the Flydubai pilot who is suspected of attacking the captain on that Israel-bound flight. What his now-deleted posts on social media, are revealing tonight.
[21:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight there are some pretty stunning new revelations about the Flydubai pilot who is suspected of attacking his captain aboard that Tel Aviv-bound flight.
Now, sources say he is an Omani citizen named Hamam al-Hammami, and he was removed from a previous job at Oman's national airline, last year, over concerns about his extremist views.
[21:50:00]
Tonight, CNN has found terrorist images that were posted on his social media. The posts were published in quick succession on Wednesday, about nine hours after the attack. It's not clear who published them or whether they were scheduled in advance. Al-Hammami has now been transferred from Saudi Arabia, which is where the plane made that emergency landing, after the heroic passengers on board, to the UAE, where he is facing a terrorism investigation. This comes as tonight, we're hearing from that injured captain for the first time as he's recovering. Captain Smit Machchhar is being called a hero for fighting off his co-pilot, and being able to open the cockpit door, so he could get help.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SMIT MACHCHHAR, HERO FLYDUBAI CAPTAIN: I was doing this for my life, but at the same time, I knew that I cannot let everybody else die.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My source tonight is Donell Harvin, who is the former head of Homeland Security and Intelligence in D.C., and faculty at Georgetown University's Emergency & Disaster Management Masters program.
And it's great to have you here.
Because this is what's on -- I mentioned these posts that are on the suspects now-deleted LinkedIn page. One is a picture -- was a video that ends with a photo of the person who led Al-Qaeda after the death of Osama bin Laden. The second is an AI-generated image that shows Islam's three holiest sites: Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem. It's linked by this continuous glowing trail. There's a poem recited in the background that talks about rejecting humiliation, not fearing death, defending one's dignity.
How do you think investigators are looking at posts like these tonight?
DONELL HARVIN, FORMER HEAD OF HOMELAND SECURITY & INTEL, WASHINGTON, D.C., FACULTY, GEORGETOWN'S EMERGENCY & DISASTER MGMT. MASTERS PROGRAM: Well, they're not only looking at that, but any other social media that he may have had.
There's three possibilities. One, that post was set to, as you had mentioned in the intro, to go off automatically. Two, someone hacked into his system and may have posted that. Or three, there may be an accomplice out there that he was working with, that knew this was going to happen, and had instructions to post this thereafter.
And so, this poses a very, very interesting breadcrumb, if you will, for investigators, as well as some of the more concerning things from his background, as you mentioned in the intro.
COLLINS: Yes, when you look at the picture of what we have now, I mean, I wonder what stands out to you in terms of, of what the next steps are in this investigation.
HARVIN: I mean, I got to be honest with you. I mean, this is truly the miracle at 35,000 feet, Kaitlan. I mean, over a 170 people could have died.
There's a couple of security failures that stand out.
One, if he was in fact terminated from another airline because of extremist views. Why was that not communicated? Why was that not picked up on a background check?
Two, he's a citizen that from Oman that does not have diplomatic ties with Israel. And based on their own security posture, he probably shouldn't have been in that -- in that plane to begin with.
And three, we still don't know the weapon that was used. It's possible that was a flight ax that's been widely reported that's already there. But if it turns out to be a knife, how do he get that knife on that plane?
And so, everything would have perfectly went well for him if it wasn't for that captain who was -- had the wherewithal to open the door and let other people in.
COLLINS: Yes, and in terms of a background check. I mean, if one airline says, OK, we're worried about his extremist views, we're not going to let him fly planes for our airline. Is that information not shared among airlines? How would that even happen to where he could be allowed to be a pilot for a different airline?
HARVIN: Apparently, it's not. I can see some legal problems with that. Maybe it's a sealed or a closed personnel file, but certainly that should be picked up in a background check, particularly the background check that airlines do who fly into Israel.
There are many agreements, Israel, the U.S., EU, where airlines have to vet at a higher level than other countries, their pilots. I'm not saying get full permission, but the pilots have to be vetted. The airline has to go through a rigorous process. And it's clear, there was some holes or some problems in this process with this particular pilot.
COLLINS: Yes, that much is clear.
Donell Harvin, thanks for joining us tonight.
HARVIN: Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next. It is time for Source Code. Tonight's Source Code is 59. I'll be right back with the story.
[21:55:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight's Source Code is 59. That's because that's the age of a massive Doobie Brothers fan who discovered the lead singer is, get this, his biological father.
Michael Goessling says he loved the band's music as a child, saw them live a couple times, but only learned last year that Michael McDonald is actually his birth father. Goessling was adopted as a baby after McDonald and his birth mother became parents at just 14-years-old. Decades later, a genetic testing service connected him and McDonald's other son. Now, Goessling says the reunion still feels like a dream to him. And here's another twist: the two Michaels share a name, a resemblance, and a love of music, but Goessling jokes, he did not inherit that famous voice.
Thanks so much for joining us tonight.
You can stream THE SOURCE live or watch on demand anytime, if you have an All Access subscription. You can scan the QR code on your screen or go to CNN.com/Watch to learn more.
[22:00:00]
If you missed any of the show tonight, it is available on demand to subscribers on our app. You can also check out our podcast wherever you get your podcasts, and follow me on Instagram and Twitter @kaitlancollins, where I'm always posting all the latest reporting throughout the day.
Thanks so much for joining us here tonight.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
