Return to Transcripts main page
What We Know with Max Foster
Nine Hours To Go Until U.S. Government Shuts Down; Trump Giving Hamas "3-4 Days" To Respond To Gaza Plan; Hegseth: U.S. Military Must Fix "Decades Of Decay"; FBI Supporting Immigration Enforcement In Chicago; At Least One Killed After 6.9 Earthquake Hits Philippines; Taliban Cut Internet Services Across Afghanistan; ChatGPT Introduces New Parental Controls For Teens. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired September 30, 2025 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:28]
MAX FOSTER, CNN HOST: Just hours away from a U.S. government shutdown.
This is WHAT WE KNOW.
If the midnight deadline passes, a shutdown could disrupt a wide range of U.S. services. At issue, Republicans want a short-term agreement to keep
the government open, while Democrats want protections for health care subsidies included. During a shutdown, essential workers will still be
required to come to work, but won't get paid until all of this is resolved.
Right now, neither side is negotiating, and both major parties are pointing the finger of blame at the other.
The House minority leader says that he and Democratic leaders will stay in Washington this week if the shutdown does indeed happen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: We're on duty. They're on vacation. They're on vacation because they'd rather shut the government
down than protect the health care of the American people. That's unfathomable. That's unacceptable. That's unconscionable. And that's un-
American.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Well, the White House warns government shutdown could also lead to mass federal firings. President Trump weighed in on the possible cuts just
a short time ago.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We don't want it to shut down because we have the greatest period of time ever. I told you, we have
$17 trillion being invested. So, the last person that wants to shut down is us. Now, with that being said, we can do things during the shutdown that
are irreversible, that are bad for them, and irreversible by them, like cutting vast numbers of people out, cutting things that they like, cutting
programs that they like.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Arlette Saenz joins us live from Washington.
Quite threatening language there, coming from the president, but also the Democrats refusing to budge. So, it looks like it is going to happen,
right?
ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Max. All lawmakers that we have spoken to throughout the day truly believe that this is heading towards a
government shutdown at midnight. Just moments ago, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said that he is not willing to negotiate with Democrats over
their health care demands unless the government stays open. But Democrats want Republicans to come to the table on changes to health care when it
comes to extending the expiring Obamacare subsidies and reversing Medicaid cuts that were made in President Trump's domestic policy law over the
summer.
But there does not appear to be any immediate resolution to any of those matters at hand. There will be a key moment in the next 2-1/2 hours, when
the Senate is expected to bring up a vote on that House passed bill by Republicans that would fund the government for the next seven weeks. They
will need at least eight Democrats to get on board in order to pass that, or to advance that.
Senator Rand Paul told our colleague Manu Raju that he plans to vote no. That is why that threshold of eight Democrats has now just been raised. So
far, only one Democrat has said that he would vote to avert a government shutdown. That is, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. It is expected
that that vote will fail. And right now, lawmakers are really bracing for the impacts of a government shutdown.
Take a listen to Senator Chris Coons, a Democrat, and Senator Bernie Moreno, a Republican, on what they are preparing for.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. CHRIS COONS (D-DE): What Democrats have been asking for is simple. Work with us on reducing the harm to health care in this country as a
result of the policies of the Trump administration. There's going to be a shutdown tonight, I am afraid. I think it will have a real impact on our
communities, on our states, on our families.
SEN. BERNIE MORENO (R-OH): Schumer shuts it down. There is no easy path for it to reopen, so this could go on for months. So, we will have no
choice. The administration will have no choice but to massively reduce the size of the federal workforce.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SAENZ: Now, if the government does shut down at midnight, Republicans are hoping to keep the pressure on Democrats to try to get them on board with
this seven-week funding plan senators, Republican leaders have indicated that they plan to hold a vote tomorrow on that seven-week plan. Then there
would be a break for the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur on Thursday, and then they will be back voting on that very same measure on Friday and Saturday.
They believe that the answer to this crisis is having Democrats agree to that seven-week plan. Right now, Democrats insist they're not budging until
they get some concessions on health care. So there's a lot of questions about people are expecting the shutdown will occur at midnight. But a lot
of questions about how long it could last, what the impasse and way out will look like as millions of federal workers could face impacts in the
short future with this shutdown looming.
FOSTER: Yeah, take us through that. So effectively, federal workers, members of the military have to go to work whilst not being paid and unable
to pay their bills, right?
[15:05:06]
SAENZ: Right. So, there are those workers who are deemed essential. Think about members of the military. Also, people working at airports, TSA
agents, air traffic control workers, all of those people are the type who would have to report to work and would go without pay until the shutdown
ends.
Then there are tens of thousands of more workers who would be placed on furlough, and that's on top of President Trump threatening to fire a wide
swath of the federal government if the shutdown goes into effect.
I spoke with one senator earlier, Republican, who said that they believe that the OMB Director, Russ Vought, will try to use this moment to try to
advance some of their goals and priorities when it comes to the remaking of the federal workforce. So that's adding another layer of anxiety for
federal workers, as they've already seen major cuts to federal government in the early months of President Trump's second term in office.
But for now, lawmakers on both sides don't seem or they're undeterred with the demands that they've been making. Even as these federal workers are
going to face some massive ramifications with the shutdown.
FOSTER: Yeah, very much caught in the middle, aren't they?
Arlette Saenz, thank you.
Another deadline to watch, President Trump says Hamas has three to four days now to respond to the new U.S. peace plan for Gaza. Hamas is now
reviewing the proposal, which was unveiled on Monday by Mr. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
It calls for an immediate ceasefire and the return of remaining hostages within 72 hours after an agreement is reached. A source tells CNN the
United States is open to listening to counter-proposals from Hamas, but will not engage in lengthy negotiations.
Mr. Trump is urging Hamas to sign off on the plan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: How long do you plan to give Hamas to respond to the ceasefire proposal?
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, we're going to do about three or four days. We'll see how it is. All of the Arab countries
are signed up. The Muslim countries all signed up. Israel is all signed up.
We're just waiting for Hamas. And Hamas is either going to be doing it or not. And if it's not, it's going to be a very sad end.
REPORTER: Do you have a deadline?
REPORTER: Mr. President, is there room to negotiate or is this a take it or leave it deal? Is there room to negotiate with Hamas or is this a take
it or leave it deal?
HAMAS: Hamas -- you know, with Hamas, we want very simple. We want the hostages back immediately and we want some good behavior.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Well, the U.S. blueprint for peace didn't include any input from Palestinians. And many in Gaza say they're skeptical about a process they
were left out of.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This delegates all of the rights of the Palestinian people. It ends the Palestinian cause, and at the same time will end the
Palestinian population and what's left of it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: President Trump promised yesterday that there will be peace. He said that there will be peace and the hostages will be released.
But we, as Palestinian citizens, where are we in this equation? Who is going to solve our situation?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Well, Jeremy Diamond now has more for you from Jerusalem.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's no question that a lot of pressure is being brought to bear on Hamas to accept
President Trump's new proposal to end the war in Gaza.
But this is going to be a lot more complicated than just a yes or no from the Palestinian militant group. President Trump says that he's giving Hamas
three to four days to respond to his new 20-point proposal, which the Israeli prime minister said he is supportive of.
Hamas officials are meeting with top level officials from Qatar, from Egypt and from turkey in an effort to get Hamas on board. But what all of my
sources are telling me, the expectation is, is that Hamas is going to have some changes that it is demanding to this proposal. And that's because when
you look at this 20-point plan, there are a number of provisions that either cross Hamas's red lines or that mark a kind of downgrade from
Hamas's perspective from previous proposals.
First among them, of course, is this question of disarmament. This proposal would require Hamas to be fully disarmed, Gaza to be demilitarized. Hamas
has rejected that notion in the past.
There's also questions about the withdrawal of Israeli troops and also the number of Palestinian prisoners that would be released in exchange for
those 48 Israeli hostages. Keeping in mind, of course, that Hamas would be required to release all 48 hostages within three days of this proposal
actually being agreed to. And of course, for Hamas, that is their leverage.
Now we will see what Hamas's response is. They have said that they just received the proposal, and that they are going to be deliberating over it
and then submitting a response.
Now, if Hamas rejects this proposal, President Trump has made clear that he's basically going to give the Israelis carte blanche to continue
pummeling Gaza with this lofty and so far, unachievable goal of fully destroying Hamas.
[15:10:07]
But what's interesting is that even if Hamas rejects this plan, it does lay out a pathway for that alternative, a pathway for Israel to actually begin
gradually handing over territory to an international security force. And this is the first time that we have ever seen the Israelis acknowledge, let
alone agree to, any kind of plan for postwar governance of Gaza and the handover of territory in the Gaza strip to an international authority.
The United States so far has sounded quite an optimistic tone. We've heard from Steve Witkoff, President Trump's special envoy, who says that he
believes that this is the moment to actually close all of this out.
Of course, beyond Hamas's approval of this deal, there are still questions here in Israel as well about the politics around all of this. The Israeli
prime minister, already facing fierce criticism from some of his right-wing allies who have said that they oppose this proposal. But so far, those
right-wing allies like the finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, haven't gone quite as far as saying that they would leave the government over this. But
that will certainly be something to keep an eye on.
Jeremy Diamond, CNN, Jerusalem.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER: The U.S. defense secretary gathering his top brass from around the world to outline his vision for the newly renamed Department of War. In a
lengthy speech, Pete Hegseth told military leaders that too many of them adopted what he calls woke ideology.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETE HEGSETH, U.S. DEFENSE SECRETARY: An entire generation of generals and admirals were told that they must parrot the insane fallacy that, quote,
our diversity is our strength. Our job, my job has been to determine which leaders simply did what they must to answer the prerogatives of civilian
leadership and which leaders are truly invested in the woke department and therefore incapable of embracing the War Department and executing new,
lawful orders.
If the words I'm speaking today are making your heart sink, then you should do the honorable thing and resign.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Zachary Cohen joins us.
I mean, so many people asking, why they had to go there, especially when it was live streamed. These are very important people with important jobs
around the world, ultimately, for a speech. But it was obviously something clearly, that the defense secretary wanted to get across.
How would you encapsulate it?
ZACHARY COHEN, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yeah. This is consistent with what we've seen from Pete Hegseth throughout his tenure as
defense secretary. And look, there was some anxiety about maybe there was some sort of a major national security announcement that was coming or
worse, potentially an announcement about a mass firings ahead of today's speech.
But what we saw was really just a partisan speech from the secretary of defense, where he didn't focus on major national security issues like the
threat from China, from Russia, the war in Ukraine, the situation in Gaza. Instead, he focused on these standards, these internal standards within the
military and what he calls President Trump's vision for the U.S. military going forward.
He outlined a series of new directives that, while consistent with what we've heard in the past, were a little bit more specific. Those include
returning the military to sort of a uniform fitness standard that is basically saying that women and men serving in the military have to pass
the same fitness tests in order to serve in combat roles. He also made clear that he wants commanders to implement a policy of no beards unless
you serve in the Special Forces. At the same time, you know, reviewing these definitions of toxic leadership, bullying and hazing that were
implemented by his predecessors in an effort to address issues like sexual harassment in the military. He says, though, that those policies have gone
too far, and he wants to strip those back.
So ultimately, at the end of the day, though, this is more politics from a defense secretary, a position that has historically tried to remain
somewhat apolitical, speaking to an audience that has certainly throughout history in the military, brass tried to remain outside of politics.
Now, we also heard from President Donald Trump today who swerved through various topics throughout his very long speech. But there was one comment
that he made that really stood out where he said that he floated the idea of using the U.S. military and sending them to American cities, dangerous
American cities, as he qualified them as a training ground for those troops, calling it, saying that they needed to help address what he called
the, quote, war from within.
And that is something that is almost certainly going to make or made several people in that audience very uncomfortable. We know the Pentagon
has traditionally really been uneasy about the prospect of using active duty, in particular, U.S. forces, to address domestic issues. But we also
know at the same time, President Donald Trump, even back to his first term, has suggested that he wants to use the military to do things like quell
domestic unrest, address protests, particularly protests that maybe he views as not consistent with his political agenda.
[15:15:01]
So, at the end of the day, a very partisan speech that was delivered to an audience of more than 800 military officers who have dedicated their entire
career in part to serving in an apolitical capacity.
FOSTER: Yeah. And women amongst them. And there was this idea that women should be measured against men's fitness, which was, you know, quite
bizarre on one level, because men and women can be equally fit. He wasn't talking about strength, but what was the message he was trying to get
across there?
COHEN: Yeah, Max, we know Pete Hegseth before he became secretary of defense about a year ago, he said on a podcast that he believed women
should not serve in combat roles in any capacity. And so, that was something that he was grilled on by members of Congress during his
confirmation process. They really wanted clarity around whether or not he actually believed women could serve in combat roles as they are currently.
Today's remarks were a little more nuanced, but still could be construed as the defense secretary trying to make it more difficult and essentially push
women out of these service roles.
And again, not every role in the military technically requires the same level of physical fitness. As you mentioned, we had a former Air Force
pilot on a female former female air force pilot on CNN earlier today who put it very bluntly and said when she was serving, you could either fly an
aircraft and landed on an aircraft carrier or you couldn't. And that was the standard.
It remains to be seen how Pete Hegseth will go about implementing these new directives that he outlined today, and whether or not they will change the
physical and mental makeup, frankly, of the U.S. military writ large.
FOSTER: Zachary Cohen, thank you so much for bringing us that.
As Zachary mentioned, President Trump suggested that U.S. military troops could go into what he calls dangerous cities as, quote, training grounds
for troops. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: What they've done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they're very unsafe places. And
we're going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That's a war, too. It's a
war from within.
And I told Pete, we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military, national guard, but military, because we're going
into Chicago very soon. That's a big city.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Well, the president's statement comes as the FBI confirms it's supporting immigration enforcement operations in Chicago. The agency says
its agents have joined other Departments of Justice, law enforcement, partners in operations throughout that city.
Whitney Wild joins us now from Chicago.
A huge amount of pushback, but the president says its going to happen at some point.
WHITNEY WILD, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT CORRESPONDENT: Max, it's important to point out that we've heard this now for a month, this back and forth of
whether or not they were going to deploy the National Guard, they were going to, then they weren't going to.
It is really hard in these last few weeks to figure out what is actually going to happen. The information is limited and very spotty. A lot of the
information were getting is coming directly from Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, a Democrat, who acknowledges that he is not getting any
information directly from federal officials.
This latest information about the potential that 100 members of the military would deploy to Chicago, he says, came from the Illinois National
Guard. And their understanding is that the Department of Homeland Security sent a memo to the Department of Defense requesting 100 members of the
military to deploy to Chicago when that's going to happen, which, you know, which part of the military is it going to be solely the national guard, or
will other members be brought in?
We simply don't have the details on that yet, Max. And the Illinois governor was very clear that he has very few details other than what he had
heard again from the Illinois National Guard. So, these things seem to develop rapidly.
And then there's really a gap in any realistic information about what's actually going to happen. Even still, this is very upsetting to many of the
local leaders here. They came out aggressively against this idea.
Here's more from Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D), ILLINOIS: The Department of Homeland Security has sent a memo to the Department of War seeking the deployment of 100 military
troops to Illinois, claiming a need for the protection of ICE personnel and facilities what I have been warning of is now being realized. One thing is
clear -- none of what Trump is doing is making Illinois safer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WILD: Max, local leaders here point to data that shows that crime has dropped in several major categories. They are on track to have one of the
least violent years they've had in a very long time here.
Meanwhile, Max, this all comes on the heels of some pretty significant clashes that we saw at the ICE facility in a town called Broadview,
Illinois. This is about 30 minutes west of Chicago. This is where ICE agents and other members of law enforcement clashed with protesters over
the weekend, deploying pepper balls and other non-lethal munitions.
[15:20:08]
The leaders in that town, in Broadview, say that they have opened three criminal investigations into the actions of ICE. That happened in their
town. So, we will see more on that.
But certainly, Max, it is a fraught time here. Local law enforcement being caught in between, you know, ICE and protesters. It is a really fraught
time here as they try to figure out what is actually going to happen moving forward -- Max.
WILD: Yeah. Whitney, thanks for bringing us that insight.
What did the U.S. military make of the speeches by the president and defense secretary earlier? We'll ask a military analyst for you after the
break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:23:54]
FOSTER: The U.S. defense secretary has promised an end to DEI in his big speech to military leaders, and a big part of that was physical standards.
Pete Hegseth told the crowd of generals that troops in combat roles will need to meet what he calls the highest male standard only.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEGSETH: I don't want my son serving alongside troops who are out of shape or in combat, unit with females who can't meet the same combat arms
physical standards as men, or troops who are not fully proficient on their assigned weapons, platform or task, or under a leader who was the first but
not the best -- standards must be uniform, gender neutral, and high.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: What we don't know is how does the military judge the highest male standard?
Joining me now, our military analyst, retired Colonel Cedric Leighton.
Thank you for joining us.
I mean, it was extraordinary, wasn't it? This part of the speech, because he was talking about fitness and, you know there could be a situation where
the fittest person in the military is a woman. He wasn't talking about strength. It was quite confusing, wasn't it? What did you make of it?
COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Yeah, Max, it was. It was indeed confusing in many respects, because the fact of the matter is,
is that there are females who can meet the highest male standard, unquote, in certain specialties. For example, in firefighting, the basic rule is
that a person who is training to be a firefighter in the U.S. military has to be able to pull a dummy that is, that weighs 100 pounds, and there are
women who can do that. So, women have been in that particular role, which can have a combat aspect to it for many, many years now.
Fighter pilots also. There are women fighter pilots now in the U.S. military after many years of not having them. And there are many other
roles that require certain physical attributes. But then there are a lot of others, for example, in the cyber realm or in intelligence or
communications that don't require those same kind of standards, but they're still vital to the warfighting enterprise.
And that's the kind of aspect here where this seemed to be more of a backward looking speech, as opposed to a forward looking speech when it
came to not only military readiness, but the whole force structure for the military. And that is something that, frankly, is a bit concerning.
FOSTER: Yeah. And talking about he didn't want fat generals wandering the corridors of the Pentagon either, when they're not actually in the
frontline roles, are they?
But I also wanted to ask you just about Trump's speech because, it actually felt quite political, didn't it? And a lot of people saying that was not
the right audience for that.
LEIGHTON: That is correct. Yeah. The military is absolutely not the right audience for a political speech. Now, people from both sides of the
political aisle here in the United States have used the military for political purposes and for campaign events, or at least events that have a
bit of a political tinge to them. That is nothing new, but what is new or at least different in this particular case is the fact that there was so
much overt political messaging, especially in the president's speech at Quantico earlier today.
And that -- that's not only a bad look, but it is also really damaging to the apolitical nature of the military. In essence, the commander in chief
is not respecting the apolitical nature of the military, and that is something that certainly needs to be watched very carefully here in the
United States. But it is also some something where that particular norm, that particular line should not be crossed.
FOSTER: Perhaps darker potentially, is this line were under invasion from within, no different from a foreign enemy, but more difficult in many ways
because they don't wear uniforms. If you tie that to some of his other speeches, he's directing that towards the left. His political opposition,
isn't he?
So, do you think he was almost trying to recruit the military to his political agenda?
LEIGHTON: Well, in some ways I think he was. I think he almost can't help himself when it comes to that. And, you know, one of the things that
everyone in this discussion should keep in mind is the inner cities in these American cities that he's talking about, like New York, Portland,
D.C., Chicago, none of them are like Fallujah. And Fallujah in Iraq was a absolute combat zone.
This is not what we are experiencing here today. The crime rates in all these places are going down. Is crime too high? It's always too high. But
it is something that does not require the military to go in there and do that. We've had laws since the 1870s that have prevented the use of the
military in a effort to quell civil disturbances. They can be used, but there are -- these are exceptions to the law. In the cases of an
insurrection or an open rebellion. That's when the military could be brought in. But they have to get special permission to do that.
None of those conditions apply in this case, and in essence, what they're trying to do Max, is make a crisis out of nothing. And that -- that is very
disturbing because when there is a real crisis, that's when things are going to go really south, really wrong. And the military won't be able to
respond in the way that it is supposed to, because they are built for overseas action. They are built to be a real military force, not a police
force.
FOSTER: Colonel Cedric Leighton, as ever, thank you so much.
LEIGHTON: You bet, Max.
FOSTER: Now, in just a few hours, the U.S. government could shut down, would you believe? The economy is bracing for impact. I'll ask an expert
how it could all play out.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
FOSTER: Right now, the leaders of Hamas are reviewing a new U.S. peace plan that could potentially bring an end to the war in Gaza and facilitate
the return of the remaining hostages. A Qatari government spokesperson says Hamas negotiators are meeting with officials from Egypt, Turkey and Qatar
in Doha.
Foreign ministers from eight Muslim countries, along with the Palestinian Authority, praised the Trump administration proposal in a jointly released
statement.
While the world waits for a response from Hamas, the U.S. president remains optimistic that an agreement will be reached. But he's also issuing a stark
warning if the militant group decides not to sign off on the plan.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: So, if this happens, I think it will. I don't say that lightly because I know more about deals than anybody. This is what my whole life
was based on. And they can change. And this can certainly change.
But we have just about everybody. We have one signature that we need, and that signature will pay in hell if they don't sign. I hope they sign it for
their own good. And we create something really great.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: CNN's Kristen Holmes joining us now from the White House.
So, all eyes very much on Hamas right now. Yeah. And it's a question of whether they sign, but also whether or not the White House will shift on
some of the red lines that Hamas see in this.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. And it's unclear that they will. I mean, the White House believes that this is the
best and final offer. They went through all of the negotiations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, with Israel. We know that even before Netanyahu got to
the White House, he had sat down with Middle Eastern envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner for hours, going through this proposal that at one point
was 21 points, then changed to 20 points.
We also know that they had orchestrated this call with Qatar in order for Netanyahu to apologize and essentially promise that he would not strike
within Qatar again, which was at one point a principal in the outline for peace, but then moved into this kind of separate call and promise from
Netanyahu to the prime minister of Qatar.
So, it's unclear whether or not there would be any movement in terms of the United States and Israel.
[15:35:00]
One of the things that we continue to hear from President Trump, from the press secretary, was that they believe this is as good of a deal as they
are going to get. So, where that movement would be, that's really what we would look at. And most of the movement we've seen, there's not really
places for them to shift on some of these red line issues, particularly because they got Israel to agree to some of the things that they didn't
originally want to agree to.
So again, all eyes here are on Hamas. And one of the things we heard, you heard from President Trump there, but we also heard from Netanyahu that
they are willing to essentially threaten Hamas with military action, with strikes, with bombs and that the U.S. said that that Netanyahu would have
their full backing. President Trump said he would have their full backing if Hamas does not agree.
So clearly, they're really trying to ramp up the pressure here. Unclear if it's going to work.
FOSTER: Okay, Kristen. We'll see. Thank you for joining us.
Now, it's the final moments of trade up on Wall Street. And the Dow is pretty much flat. Investors bracing for U.S. government shutdowns to take
effect at midnight.
Our business breakout for you. Elon Musk says his A.I. company is building an alternative to Wikipedia. Musk says that Grokopedia will be, in his
words, a massive improvement. He's criticized Wikipedia in the past for supposedly being biased.
Spotify's founder is stepping down as the company's CEO. Daniel Ek will instead become executive chairman starting next year. He'll be replaced by
the company's chief product and chief business officers, who will work as co-CEOs. Shares in Spotify fell around 5 percent on the news.
YouTube has agreed to pay almost $25 million to settle a lawsuit filed by U.S. President Donald Trump. The suit was over his suspension from social
media after the January 6th insurrection. Some of the money will go towards plans to rebuild the White House state ballroom.
Meanwhile, we are just hours away from a U.S. government shutdown and questions are arising as to just how this will affect the U.S. economy.
Previous shutdowns seem to have had few long-lasting effects. However, some are worried this time will be different, with the job market already
struggling and President Trump threatening mass layoffs.
Joining me now to unpack that, and what's at stake here, Justin Wolfers, professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan.
Thanks so much for joining us, Professor.
Obviously, this has happened before, but the economy is in a delicate state, so it's a shock it probably just doesn't need right now.
JUSTIN WOLFERS, PROFESSOR OF ECONOMICS & PUBLIC POLICY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: It's certainly something we don't need. But I think in terms of
the economic consequences, it's just not that big of a deal. The U.S. has over a number of decades now just gotten itself in this awkward situation
where everyone fights in Washington and they threaten that they'll not pass a budget and they threaten, they'll shut down the government. And sometimes
they call on that threat.
But we all know eventually something will pass. And the real problem here is just the waste, which is the -- we're not going to let public servants
come into work. They won't be allowed to work. But at the end of the day, in order to do the right thing, we'll probably end up paying them anyway.
And so, that all just seems awfully pointless.
FOSTER: Unfair, though, isn't it? Because they have to work whilst not being paid, and they won't be able to keep up with their bills and there
could be a backlash there. So, do you think there'll be pressure on the government to act on this, combined with what they see in the economy?
WOLFERS: You know, if you interviewed me at any previous time over the last quarter century, I would have said this creates enormous pressure on
the government and that it creates unhappiness because it's a deviation from the ordinary functioning of a moderately functioning government.
But this is not a well-functioning government. This is one where the federal workforce already went through with DOGE. Enormous pain, in which,
cabinet secretaries wake up and decide they're going to fire people. And the next day the courts reinstate them where it's been completely made
clear to public servants that as much as they're drawn by trying to further the public good, that they're seen as the enemy by their political masters.
And so, in this current moment that we're in, if they shut down the government, would anyone really notice?
FOSTER: I'm sure a lot of people just looking at politicians arguing, but how would you compare? There are two alternative plans effectively, aren't
there? There's the Democrat plan and there's the Republican plan. A lot of people saying they're both as bad as each other because they involve as
much debt. I mean, what's your view on that? How would you compare them?
WOLFERS: Well, that's actually a really good point. So, let's just -- let's just get the facts out there, which is that so far through this
fiscal year, for all the DOGE, for all of the budgets, for all of the talk, for all of the tariff money, for all of that, in fact, the U.S. budget
deficit this year looks on track to be higher than any of the recent years.
We run large budget deficits when the economy is weak, yet we keep being told that the economy is strong. What that means is we don't have a rainy
day fund for when things go south. So fiscal policy is utterly upside down. Back to front and completely unhelpful right now.
FOSTER: How long do they normally go on for?
[15:40:00]
WOLFERS: Yeah. So, it turns out there's actually betting markets on this. You might think betting on a football game is fun. Well, the only thing
more fun than that is betting on a government shutdown, really.
And so, they say right now, it's an 85 percent chance that we shut down tonight. We have seen last minute deals in the past. That's why that's not
100 percent. The betting currently says it's likely that we'll see a shutdown of a few days.
It starts to become a little bit more painful when we get to a point where we can't send military -- members of the military their paychecks, that
would be the middle of October. We had one as long as 34 days, just a few - - few years ago.
So, look, its anybody's guess, but I'd say probably measure it in weeks, but not in dozens of weeks.
FOSTER: Yeah. I mean, yeah. So, at what point, you know, I'm just sort of looking for the tipping point here. At what point should we become really
concerned? And at which point, you know, they just basically have to bang their heads together and come up with a solution.
WOLFERS: Well, mate, if you want to know when to be really concerned, let's go back to liberation day. There's all sorts of reasons to be
concerned right now. And there's all sorts of things going on. And it is just yet one more layer of nonsense.
Look, the politics of this is that usually one side says, I'm not going to fund the government because it will be painful to the to the governing --
governing party, to their political fortunes if the government were to shut down. But this time we have a government which -- and that's why they, for
instance, closed the national parks. They want to make it look visible and painful so that that forces both sides back into the room so both sides can
come up with some sort of an agreement.
But what happens when the Republicans really are quite comfortable with drowning government in the bathtub? And what happens when Democrats are
focused on trying to draw attention to Trump and the White House and making him look bad. All of a sudden, that pain which is borne by everyday
Americans, becomes much less politically salient in this larger political play. And so, it's quite likely that the public good gets left on the
sidewalk here.
FOSTER: Okay. Justin Wolfers as ever. Thanks.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:45:11]
FOSTER: Rescue efforts are underway in the Philippines, where at least one person has been killed in a powerful earthquake. The 6.9 quake struck near
the central city of Bogo in Cebu province. A tsunami warning that was briefly issued has now been canceled. The quake hit as the Miss Asia
Pacific International pageant was taking place. You can see the contestants running off the stage.
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates half a million people felt the quake. Some of the central Philippine provinces affected were still recovering
from a storm that hit on Friday.
Now the Taliban are enforcing an internet blackout in Afghanistan as part of a crackdown on so-called immoral activities, observers warn the
widespread shutdown could further isolate millions of Afghans from the outside world and have devastating consequences for the education of girls
who are already barred from most in-person learning.
CNN's Ivan Watson has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
IVAN WATSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORREPONDENT: The Taliban has shut down Internet across Afghanistan as part of what it describes as morality
measures. The Internet watchdog Netblocks has documented that connectivity has plummeted to nearly zero.
So, what does that mean for around 43 million Afghan citizens? We simply don't know. No video and very little information is getting out. And that
may be intentional. What we do know is that this is one of the most extensive telecoms shutdowns since the Taliban swept back to power in 2021.
It's also a return to their previous playbook, wind the clock back a quarter century. The Taliban, once outlawed television and satellite
dishes, alleging they went against Islamic teachings. With the latest blackout, NGOs and media organizations inside Afghanistan have been cut
off.
Meanwhile, Afghans living abroad have lost contact with their families inside Afghanistan, and they now face an anguished wait, trying to hear
from their loved ones by any means possible.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER: New parental controls are now in place for ChatGPT, and that's amid growing concerns about the safety of teens using A.I. chatbots. OpenAI
says parents can now link their accounts with those of their children, and they have access to new safety options as well, allowing them to reduce
exposure to sensitive content and implement quiet hours to block access during selected times. OpenAI also says it will alert parents if their
child's account indicates that they are thinking of harming themselves.
Now still to come, MrBeast's latest stunt is coming under fire for safety reasons. Just how safe is it, really? We'll talk to a stuntman after the
break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:50:35]
FOSTER: How much money will it take for you to sit in a flaming building and risk burning alive?
That's the question MrBeast is asking in his latest video, where a contestant is trying to win half a million dollars. Take a look.
(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)
FOSTER: It's had more than 53 million views since Saturday. And it's causing a bit of controversy. So much so that MrBeast had to issue a
statement saying the guy in the video is a professional stuntman, and that the YouTuber himself takes safety, in his words, more serious than you
could ever imagine. So, what we want to know is, was Mr. Beast's stuntman in real danger?
Joining us now is Rory Bratter. He's a stuntman who's worked on shows like "The Equalizer" and "The Naked Gun" reboot as well.
Thanks so much for joining us.
I mean, the whole point of it is to -- that he could die, isn't it? That's, you know, that's the honest part of the video, isn't it? Thats why they're
doing it. There has to be some element of risk.
ROY BRATTER, STUNT EXPERT AND COORDINATOR: Yes, sir.
First and foremost, Max, thanks for having me on. It's an honor.
Yes. Whenever we are hired to do stunt jobs. Yes, there is a risk when we sign our contracts, it's under the knowledge that we will be risking life
and limb. However, a stunt coordinator that would hire us is in charge of all safety measures and protocol.
So, there are a lot of different ways that we can ensure safety in scenes or gags, like we like to call them in situations like this.
FOSTER: What are the safety elements you saw there in the video?
BRATTER: Well, first things first. I mean, there was a safety coor -- there was a stunt coordinator present. There was fire rescue teams. There
was also water rescue teams for the gag where he had to jump and grab the - - the net, with the potential of falling, you know, doing a high fall into some water.
A water safety team is basically a team of scuba divers that are underwater. If he was to -- if he would have fell he would have, you know,
been met by a rescue team underwater that would have taken him off of set and, tended to him.
So, you know, in cases like this, it's not even just your stunt coordinator or the safety protocols, because there's always a chance that something
could go wrong. So, in when we're picking people to do these kinds of gags, its very important that we pick the right personnel.
FOSTER: Yeah.
BRATTER: Eric Salas is actually a very good friend of mine. And he's a complete savage. I mean, this guy is a skydiver. He slides cars. He's a
precision driver.
He can do rigging. He can be on wires. He's a man of many talents. I'm sure if we left it up to Eric's discretion as to whether or not this stuff was
too dangerous, I'm sure he would have made the right call.
But when you have somebody like Eric Salas, who's ultimately a stunt coordinator dream hire because of his knowledge and his experience, you
kind of go into gags like this with a lot of confidence.
FOSTER: It was slightly different from your normal jobs, though, right? Because he was actually there as a person, as a character, not just as a
stunt man. He wasn't doing an act for someone else. He was actually a contestant himself.
I mean, one of the comments I saw that -- was that it was humiliating for him. But what's your view on that?
BRATTER: I don't think it was humiliating at all. When you realistically look at the reason that he was there, you know, he had mentioned that his
father is going through some health issues and, listen, $500,000 is more money than we would make in a day to do that type of stuff.
So, I think if anything, it was a great opportunity. I think he represented our community extremely well, as we all knew he would.
[15:55:03]
He's what we call a Swiss army knife in this industry. He can do a little bit of everything and he could do a little bit of everything at a really
high level.
Do I think it's humiliating? Absolutely not. He's a rock star, and I'm happy that he showed up the way he did.
FOSTER: Okay, Rory, I really appreciate your view on this. There were loads of people who enjoyed it, of course. Probably more than the critics.
But he was -- he did come out with that statement, so we thought we'd have a look at it. Thank you so much for joining us.
Now finally tonight, don't have a cow, man. The Simpsons are returning to the big screen. There aren't a lot of plot details yet about the new movie,
but the poster is out there. It is showing Homer Simpson's hand snagging a donut with the caption, "Homer's coming back for seconds," and there's a
release date July 23rd, 2027. Put it in your diary if you're a fan.
I'm Max Foster. That's WHAT WE KNOW.
Richard's up next with "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS", physically in the same space.
END
TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS
