Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Deadlocked Linsay Clancy Jury to Return for Deliberations Friday; Vance: Iran Conflict isn't a "War" and Refuses to Say When it Will End; Interview with Rep. Pat Harrigan (R-NC): Vance Downplays War With Iran After Largest Escalation In Weeks; Interior Secy: Work On Trump's "Triumphal Arch" To Begin Within Two Weeks; Gloria Steinem, Feminist Icon And Co-Founder Of Ms. Magazines, Dies At 92; Letty Cottin Pogrebin Remembers Gloria Steinem; NASCAR's Kurt Busch On Losing His Younger Brother Kyle. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired September 03, 2026 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: You can check us out on X OutFront CNN. Also, we're on Instagram and TikTok, Erin Burnett OutFront. You can find us there; we've got extras there and key moments you may have missed from the show or you want to see again and always you can e-mail your questions to us OutFront@cnn.com. We hope you'll do that. We'll see you back here tomorrow.

AC360 begins right now.

[20:00:20]

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening from the Newsroom. Thanks for joining us. We start off tonight with stunning new developments to what began as a profound human tragedy that has become a riveting courtroom drama that could come down to one single juror.

Lindsay Clancy on trial for murder. The Massachusetts mother charged with strangling her three young children in 2023 waiting for a verdict that did not come after day one of jury deliberations or days two through six. The jurors say they are deadlocked. The judge today calling each one to the bench, reminding them of their duty.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE WILLIAM SULLIVAN, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE FOR THE MASSACHUSETTS SUPERIOR COURT: It's not enough for the Commonwealth to establish a probability, even a strong probability, that the defendant is more likely to be guilty than not guilty. That is not enough.

Instead, 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. This is what we mean by proof, beyond a reasonable doubt. All right, and with that, I'm going to ask you to resume your deliberations.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, just minutes later, a bombshell defense attorney, Kevin Reddington, told the judge that one of the jurors is not listening to instructions.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN REDDINGTON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR LINDSAY CLANCY: I object to the court's ruling. I request that we have further inquiry. I request that we -- my motion is to remove this juror that refuses to listen to your instruction on reasonable doubt.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: And CNN's Jean Casarez joins us now from outside the courtroom. So, what more did the defense attorney have to say about the judge questioning the lone juror tomorrow?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, after court, he came out and he always speaks to the media and Kevin Reddington said that tomorrow there will be an inquiry with this juror, he believes, in open court, which is extraordinary right there.

Because, Anderson, I've covered trials for a long, long time. And if there has ever been an issue with a juror and I've never seen anything like this, but it's done in chambers, it's done because the anonymity of the jurors is very important.

They're not put on the spotlight at all, because they are the ones that determine the facts are the most important people in that case. And this juror right here to remove him would be really something because for four weeks, this juror and we don't know if it's a male or a female, but they've sat with the other jurors. They've got their notebooks, they're all taking copious notes. I saw that myself in the courtroom.

So, to remove a juror, after four weeks of testimony, one week of jury selection, that would really be something. And they'd have to start from scratch with the deliberations.

COOPER: If the judge declared a mistrial, what happens next?

CASAREZ: Well, a mistrial, it would be over, right, this trial would be over. And conceivably Lindsay Clancy would be a free woman.

Now, we have to remember she is in a mental hospital here in Massachusetts. But the prosecution most likely would want her to stay in custody because she is in custody right now, even though she is where she is.

This is a triple homicide, and the prosecutor would most likely say we want her to remain in custody, remain a no bail situation, and our intent, they may give their intent, is to retry the case.

COOPER: Jean Casarez, appreciate it. Joining us now is former Westchester County, New York, district attorney Mimi Rocah, criminal defense attorney Jeremy Saland, who's a former prosecutor with the Manhattan District Attorneys' Office, and defense attorney and jury consultant Renato Stabile. Mimi, what do you make of Clancy's defense attorney's motion?

MIMI ROCAH, WESTCHESTER COUNTY, NEW YORK, DISTRICT ATTORNEY: He is convinced that this juror, who is holding out is the lone juror for conviction.

COOPER: How would he know that?

ROCAH: I don't know. I mean, and I want to just say that anyone who thinks they're certain, I'm not sure how they know that.

Now, Reddington is an amazing lawyer and has had a really incredible sort of, you know, radar and intuition throughout this case, I think. And so, if he is convinced of that, I'm inclined to go along with that. But I don't think we can be --

COOPER: But I mean, would that just be based on observing the juries?

ROCAH: I think it's also based on apparently the note, which we didn't see, but he at least referred to, Reddington referred to, which came out today, which said that there was someone who was not following the law on reasonable doubt.

And so, I think there are different interpretations of that but the most reasonable one is that somebody is not, you know, going along with the idea that if there's reasonable doubt, you'll quit.

COOPER: And Jeremy, how unusual is that for a member of the jury, apparently to accuse another member of the jury?

[20:05:17]

JEREMY SALAND, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: There's often infighting and there's often troublemaking and friction, that's the nature of things. And especially when you have such a trial where there's so much passion and empathy, and it's something that no matter the outcome, it's going to be a hard result. Theres no real winner here. There's only losers, there's just degrees of that. But what's unique here, I think, is that you would often find a defense attorney.

And I've worn both hats as a prosecutor in Manhattan, as a defense attorney now. Oftentimes as defense attorney, I look at a mistrial on a strong case as a win, because that's not a conviction. Maybe I get another bite at the apple. Not necessarily here, maybe it doesn't go back to another trial, which I think it would if there is a mistrial.

But here you have the confidence from the defense counsel saying, I believe that 11 of those jurors potentially want to acquit. And there's only one who is against me and wants to say, I'm making up the rules of reasonable doubt. And the reason why I believe he thinks that is because there's no dispute about the action she took, meaning the killing. The question is insanity and that's the reasonable doubt issue that gets him over the hump if he wins.

COOPER: Renato, I mean, it's such an unspeakably horrible case. How much of a toll can that take on a jury's deliberations drag out? And what do you think is happening with that one juror?

RENATO STABILE, DEFENSE ATTORNEY AND JURY CONSULTANT: It's taking a tremendous toll on them. You know, were also going into a long weekend. We might get a resolution tomorrow. You know, the judge is going to question the juror in open court. One reason why Kevin Reddington may think he knows that it's eleven-one for not guilty by reason of insanity. Remember, the parties know these jurors much better than we do. And you usually have a sense of who your jurors are and who your bad jurors are.

This might be the person, and he knows who the juror is. This might be the one juror who he knows is the worst for his case, and that's why he's reaching that conclusion.

I don't think he can know this for certain, but he's taking a gamble that that's what it is. But if this juror gets removed, and I don't see any evidence that the juror should be removed at this point, because, you know, not following an instruction is usually not enough. It has to be some outside influence. It has to be some race based or gender-based bias that you have against the defendant. But he's really taking a gamble here because you just see another juror.

COOPER: So, Mimi, you can tell, I mean, if you're spending time in a courtroom, the jury is right there and you're observing them, you can tell over time who likes your client and who doesn't.

ROCAH: You think you can tell and sometimes you're right and sometimes you're not. But, you know, it is a good point that there's a lot of background on each one of these jurors that they had going into it. So, there may have been, this may be the juror that --

COOPER: Would they have done their own background on the jurors.

ROCAH: Well, they as part of the voir dire, they would have gotten some information, right. What do they do for a living? You know, maybe what newspapers they were, you know, kind of general information, depending on how detailed the voir dire was in the beginning.

And so, maybe there was a juror that he didn't get to strike that, you know, he was never thrilled about. And now he thinks that's the juror that's holding out. But again, he could be wrong, you know, and I think the judge, the judge did the absolute right thing today, by the way.

I mean, I understand the vehemence of the defense counsel's motion, but the judge asked the question that under the law is the key question. Can you follow the law and the fact that each juror, including whoever this juror is, said, yes, I can, that's enough to drop.

COOPER: Would the judge know who the one juror is at this stage? SALAND: The judge may know and the judge is going to ask the question. And that's why counsel wants the judge to make it more formal inquiry. So, if he doesn't know, he should know. And there's an opportunity potentially to have this hearing or this inquiry tomorrow to really dig deep.

But again, it's a very high bar and the judge has to make sure that it's not that I'm not getting along with you, meaning the other jurors. it's not that I disagree with the evidence. it's not that I don't think you've reached it. it's that I'm not following the law and I can't follow the law as you instruct. Theres a fine line, but there's a vast, vast difference between those two factors.

COOPER: And Renato, I mean, a mistrial is obviously not the same as an acquittal. The prosecution can choose to retry a defendant after a mistrial. Do you think that would happen in this case?

STABILE: Well, you know, if it turns out that it is 11 to one for not guilty by reason of insanity, that may give the prosecution some pause. I mean, every indication is that they will retry her. But if it's really that lopsided, they may consider offering her a plea. And based on Kevin Reddington's statements outside of court, it seems that his client is open to some sort of resolution.

He's made statements that this has taken such a toll on her that she really can't go through this again. So, he's starting to signal that they may be open to that.

COOPER: And Mimi, if she was, or acquitted by reason of insanity, would she go free?

ROCAH: I believe that she, yes, I believe in that case she would. I'm not sure if she would end up having some kind of a hospital stay. But it would be, you know, very limited and very different than being in prison.

[20:10:23]

COOPER: I mean, this is kind of a crazy question, would she be allowed to have children again?

SALAND: I don't think she would have the opportunity while she was in custody in an institution of some kind to have those type of things that--

COOPER: Would she be institutionalized?

SALAND: Well, I think that she likely would be for some extended period of time. And the state would decide when she can be released and when she was capable of being released, whether it's conjugal visits and things like that I can't speak to.

But the state can't say you can never have another child again. They don't have that right to take those rights for another person. But it certainly begs the question whether she should but that's not in the court of law. It's a different forum. COOPER: Yes, Jeremy Saland, appreciate it, Mimi Rocah as well, Renato Stabile. Thank you so much.

Ahead tonight, remembering Gloria Steinem legendary journalist, feminist and inspiration for the movement that changed millions of women's and men's lives.

Coming up next, the war with Iran. My conversation with the Republican lawmaker and former Army Special Forces officer who says it has stalled. Also, the Vice-President now says we are not at war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN'S CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT AND THE ANCHOR OF "THE SOURCE": Will this war be over by the time of the midterm elections?

J.D. VANCE (R), VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We'll, Kaitlan, again, I don't, I wouldn't call it a war.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:15:36]

COOPER: Today, Vice President Vance was asked when the Iran war would end. He replied, it's not even a war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: So, by his by his formulation, the actual war, the war, war ended back in mid-April as a two-week cease fire took effect. Or he may have just been slightly off and was thinking of when Secretary of State Rubio said this back on May 5th.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARCO RUBIO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: The operation is over. Epic Fury as President notified Congress, were done with that stage of it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, keeping them honest, renaming a conflict or observing a cease fire does not necessarily mean the war itself is over.

In mid-July, three American service members were killed in a missile and drone attack on a base in Jordan and two more elsewhere in the region. Others were wounded. For them, the war went on, went on for the missile crews aboard U.S. Warships and pilots carrying out dozens and dozens of airstrikes over the summer, most recently two nights ago, hitting targets across Iran, with the President threatening far worse if Iran did not give in, which has not, though it's clearly under enormous economic pressure to do so.

The war certainly seemed to go on for the entire crew of the Supercarrier Abraham Lincoln, which was obligated to or obliged to remain at sea on station months after the war. As Vice-President Vance says he would call it ended.

And it goes on today, for Americans at the pump. Despite a measure of American success recently, the numbers vary in shepherding oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, something the Vice President today acknowledged.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: The reason gas prices are so high right now is because the Iranians are shooting at commercial shipping.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: So, whatever the Vice President chooses to call it, they're shooting at us and at our allies. We're shooting at them.

Tens of thousands of Americans are deployed in the region to do the shooting and the defending. But there's not even the need to really split hairs over this. The President himself today called it a war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Now, we have a war with Iran. We've defeated their Navy, we defeated their Air Force, we've defeated them. Their leaders are gone, everything is gone, just about there. You know, we just hit them again last night and we took out their radar.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: CNN chief White House correspondent, anchor of "The Source" Kaitlan Collins, joins us now. Did the Vice President shed much light on the White House's Iran strategy?

COLLINS: Not really, because the question that we were getting at, which is, when is this war going to end? What's your expected timeline on it? Because they were obviously, you know, very happy to give timelines at the beginning of the war, saying repeatedly from multiple officials it was only expected to last four to six weeks.

Of course, now were six months into this war, and the Vice President was basically arguing that he didn't want to put what he described as an artificial deadline on this. He didn't want to put a deadline out there. And then the Iranians continue disrupting the Strait of Hormuz, as they have now been doing for months. And then the war would essentially keep going, was his argument that he was making. But obviously, it's still very much is a war, and it is very much going on, and there's no clear end in sight, which is the real question here. And one thing that he made clear in his answer to me is, I asked him about, which is that he was essentially saying, the Iranians have a lot of say in when this war ends, because they are the ones who are continuing to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz. They're affecting what oil, how much oil is getting out, even though the United States is, as he alluded to, trying to stop that

But in terms of whether or not it matters, whether you call it a war, it does. Because the first question I asked him was about the widow of this airman. They're actually both from Alabama. And she wrote on Instagram this week that her family was not eligible to get some of the benefits that typically that of a fallen service member would be able to get because Congress hasn't declared this a war.

And so, I asked him about whether or not the Trump administration would personally ensure that they did get all the benefits that they're eligible to receive. He inquired as to the name of the fallen airman, Alex Klinner, and then said that they would work with the Army to make sure that they did get all the benefits they're entitled to.

COOPER: So, it matters from in very strongly in that regard, whether it's called a war or not.

COLLINS: Right, because it changes the benefits that the family of a fallen service member will get. And he was in that plane that crashed over Western Iraq several months ago. And so, it does matter, actually. And it actually also goes to the point of why it matters what Congress calls it and where that stands.

But I thought it was notable that a few moments after her making the point, as she did, that they can't get all the benefits because it's not officially declared a war, that he also argued that he does not view this as a war.

[20:20:34]

COOPER: Kaitlan Collins, thank you so much. Join Kaitlin at "The Source" the top of the next hour.

Shortly before air time, I spoke with Republican Congressman Pat Harrigan of North Carolina. He sits on the House Armed Services Committee and served in Afghanistan as Green Beret, earning two bronze stars.

Congressman, you told Bloomberg in an interview that militarily were stalled and that we have to stop fighting a limited war, thinking we're going to use limited conflict to achieve unlimited outcomes.

Given your experience in Afghanistan, I'm wondering what specifically you want to see the U.S. do vis a vis Iran?

REP. PAT HARRIGAN (R-NC): Well, look, you have to put the Iranian regime in a box that we have at this point failed to put them in, which is a decision-making box where they have only a binary choice to make.

On one hand, they can choose to use the limited resources that they have left to continue to pursue red lines that are intolerable to the United States and its Western allies. Or it can actually take care of the 92 million people in Iran who are not members of the IRGC, that are just regular people that want safety and stability for their family's economic opportunity. And if the regime doesn't provide that, they're going to run the risk of staying in power six months, 12 months or 18 months down the road.

We have not set the conditions for the Iranian regime to have to make that decision. Until we do, we are not going to achieve anywhere near those unlimited outcomes that I think we're trying to achieve.

COOPER: Do you believe the kind of the economic strategy which the administration now seems to be pursuing or talking about pursuing? Um, you don't believe that's going to be effective enough without unlimited military involvement?

HARRIGAN: No, I think that it has a chance of actually being effective. And I will say that I'm a big fan of the administration communicating exactly what that strategy looks like today.

We've heard that the Iranian economy is now suffering 70 percent inflation. It's currency, the Riyal is at record low, 2.2 million to one dollar, and its oil exports have collapsed from 1.7 million barrels a day to roughly a quarter million. And I think when you juxtapose that against America's private sector demand growing at 4.2 percent annual rate this last quarter, and you have the question of whose economy is going to outlast the other?

I'd certainly bet on the American economy standing strong while the Iranian economy breaks. But up until today, we've not heard that articulated from the administration. They need to keep communicating like that.

COOPER: So, in terms of military action, what would you like to see?

HARRIGAN: Well, I think there's a choice. And the administration has to make this choice, right? We cannot risk a forever war. That is something that no American wants. No, none of my constituents want certainly none of us in congress, Republican or Democrat, who are veterans of the global war on terror and watched what unfolded in the first 20 plus years of this century. We don't want a forever war.

And so, what you can't do is you cannot do just enough not to lose, but not enough to win. So, we have to decide, are we going to increase military force to achieve very specific objectives that puts Iran in that box? Or are we going to take the tactical victories that we have actually achieved in this conflict, declare victory and walk away from the situation?

We have to make one of those two decisions by continuing to pursue limited conflict with the hopes that were going to somehow, over time, change things and achieve unlimited results. That has never played out in our history before. And it's quite dangerous for the strategic interests of the United States.

COOPER: My thanks to Congressman Pat Harrigan.

More ahead tonight on the state of the conflict, both on the ground and in the realm of public opinion, with elections now just two months off.

Also tonight, breaking news, the President's arch gets ready to rise.

[20:25:04]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:29:10]

COOPER: More on our breaking news tonight, the Vice-President declined to provide a timeline for an end to the war with Iran, which, by the way, he says, is not really a war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: The Vice President also did not address when voters can expect gas prices to come down, or when the global economy might recover. I want to get some perspective now from former White House Trump communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin, CNN global affairs analyst Karim Sadjadpour.

So, what's the reason for the Vice President to kind of go down this road?

ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It's kind of a bizarre take because President Trump himself has repeatedly called this a war. He said, we're winning the war. He said it in public statements, in Truth Social statements. So, for the Vice President to kind of play this semantic game and say, no, it's really just hostilities that have ceased and ebbed and flowed, doesn't make a lot of sense. It's quite a divide between what the President has said.

Something kept sticking in my mind though, when I heard this. This administration chose to rename the Department of Defense, the Department of War. That may have sounded like smart branding at the time. It seemed tough or whatever, but now we are in this war going into six months. It feels endless to a lot of Americans. It's deeply unpopular, and I have to wonder if they're thinking that was still the right branding.

[20:30:35] COOPER: Yes, it is sort of bizarre to go through that effort to call this the Department of War and then say --

GRIFFIN: And then now we're in a war --

COOPER: Yes.

GRIFFIN: -- and we're saying it's not a war.

COOPER: Karim, I know you say time is no longer on Iran's side. And I'd like you to talk about that because you're saying that the level of economic degradation it's suffering at the hands of the U.S. is not sustainable. You believe the kind of the clock is now working in the favor of the U.S.?

KARIM SADJADPOUR, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I think, Anderson, over the last weeks the momentum has shifted towards the U.S. and that Iran as a regime, as a nation, is being strangled economically. There are few nations in the world which are experiencing this level of economic punishment, a collapsing currency, hyperinflation, triple-digit food inflation. Their oil exports are down around 80 percent.

And so that level of economic pressure is not sustainable. The question is how is this regime likely to react to this continued naval blockade. Are they likely to choose the path of capitulation or confrontation?

My fear, Anderson, is that they are going to make good on their threats to retaliate against U.S. interests militarily and our partners in the Gulf, including oil installations throughout the Gulf, in order to try to spike the price of oil and stop this naval blockade.

COOPER: Alyssa, what do you think the resignation of the Army secretary could foretell about Hegseth?

GRIFFIN: It's kind of a significant moment. Driscoll was well-loved on both sides of the aisle, on Capitol Hill. He's somebody who learned how to navigate the Pentagon despite being ideologically very aligned with Trump. But he's a conservative who ran as a Republican for Congress.

But he managed to be able to be somebody who could be a liaison within the Department of Defense and the Hill in the White House. Who replaces him will matter. They've named someone in an acting capacity at this point.

But I think it signals the war is not going the direction that the administration wants it to be. It's deeply unpopular. And Hegseth really is wearing this. Marco Rubio is not front and center on it. I'd say Scott Bessent and Pete Hegseth are. I think it was an interesting moment for Driscoll to create that line of division and step aside.

COOPER: Karim, the Vice President claims today that Gulf nations, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE are privately helping behind the scenes to cut off Iran economically. Does that seem likely to you? Do you think that's true?

SADJADPOUR: What those countries are trying to do is de-conflict with Iran. None of them are interested in being at war with Iran. This is an existential war for all of those countries. They're trying to find alternative routes to get their oil and gas to bypass the Strait of Hormuz.

But I don't think that they're interested in being the tip of the spear in this war. They would like this to be wrapped up as quickly as possible.

COOPER: What do you think voters expect a victory to look like or the end total (INAUDIBLE)?

GRIFFIN: Well, this is part of my problem because I was in the first Trump administration. I supported our maximum pressure campaign against Iran. I think the economic sanctions that are crippling are critical. I support the Soleimani strike.

But they've not articulated what the vision is here, what success looks like and what winning looks like. And it's a moving of goalposts. Was it about taking out the Ayatollah? Is it about overthrowing the full regime? That's what they need to explain.

Because even Karim just said it better now than I've heard articulated by the administration. They're economically depleted. They're in a weaker place than they were months ago. If they can explain how the world is safer and America is safer and declare victory, I think before the midterms, that would be the smartest thing the White House could do.

COOPER: Karim, even if they are economically depleted and if they don't care about their population, do they not have the sustaining power? I mean, didn't they blast through a brutal war with Iran -- with Iraq for what, like 10 years, I think?

SADJADPOUR: That's a very important point, Anderson. Let me amplify what Alyssa just said, which is that we do know historically over the last 47 years, this regime has compromised on very few occasions. And it's when it faces almost existential economic pressure, but that's coupled with kind of a clear diplomatic exit.

So we're getting towards that level of almost existential economic pressure. But I don't think we've articulated to them what is the clear diplomatic exit we're looking for.

COOPER: Alyssa, just in the minute we have left, do -- we're going to do a report about the arch being built, you know, moving forward. Does that make -- are you surprised by that?

[20:35:02]

GRIFFIN: I'm not surprised because this is something the President wants. The timing, the optics are just so bizarre. The -- you know, a photo is now out of what it's going to look like. In a moment where Americans are economically struggling, it feels like the President's focus is not where it should be. This is kind of the last place I think his focus should be.

COOPER: Alyssa Farah Griffin, appreciate it. Karim Sadjadpour, thanks so much.

As we said in the middle of this war, the President has been continuing to redecorate. Tonight, there's breaking news on the massive arch that he wants to build just steps away from Arlington National Cemetery.

Tonight, the Interior Secretary Doug Burgum posted the following on social media, "We are pleased to announce that after a very long wait, over 125 years, we are preparing to start over the next two-week period the excavation work necessary for the Great Triumphal Arch and Military Observation Deck."

CNN's Sunlen Serfaty joins us now from the site. So what is the administration's rationale for moving ahead despite the project facing numerous legal challenges?

SUNLEN SERFATY, CNN WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly, Anderson, that is a big question here. And the administration so far has not spelled that out completely, nor have they answered our questions asking that exact thing. But it certainly is very notable that this comes just days after the Supreme Court cleared the way for the White House ballroom construction to go forward.

And we saw the Department of Justice lawyers today in this arch case essentially resubmit, re-ask the judge to dismiss this arch legal challenge on the grounds of what happened in the ballroom case. So they are clearly here and are still feeling very emboldened in this moment that they feel that they have the authority to go forward.

Now, previously, the administration, they had said that they will give 14 days before they do anything to this ground behind me. Today, we saw Burgum, as you noted, say that we are going to start within two weeks excavating this ground. Certainly, this is a project, Anderson, that the President has been very clear he cares a lot about.

COOPER: And do opponents of the arch have any recourse at this point?

SERFATY: Well, it's a good question. It's something that I pose to the plaintiffs in the case, those who are bringing suit against the administration here. And they said they're essentially trying to figure out what the next strategy is, not wanting to disclose anything yet, but saying they will make moves quickly and very quickly is what they need to do.

Beyond the legal limbo, though, it should be noted that there is a whole laundry list of items that are still outstanding to have this arch go through with proper approvals. It still has not gotten final approval before the National Capital Planning Commission, one of the two big regulatory commissions that have to approve it.

It still does not have the final study back from the FAA, whether it's safe to have so close to Reagan's National Airport nearby. It still has not had a Section 106 review, which is weedy here, but important. That's under the National Preservation Historical Act. That needs to happen to make sure that they're talking about effects of cultural and heritage sites.

So all of this stacking up against this project. Meantime, the administration is pushing forward.

COOPER: And what's the timeline the administration has said that this would be built in? I mean, is this going to take longer than the Trump administration?

SERFATY: They've been very clear that is going to be a very aggressive timeline. They have spelled that out completely. We expect this ground to be excavated over the course of the next two weeks, but they have previously tried to minimize the effects of the area around.

This is a highly trafficked area. This is an area between D.C. and Virginia that a lot of people travel in. So they've talked about bringing in crews, working two shifts, a 12-hour shift each around the clock, essentially, to get this done. The goal is that they would get this done before President Trump leaves office.

COOPER: All right. Sunlen Serfaty, thanks very much.

Up next, we remember feminist trailblazer and journalist Gloria Steinem. My conversation with a good friend of hers who co-founded Ms. Magazine with her ahead.

And later, an update on the pressing effort to find hundreds of hydropower plant workers unaccounted for, feared trapped underground in Nepal after the devastating wave of ice and mud last week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:43:45]

COOPER: Gloria Steinem, the journalist, political activist and feminist icon, has died. She was 92 years old. In a statement on social media, her foundation said, quote, "Yesterday, Gloria passed away peacefully at her home in New York City, surrounded by some of the many who loved her. Gloria's near-century on earth were years well-lived, and she continued working for equality until the very end."

Gloria Steinem spent the better part of her life advocating for women's rights in the workplace, the right to abortion, and sex education. I spoke with her in 2022 about the leak of the Roe v. Wade opinion draft one month before it was overturned.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: When you were protesting and demonstrating in the streets for abortion rights, you were there, you saw the Supreme Court legalize abortion in 1973. What was your reaction, given your history, to this leak?

GLORIA STEINEM, FEMINIST ICON & CO-FOUNDER OF MS. MAGAZINE: It seems of, you know, like science fiction to suppose, once again, that we can have democracy without allowing women to control our own physical selves. It's a throwback.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, Steinem reflected on her career in an interview with The New Yorker in 2015, saying, "People are always asking me, who will pass the torch -- who will pass the port -- who will you pass the torch to? The question makes me angry. There is no one torch. There are many torches, and I'm using my torch to light other torches. There shouldn't have been a first Gloria Steinem, and there won't be a last one."

[20:45:13]

Here's Randi Kaye with more on her life and her incredible legacy.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A feminist crusader.

STEINEM: The point is not what we choose, but that we have the right to make a choice.

KAYE (voice-over): Journalist and activist Gloria Steinem spent much of her life fighting for a woman's right to choose and access to reproductive care.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You were the one who coined the phrase reproductive freedom. Now, how did that happen?

STEINEM: It was reproductive rights, reproductive freedom. But clearly, the ability to control, to make decisions over our own physical selves is fundamental to democracy.

KAYE (voice-over): Steinem targeted policies that reduced women's access to health care and equality. When we spoke in 2012, never shying away from politics, she talked about the war on women.

KAYE: Describe that war as you see it today.

STEINEM: The war on women is not actually a Republican war, it's a war by the extremists who are now in control of the Republican Party.

KAYE (voice-over): To amplify her message, she opened up about the abortion she had in London when she was 22.

STEINEM: I can assure you, as a woman who has had one, that abortion is not a pleasurable experience. It is only a last resort.

KAYE (voice-over): Gloria Marie Steinem was born in 1934 in Toledo, Ohio. After college, working as a young journalist in New York City, she said she experienced sexism, recalling an editor telling her once, "We need a reporter, not a pretty girl". Still, her 1963 expose on the New York Playboy Club launched her writing career. She worked undercover as a bunny to reveal low pay and lousy working conditions for women at the club. Years later, in 1972, she co-founded Ms. Magazine.

STEINEM: There really was nothing for women to read that was controlled by women.

KAYE (voice-over): For her, it was about more than just feminine rights. She fought for civil rights and gay rights. In 2013, President Barack Obama awarded her the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor.

BARACK OBAMA, 44TH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The one piece of advice to young girls is, I love this, do not listen to my advice. Listen to the voice inside you and follow that.

KAYE (voice-over): In 2011, a University of Chicago history professor, a woman, told Glamour magazine, "Gloria Steinem is to the women's movement what Martin Luther King Jr. was to civil rights -- the galvanizer."

Gloria Steinem was 92.

Randi Kaye, CNN.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: Gloria Steinem co-founded Ms. Magazine with her good friend Letty Cottin Pogrebin in 1971. I spoke to her just before airtime.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Letty, thank you so much for being with us. I'm so sorry for your loss. I'm wondering what's going through your mind tonight as you think about Gloria's life and legacy.

LETTY COTTIN POGREBIN, CO-FOUNDING EDITOR, MS. MAGAZINE: It was such a full light and such a well-realized life, and well-lived ethically and in public affect terms. I think, you know, if you got to die, the trick is to die and leave a legacy like that and die at 90 -- over 90. She was 92

COOPER: Yes. I mean, you shared friendships of 55 years.

POGREBIN: That's right.

COOPER: She was woven into your life, I've heard you say. Can you just talk about how did you guys meet? What was your bond, do you think?

POGREBIN: Well, I was a baby feminist and I went down to be a Betty Friedan's rapporteur kind of at the founding conference of the National Women's Political Caucus. And she wanted me to cover as many workshops as I could and then write it up so she could do her plenary presentation.

And I went for a quiet room. I went into a workshop room and there was Gloria. And I was, of course, struck dumb because I knew her work. I thought she was awesome. She was like a model for me of how to be a journalist and serious.

And there she was, and I said, "I'm sorry to disturb you." She said, "No, come in. What did you need? Do you need this room?" And I told her why I was there. And she said, "Let's do it together."

So let me tell you, that was Gloria in a nutshell, let's do it together. And then she said, when we get back to New York on Sunday night, Monday, I'd like you to join up with me and a couple of other women and we're starting a magazine.

COOPER: Yes, I mean, so you were a co-founding editor of Ms. Magazine with Gloria. What was that like, starting that, working alongside her at that time?

POGREBIN: It was like watching somebody who couldn't have been more natural as a movement leader.

[20:50:04]

And what you saw with Gloria was what you got. I knew her for 55 years. I knew her professionally, and she was at my Hanukkah parties, and she knew my children from the time they were we taught.

So what she was in my house at my dinner table is the same person who the world saw -- kind and caring and totally dedicated to forefronting women. She had no ego. When do you meet a person like that?

You know, gorgeous, brilliant, articulate, eloquent, the perfect you can send out to central casting for this person. And that's who she was in her private life -- kind, caring, and always giving credit to others.

COOPER: One thing I remember reading her say was that when she started sexual harassment, it wasn't even a term. It was just -- it was called life.

POGREBIN: That's a perfect quote of hers, yes. She was so quotable. But, you know, she put it in a framework that it was kind of like saying fish, you're in water and you didn't notice. But it doesn't have to be this way.

You know, we need water, but we also need to swim. We need to be able to swim and be who we are. And she just clarified this totally accessible feminism. She was never a pontificator. She was always somebody whose rhetoric was accessible --

COOPER: Yes.

POGREBIN: -- and her warm. She invited people into her home and, you know, she had a kind of a coven of women around her who really needed her and she needed them.

COOPER: Yes. POGREBIN: She made her family. What she once told us was that what she wanted on her gravestone was, wait a minute, I'm not done yet. I mean, I love it. I love it because it tells you who she was.

And she always was looking forward to the next project, the next march, the next demonstrating -- the next conference, the next woman to inspire.

COOPER: Yes.

POGREBIN: Yes.

COOPER: Letty Cottin Pogrebin, thank you so much.

POGREBIN: Thank you, Anderson. Thank you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COOPER: Well, coming up, more than 5,000 people are still missing after the floods in Nepal, including scores of workers who are trapped inside those hydropower tunnels, while the latest in the rescue teams racing against time to try to find them.

Also tonight, my conversation with NASCAR Hall of Famer Kurt Busch for a new episode of my podcast All There Is, which is just out tonight. Kurt talks about the sudden death of his younger brother, legendary NASCAR driver Kyle Busch to complications from pneumonia that suddenly progressed into sepsis in May.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KURT BUSCH, NASCAR HALL OF FAMER: The sequence of events is just -- it's horrific. Just how fast things changed, man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:57:38]

COOPER: We have new video from Nepal. That's the Nepali army scraping through cement like mud and debris today. They're trying to find hundreds of hydropower workers who fear trapped alive in underground tunnels after last week's glacier collapse and flash flood. A local police chief concedes that hope of finding anyone alive in those tunnels is fading, but he says we're trying our best.

On Monday, when I was there, I visited two sites where the search for hydro workers was underway. Tonight, though, throughout the flood zone along the Nepal-China border, the death toll now tops 1,200. More than 5,000 others are still unaccounted for.

My podcast, All There Is, we talk about loss and grief, and a new episode is available now tonight wherever you get your podcast. You can also access it using the QR code at the bottom of your screen. My guest tonight is NASCAR Hall of Famer Kurt Busch, who talks about the sudden death of his younger brother, fellow racing legend Kyle, back in May at the age of 41.

Kyle had complications from pneumonia that led suddenly to sepsis. In our conversation, Kurt also talks about their years of sibling rivalry and the brotherhood they shared on the racetrack. Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSCH: What I saw happen in a 12-hour period is unfathomable. It's out of a horror movie. The sequence of events is just -- it's horrific. It's just how fast things changed, man. It wasn't like we lost time. It wasn't like we didn't have good care. You know?

Just the one in a million, and it's like, no, no. And the biggest thing that I miss is the unspoken words when we would race each other. My last win at Kansas Speedway, 2022, my brother's second.

And there was one big slide that my brother missed on taking the lead. And now his tires are toast. And when I caught him in the next set of corners, it was almost like he knew he was done.

Go ahead, brother. You get him. I couldn't get him. He yielded. You won't really see it if you pull up tape, but you knew it. And I called him afterwards. I said, thank you. He goes, I know, I know.

Those are the things I miss the most. And that's my last NASCAR win. He helped me win it.

COOPER: It's like a secret language or a feeling that only you and Kyle could understand but through --

BUSCH: Brotherhood, yes.

COOPER: -- the brotherhood, you were communicating with each other. That's a bond that you and he shared that no one else does.

BUSCH: Now, thank you. You picked up on it. It's hard to describe.

COOPER: It's beautiful.

BUSCH: It is. It's poetic in a way.

COOPER: To feel that, what a beautiful thing to have had.

BUSCH: It was pretty special.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

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. See you tomorrow.