Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
Trump To Hold Midterm Campaign Blitz In Several Red States; Source: Trump Personally Driving Pro-Trump Taxpayer Funded Ads; Prosecutors Reopen Investigation Into Cornell Gang Rape Allegations; In First Year Back In Office, Trump Made More Than $1 Billion From Cryptocurrency Ventures; OpenAI Won't Release New AI Model Over Safety Concerns; Trump To Host Top AI Leaders At White House Tomorrow; Malcolm Gladwell On How Both Sides Of Gun Debate Traffic In Dishonesties; Two Giant Pandas On Loan From China, Arrive At Zoo Atlanta. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired September 28, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN IMMIGRATION CORRESPONDENT: "Under the Trump administration, ORR remains committed to ensuring that every unaccompanied illegal alien child has legal representation in immigration court."
Of course, today, Erin, that was not the case for all of those 25 children in Texas.
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: All right, Priscilla, thank you very much for that important reporting. And thanks so much to all of you, as always, for being with us. We'll see you tomorrow. AC360 begins right now.
[20:00:29]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Good evening, from the Newsroom tonight. With midterm elections just five weeks from tomorrow, what does it say that the President is planning to campaign in a state he won by more than two to one or 34 points just two years ago?
The state is Oklahoma; he'll be there on Thursday and campaigning in other red states in the days ahead. Alabama, for one, which he won by 30 points. Also, Texas, Florida and Ohio, all of which went for him by double digits in 2024.
In addition, according to Politico, he'll be hitting other red states Alaska and Iowa, as part of a campaign schedule that could keep him on the road almost every day next month.
He was asked about Iowa today after unveiling plans for a Minnesota company to build a $15 billion steel mill in the state.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Sir, you won Iowa by 13 points. Some of the polling, though, for some of the races right now in the Senate and also some of the house races a little closer, much closer, in fact. Why are Republicans, do you think, having to work so hard to hold on to these seats?
DONALD TRUMP (R) PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I don't know. I love Iowa, I've always been very strong with Iowa. There's been some things that the Democrats have done that are very bad for our country. You know, they had high prices. I reduced the prices. But they like to say affordability, but they're the ones that caused the affordability problem.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, keeping them honest, the inflation rate was 2.7 percent when the President took office. It's 3.4 percent now. He also called the Iowa polling, "fake." But both that polling and his own polling are real enough, and inflation is real enough for Iowa Senate Candidate Ashley Hinson, who was with him in the Oval Office today to be running campaign ads like this one recently touting her bipartisan credentials.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ASHLEY HINSON (R-IOWA) SENATE CANDIDATE: It used to be that reaching across the aisle wasn't just okay, it was expected. Some people in Washington forgot that, I never have.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Earlier this month, Congresswoman Hinson stayed away from a campaign rally headlined by Vice-President Vance. And there's really no mystery as to why she and other Republican candidates have been trying to distance themselves from the administration. Just a few numbers kind of explain it.
The Presidents job approval, 33 percent in recent CNN polling. Gasoline, almost 4.50 a gallon. Diesel and a 6.50 a gallon. And a war with which is neither popular with voters nor over yet no matter how many times the President says things like this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We're going to win that war very soon. That will be over and the gas prices will come tumbling down. So, nobody else could have done that, nobody else. The inflation is coming way down and when you see what happens, as soon as that war ends, inflation is going to be eradicated totally but nobody talks about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, what many in the political world are talking about are a pair of tax-payer funded White House T.V. spots, which are billed as public service announcements. But look and sound for all the world like campaign ads.
Late tonight, a source familiar with the matter told CNN the President was personally involved in orchestrating them. This is part of the second one, which aired during at least two NFL games yesterday.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We will liberate America from these villains once and for all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, the White House today said that the administrations of both parties have used public service announcements to explain policy. But this was no public service announcement.
It was a campaign ad, literally, word for word, which the President first posted online in January of 2024 when he was running for office.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We will liberate America from these villains. Once and for all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: So, the two spots are identical, with one exception, the one from 2024, as you just saw, has the Trump 2024 campaign logo. The latest one says, paid for by the U.S. Government, meaning all of us the same as those ads glorifying former DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, the one she spent more than 200 million taxpayer dollars to make, including CNN has reported $20,000.00 for a rent-a-horse and $4,000.00 for hair and makeup.
Tonight, Senate Republican Leader Thune said he liked these latest ads message, but taxpayers shouldn't pay for them. Louisiana Republican John Kennedy said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
Sen. John Kennedy, (R-LA): I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves.
Now, the White House sees it differently, but I think there ought to be a rule that you can't -- well, there probably is a rule. You can't spend public money to promote yourself.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[20:05:11]
COOPER: Well, Republican Congressman Thomas Massie posted, "Don't worry, using taxpayer dollars to run ominous campaign ads that the President has been done before and is completely legal in banana republics.
On the other hand, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, he had no problem, apparently with the ads.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. RO KHANNA (D-CA): The more they want to put President Trump on television, the happier I am. Obviously, it's an ethics violation. But here's my advice, go spend as much money as you want putting Donald Trump on T.V. Please put him on tv all over America.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Again, CNN has just learned that the President had a direct role in these two spots. Joining us now to CNN political commentators, former Trump campaign adviser David Urban and former Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh.
David, should taxpayers be footing the bill for a campaign style ad?
DAVID URBAN, SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, I agree with Senator Thune and Senator Kennedy. Look, I like the ads, Anderson, I think they're well done. But there's plenty of money in the coffers in the Trump campaign and other coffers to pay for them if they want to run them. I think they're good. And they're going to be effective in places. But, you know, there are enough things that the public needs -- we should be spending money on not these ads.
COOPER: Why do you think they are spending all
URBAN: Because I think that they -- that the argument is that obviously, Anderson, that the Presidents not on the ballot. They're not campaign ads. And so, they're, you know, promotional ads. They're patriotic ads. I mean, that's the argument, right? Because he's not on the ballot.
Do I think it's credible? Well, he's not on the ballot for sure. I know he said, act like I'm on the ballot, but technically the President's not on the ballot. And so, technically they're probably within their rights to be able to spend the money. But it's just not a good look. Listen, again, when I always talk about, you know, that mom driving home with 20 bucks in her pocket when she sees that and hears that taxpayer money is being spent, not so sure she's going to be inclined to vote Republican.
COOPER: Sabrina does, does that argument of, well, he's not on the ballot that the white house might be making make sense to you?
SABRINA SINGH, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, what's interesting is Donald Trump has actually said the exact opposite. And David mentioned that as well. I mean, Donald Trump at the RNC midterm convention said, pretend I'm on the ballot. And these ads reinforce that message that, okay, you elected me once, you know, pretend I'm on the ballot this time.
And I think to David's point, you know, when you think about the person driving home who has $20 in their pocket to spend on filling up a tank of gas, not only is that not going to get you there, but when you hear that your taxpayer dollars have been spent, millions and millions of dollars have been spent to run an ad during Sunday night football. That's very expensive.
And I think a lot of Americans where no matter where you are, question this administration's priorities. They're not looking out for you. This is a vanity project for Donald Trump and promoting his image rather than really addressing the crises facing Americans at home, which are gas prices, grocery prices, and, of course, diesel prices that we know just keep going up all over the place.
COOPER: David, when Trump adviser told CNN regarding the midterms, saying, "It's obviously going to be effing rough."
As a former Trump adviser yourself. And, you know, a lot of these states well, do you agree?
URBAN: Listen, I am more optimistic about the Senate than I am the House. I think Republicans will hold the Senate. I think there are going to be some states that are bumpy. You know, you've got great gubernatorial candidates and this comes down more to the people on the ballot, Anderson, in states like Pennsylvania, where Josh Shapiro is at the top of the ticket and going to run up big numbers.
You've got a great gubernatorial candidate in Iowa, which makes things very rough for people down ballot. So, candidates matter. Candidate quality matters. I think the Senate is going to stay firmly Republican by maybe a seat or two. I think the House you know, just as a foregone conclusion, it's rough. There are 21 seats up that are really, really tough for Republicans to hold on to. I think we're going to probably end up losing most of those. And you know, every two years, no matter who it is. The party in power loses these seats, whether it's a Democrat or Republican.
And so, there's a strong headwind blowing against the Republican Party to begin with. And couple that with high gas prices, inflation, and the things we've been talking about make it much, much more difficult to hold on to the House.
COOPER: Sabrina, do you think Trump's presence on the campaign trail does favors for vulnerable GOP candidates?
SINGH: I don't and I think Republicans really have a tough line to walk here. And I think Congressman Connick sort of outlined it in the way that, you know, if you want to put Donald Trump in all of your ads and you see him on T.V. all the time, that actually falls right into a Democratic strategy as well.
I think Democrats are focused on not just what Donald Trump has done to cripple the economy, but they're also talking about policies that they would do if they were in power to make things more affordable to Americans. So, I do think Donald Trump, being out there and across the airwaves is actually going to hurt vulnerable Republicans.
And, you know, to, you know, Ashley Hinson today, who was in the Oval Office just last week released an ad saying the war in Iran needs to end because Iowans are facing such high gas and diesel prices at home.
So, it's a very tough line to walk. I think some will completely embrace the President, but I think some are going to run the opposite direction.
[20:10:30]
URBAN: Yes, Anderson, I would just say really quickly what Sabrina said is the first part is true. I think Trump, Trump is going to get out there. Democrats are running against him regardless he's on the ballot or not.
The second part of her thesis, democrats are talking about the things they would do to make things different. I haven't heard that part right. I hear orange man bad lots of times over and over and over, but I haven't heard here the three things that were going to do that make things better for you going home with that 20 bucks.
I haven't heard Speaker Jeffries. I haven't heard one candidate on the campaign trail articulate a vision for what they're going to do when they take over the House. So, that's the shortcoming of their campaign.
COOPER: David Urban -- Go ahead, Sabrina.
SINGH: I mean, I would actually say, sorry, Anderson, just to push back on that respectfully, David, I think our candidates are out there talking about how they make health care more affordable, how they want to bring down the cost of groceries. But of course, a lot of that has to do with the decisions of this administration and including the looming over our head, over the Iran War, which, you know, I am giving you some of those.
URBAN: No, but give me steps.
COOPER: I got to go.
SINGH: Okay.
URBAN: Okay.
COOPER: I appreciate both of you, thank you. David Urban, Sabrina Singh, thanks.
Coming up next, almost two years after an alleged gang rape at Cornell University, the local district attorney now reopening the case. But it took a lawsuit by the accuser to do it. While details on that.
And later, it's not just the President who's been making big money since his return to office. Find out how much his kids and wife have been raking in as well. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:16:14]
COOPER: Prosecutors in New York are reopening the investigation into the alleged gang rape of a Cornell University student almost two years ago. The action comes after the accuser, who was 20 years old at the time, filed a civil suit claiming the school did not do enough to protect her.
The filing names more than a dozen defendants, including Cornell, seven fraternity members from the alleged rape and their fraternity, says the woman, known as Jane Doe, had been drinking at her sorority house in a bar before she arrived at the fraternity to visit one of the members. Miss Doe then alleges she was given more drinks. Pressured into
snorting something she says they described as Ketamine and sexually assaulted. The lawsuit includes a screenshot of a group chat where other fraternity members were allegedly invited to join the assault.
The matter was investigated by Cornell University police. The local police were not involved. No criminal charges were filed at the time. The local district attorney saying the accusers initial statement described her drug use and sex as, "voluntary, conscious and consensual."
Thomas Giuffra Her attorney today calls that impossible.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
THOMAS GIUFFRA, ATTORNEY FOR JANE DOE: I don't know how anybody who was grossly intoxicated and drugged can consent to anything. I mean, the fact is she went to the Cornell University Police to file a complaint because she believed she was a victim of a crime. If this was consensual, she did wanted to participate. She wouldn't have gone to the police in the first place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: CNN's Jake Tapper also spoke to the district attorney and asked why there wasn't more follow up to all of this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN, HOST: So, you never talked to police and say, I'd like to find out more about what happened here. Can you talk to anybody else that was involved, involved in the situation that never happens?
GIUFFRA: My team did not do that.
TAPPER: I know, but I'm asking, do you do that sometimes?
GIUFFRA: It does happen sometimes when there is a less complete story than what we had in the 2024.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: According to the civil complaint, Cornell expelled two of the seven accused fraternity members, while the others received lesser punishments, including suspensions and written assignments.
The university says that none of the individuals were offered a chance to write essays as a, "sole consequence of their involvement."
The school goes on to say both the complainant and respondent had the opportunity to testify and give evidence, after which a hearing panel issued a range of sanctions which, "included expulsions and suspensions from Cornell."
Joining us now is Cornell Student Assembly President, Eeshaan Chaudhuri.
Eeshaan, appreciate you being with us. I'm wondering what is the response you're hearing from people on campus today?
EESHAAN CHAUDHURI, PRESIDENT, CORNELL STUDENT ASSEMBLY: Anderson, thank you, first and foremost for having me on and getting to speak on behalf of the student body. Campus is a very interesting time right now. I love Cornell a lot, but usually students are very tense about what happened. I remember when the situation first came about my sophomore year and reading that headline and reading the crime reports, it was just a big shocker thinking that something like that was happening so close to home and now having to go and relive all of those memories as well as seeing it get on to the national news cycle, it's definitely a big shock here on campus.
COOPER: So, this was something that was known widely on campus at the time.
CHAUDHURI: Yes, My sophomore year's 2024, when this case first came up. This was a pretty well-known incident. The frat where this incident occurred ended up getting shutting down, get shut down at the time. So yes, very well known.
COOPER: Cornell says that frat has not has not reopened. The chapter has not reopened on campus. What is the view of the university, campus police, how the district attorney have handled this?
[20:20:08]
CHAUDHURI: I mean, I think there's a pretty big spectrum of views. There's some students who are calling for a very nuanced review of these exact proceedings that happened on campus. The title nine office, what ended up happening inside of there and what information was shared with the DA's office?
I think there's other students that are calling for the heads of the university to go and apologize for what ended up happening and for some overturned and staff as well.
COOPER: And are there specific things you think, university officials should be looking at beyond this specific case?
CHAUDHURI: Oh, yes, absolutely. I think first and foremost, taking a look at drug culture. I don't think this is an incident specific to Cornell. I mean, we saw Penn State earlier this year, but across the board, I think the fact that there's ketamine at the fraternity was a very alarming issue and so readily available to students as well.
And second, also looking at the way that were viewing consent education for the Greek life on campus, but also in general orientation events, I think is a huge issue and something that really needs to be taken a look at with a fresh set of eyes.
And third, in general, mechanisms. If a situation like this does happen, how can we prevent more Jane Doe's from like losing confidence in the system that's supposed to protect them as well. COOPER: Eeshaan Chaudhuri, I really appreciate your time, thank you so
much.
Joining us now is former federal prosecutor Berit Burger. What do you think of how authorities handled this.
BERIT BERGER, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes, it's shocking to me that there wasn't more of a comprehensive investigation done by the police and the district attorney's office back in 2024. I mean, it looks that they took what the Cornell Police did, a cursory investigation. They adopted it wholesale and did nothing else.
I mean, the fact that it seems like they just learned about these text messages now, two years later, really shows the fact that there was, this whole trove of evidence that they never even looked for back at the time.
COOPER: The text messages. I mean, if they are accurate, as has been portrayed, there are shocking.
BERGER: They're damning. And this is the kind of thing this sort of digital evidence is what you need in a case like this. These type of cases, the entire legal battlefield is over the credibility of your victim. And what you're looking for is anything that can corroborate their statement. These text messages are going to be a really critical piece of evidence and one has to think, if we were actually doing this investigation two years ago, what else would be available that may not be available now? What witnesses have graduated or moved away or lost recollection of this? What other sort of digital trail is now not been preserved?
COOPER: It's also a strange thing that there's campus police and city and local police, and that the campus police, I mean, obviously they're not as well sourced and probably experienced as actual police officers.
BERGER: Well, even if they are highly trained, they're not looking for the same thing. A Title Nine investigation is not the same as a criminal investigation done by law enforcement. They are not held to the same burden of proof. They're not looking to try to establish proof for a grand jury.
So, it's not surprising to me that they work together. What is surprising is that they sort of left the entire investigation to the campus police without doing their own independent investigation, which is what these cases really call for.
COOPER: So, what's going to happen now? I mean, the local district attorney is going to be doing the investigation now?
BERGER: Yes, so, what he said is that he's going to have a grand jury look into this. There's going to be a grand jury proceeding, presumably, the victim will have a chance to testify. I would imagine they'll talk to other witnesses, try to find other people that were there, perhaps interview the people that were alleged to be involved in the assault. They'll certainly look at their statements that they made to campus police.
But what I really hope is that they're able to do is to sort of dig more into this digital evidence. You know, were there any other text messages sent? If there's one, there was probably more. Anyone record this? I mean, people have their cell phones out all the time. So, this is the type of thing that would be really useful in trying to corroborate this kind of a statement.
COOPER: And then there's the civil lawsuit against the university and others.
BERGER: Yes. I mean, there's a lot of defendants named, including Cornell. This is not criminal charges, but saying essentially, they were negligent. They failed to do their part to protect their students. And Cornell is going to have to answer for the steps that it took in response to this. I mean, they did have a disciplinary proceeding, but they're going to have to explain why they thought the remedies were sufficient. And if that was enough to keep the student body safe. And in particular, this victim.
COOPER: It's also remarkable that what it took for any of this to come to light and get movement on is a civil lawsuit.
BERGER: Yes, I mean, that does happen sometimes. You don't like to see the civil lawsuit outpacing the criminal authorities, especially where you have here, somebody who actually went to the police.
She didn't go the next day. But that's not uncommon for victims of sexual assault. She went to the police. She told her story. She told her story. She made a statement. What was most shocking to me is, at least according to her attorney, she didn't meet with anyone who had this really specific trauma informed training. Somebody that was a specialist in working with victims of sexual assault. This is something that's done routinely now in sophisticated police departments and district attorneys' offices. I can't imagine having an initial interview with a survivor like this without having somebody there with that specialized training who understands how memory works, how somebody processes trauma, how that affects the narrative that they tell. The fact that, at least according to her attorney, that didn't happen is really appalling.
[20:25:55]
COOPER: Yes, Berit Berger, thank you so much, appreciate it.
Coming up next, a closer look at the Trump family's money-making success beyond just the billions the President has pulled in since taking office last year.
And later, even as new concerns reportedly spark OpenAI to scrap the release of a new model. Microsoft founder, Bill Gates weighs in with a chilling warning of his own about artificial intelligence and the billion lives that he says could be at risk. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:30:31]
COOPER: President Trump, his family, and his businesses have made stunning amounts of money since he returned to office for a second term, some of it coming from industries that the President is in charge of regulating. The President's financial disclosures for 2025 already reveal that he made more than $2 billion in his first year back in office, much of that coming from his cryptocurrency ventures.
But the President wasn't the only member of his family to see a surging bottom line, according to a new series of editorials from the Philadelphian Choir. The newspaper says Donald Trump Jr. saw his net worth jump six-fold to $300 million, and Eric Trump's worth increased 10 times to $400 million.
Also, First Lady Melania Trump received an estimated $40 million from Amazon for documentary projects, including her recent documentary feature Melania, and received an undisclosed amount for her memoir of the same name, as well as launching a meme coin of her own.
Joining us now is Paul Davies and Luis Carrasco, two members of the editorial board of the Philadelphia Inquirer. The board recently posted this piece with the headline, "The Family That Grifts Together," focusing on the Trumps.
So, Paul, when you were researching this, did the scale of the family's crypto portfolio and businesses surprise you?
PAUL DAVIES, SENIOR EDITORIAL WRITER, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER: It shocked me, actually, and that was part of the motivation for doing the project, was all these deals sort of come fast and furious and different times, and there's so much other news and events happening. But, you know, to sit back and put them all in one, you know, bucket and start to tally it up, it's, you know, it's just sort of breathtaking because it just -- it's almost never-ending.
COOPER: And Luis, a lot, it seems, of these profits are being made when the people buying these cryptocurrencies are losing money. I mean, there's a lot of people out there who are probably the President's supporters who have lost money in these crypto ventures, and probably even in Melania Trump's crypto coin.
LUIS CARRASCO, DEPUTY OPINION EDITOR, PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER: Yes, you look at, you know, people -- the high price of the Trump meme coin was around $74, and right now it's trading at around $3, under $3 in September. So really, there's been reporting that small investors at least lost almost $4 billion on the Trump meme coin. Meanwhile, the President really, you know, because he makes Trump money on the transactions, he walked away with more than $600 million.
COOPER: He's making money whether or not people win or lose, he's making money on the actual trades, on the transactions itself.
CARRASCO: Yes, you know, he famously managed to bankrupt his casino business, but he learned something that the house always wins when it comes to crypto. COOPER: Paul, the editorial also looks at the President's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, whose private equity firm has received multi-billion dollar investments from countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia. In the past, The New Yorker reported that Kushner was raising another $5 billion in the Middle East for his firm at the same time he's negotiating with Iran on behalf of the White House. What do you see the dangers of mixing business and diplomacy like this?
DAVIES: And that's the whole problem. You know, it's an inherent conflict of interest, obviously. He's got his personal wealth at stake and he's negotiating and meeting with a lot -- many of the same companies and countries that he's also trying to raise money from. So it's hard to differentiate where, you know, is he working on behalf of the United States or is he working on behalf of his personal bottom line?
COOPER: And Luis, the editorial is one of a series being done on how the President, quoting the editorial board, "has been lining his pockets and mixing personal profits with public policy." I suppose some supporters of the President will point to Hunter Biden and say, well, look, he was on a board or selling paintings. How does whatever he made compare to what the sons of the President have been making?
CARRASCO: Yes, you know, trying to make money off your family's name isn't, you know, just exclusive to the Trumps. There's Billy Carter, Roger Clinton, like you mentioned, Hunter Biden. He made about $11 million. It's been reported trading on his name.
But, you know, this was kind of Tom Homan with a fast food bag full of cash level compared to the hundreds of millions and, you know, billions that the Trump family is raking in just in the first year of the President being back in the White House.
[20:35:02]
COOPER: Yes, I mean, I remember -- I mean, I'm old enough to remember Billy Carter, I think, had Billy Beer, which seems like a joke -- I mean, it was a joke then, but I mean, it seems like a complete joke compared to the money that these guys are raking in.
Paul, if Democrats take back one or both chambers of Congress in November, do you expect investigations into or consequences for any of this?
DAVIES: You know, you would hope they'll be able to investigate it but, you know, Trump has also, you know, ignored many of the laws and taken over the Justice Department. And so will he comply with any investigations if they if they get launched? Will he answer subpoenas? Will he just turn around and pardon everybody?
He's talked about doing that on his way out the door, that pardoning everybody that gets within 100 feet of the Oval Office. So, you know, and as we've seen in his decade on the public stage, he doesn't get out without a relentless fight.
COOPER: Yes. Well, Paul Davies, Luis Carrasco, I really appreciate the reporting on this. Thank you so much.
CARRASCO: Thank you.
COOPER: Up next, we have more breaking news. OpenAI is scrapping the release of a new model over safety concerns. This is the President gets ready to meet with several AI leaders at the White House tomorrow. I'll talk with Kevin Roose, who hosts the AI-focused podcast "Machine Gods."
Also, I'll talk to bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell on AI and his new book just out. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:40:36]
COOPER: More breaking news tonight, OpenAI has scrapped the release of its next generation AI model after researchers raised concerns during internal testing. The company's head of safety systems said in an interview with Wall Street Journal, quote, "The model performed poorly on tests measuring alignment or how well the model adheres to what humans would like it to do. Specifically, the model showed higher levels of deception. It wasn't always honest about telling users of the actions it did or didn't take."
You'll recall that over the summer, OpenAI agents went rogue, hacked into an independent third party company, Hugging Face, after escaping their testing environment. Since then, industry leaders like OpenAI's Sam Altman, Dario Amodei of Anthropic and Elon Musk have been calling to slow the pace of AI development, increase regulation of the industry.
On Sunday, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates had this stark warning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL GATES, MICROSOFT CO-FOUNDER: AI is certainly powerful enough to drive events that, you know, cause a billion deaths. You know, so even though it's pretty hard to get to 100 percent, there's never been a weapon as powerful as the combination of people with ill intent using the latest AI tools.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: The White House will host the executives of several top AI companies, including Dario Amodei, for a meeting tomorrow. That news comes after Amodei joined the President for a private dinner Sunday night, despite longstanding tensions, obviously, between Anthropic and the administration. For his part, President Trump has appeared skeptical of AI doomsday predictions, insisting the U.S. has to retain its lead over China.
Joining us now is tech journalist and host of the "Machine Gods" podcast, Kevin Roose. He's also the author of the new book out next week, "The AGI Chronicles: The inside Story of the Race to Create an Artificial Superintelligence."
Kevin, do you think OpenAI -- do you think it would scrap the release of its new model if the Hugging Face hack hadn't occurred?
KEVIN ROOSE, CO-HOST, "MACHINE GODS" PODCAST: I don't know. I mean, I think that event really shook their internal safety teams and made them think about a different type of risk. You know, the risk that Bill Gates was talking about in the clip you just played was the risk that a malevolent human could use an AI model to do something destructive, to engineer a pandemic or commit some kind of attack on an electrical grid.
But this is a different type of risk. This is a risk of the model itself becoming deceptive, becoming misaligned, as they call it, breaking out of some containers that it's been placed in and causing havoc on its own with no human involvement at all. That's what really freaks out the AI companies.
They are starting to lose control of their own technology. They don't trust that when they deploy these systems or even when they're testing them internally, that they won't go out and commit a crime, which is what happened in the Hugging Face incident.
COOPER: The heads of these companies like Altman, Amodei, calling for increased regulations, they've been accused by some of essentially trying to freeze the lines where they are now with their own companies at the forefront, preventing others from, you know, making advancements. Do you buy that argument, especially in light of OpenAI hitting pause?
ROOSE: No, I don't buy it. And the reason why is because I've been talking with these companies and these executives for many years, and they've been very consistent over the years about the risks that they think these systems will pose. We're now seeing some of that come because the models are just getting more capable. They're now better at doing the kinds of things like cyberattacks that people have been worried about for years.
You know, in my book, I report on the existence of these threat models, which are basically big spreadsheets that some of these companies make where they detail in, you know, in very specific terms what kind of damages they think their models could create, whether it's deaths or billions of dollars in damages. They have known about these risks for years and they have been calling for the government to do something about these risks for years. The difference is now they're actually being listened to.
COOPER: Jensen Huang of NVIDIA essentially is saying, look, you know, there are laws in place that would, you know, punish a company if they put something out that wasn't safe, that you know, there's liability laws, all sorts of consumer protections. Is that enough, do you believe?
ROOSE: I don't think so. I mean, we have consumer liability laws that allow you to sue an airline if your plane crashes, but we still also have the FAA. We still also have the NTSB that goes in and makes sure the planes are safe.
[20:45:08]
We don't just let consumer liability law protect us against bad things from happening. So, no, I don't think it's enough in the case of the AI companies.
COOPER: I mean, you've covered this tech really well for years. In 2023, I mean, I remember you reported on your own experience with an AI chatbot trying to convince you to leave your wife for it. I'm wondering what you make of this moment where AI anxieties are kind of breaking through the mainstream.
ROOSE: Well, first of all, Anderson, I should say that I'm still happily married to a human woman. The chatbot was unsuccessful in breaking up my marriage. But I really am struck by how much it was foreseeable. All of this.
We had systems back then that weren't capable of doing anything, right. They could just talk and they could say disturbing things as Bing Chat did to me that fateful night in 2023. But they couldn't take actions.
They couldn't write code and execute the code. They couldn't get into people's bank accounts or get into their file systems and start causing chaos. So what we're seeing now is really the predictable consequence of two things.
One of these systems just becoming smarter and more capable across the board and also of people and companies racing to connect them --
COOPER: Yes.
ROOSE: -- to more of our critical systems.
COOPER: Kevin Roose, I really appreciate it. Thanks so much.
Joining us now is bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell. We'll get his thoughts on AI, but he's also here to talk about his new book, "The American Way of Killing: The Invention of an Epidemic." It's a fascinating dissection of gun violence in America and how many aspects are largely misunderstood.
Just on AI, are you optimistic or are you freaked out?
MALCOLM GLADWELL, AUTHOR, "THE AMERICAN WAY OF KILLING: THE INVENTION OF AN EPIDEMIC": Well, I'm now -- I have a sense now about how people thought during the Cuban Missile Crisis. I mean, I wasn't alive then, but I've often talked to people who were and there was a genuine fear at that time that we were all going to blow up, right? And I feel like we're --
COOPER: Right there.
GLADWELL: Sixty years have passed and we're now -- we're back in that exact moment. COOPER: I want to ask you about the book, "The American Way of Killing." I'm really enjoying it. It's about gun violence in the U.S. and you say both sides are essentially being dishonest. I want to read something you wrote.
You say not deliberately lying. It's more subtle. You write, "When either side pretends that something is consequential when it's not, when either side avoids the right conclusion because it's difficult or when either side blinds itself to the truth through laziness or indifference. The American conversation about guns is rife with these kind of dishonesties."
What is -- what do you mean by that?
GLADWELL: I mean that on multiple levels, on the most sort of basic details of how we understand what's going on in the streets when we talk about gun violence. We're just proceeding on false premises. So --
COOPER: Such as?
GLADWELL: I have -- for example, I have a chapter on the questions, is America over policed? There is -- there was among many Americans, is a kind of consensus that we are. And there's a big debate about the truth is we're not. The opposite is true.
The -- I give you the example of Los Angeles --
COOPER: Compared to the Berlin police department.
GLADWELL: Yes. Los Angeles and Berlin are the same size. L.A. has 8,500 police officers. Berlin has 18,000. A typical European city has twice as many police per capita as a typical American city. America is under policed.
The -- what is also true and connected to this is that our police are more violent than other countries. But that's because they're overmanned, right? They're -- when you're -- when you feel overwhelmed, when you don't have enough people, you have to project force in a way that you have to be aggressive. You have to show that you're in charge. The violence of our police in this country is a consequence of the fact that we have too few of them.
COOPER: That's really interesting. And you talk about the assault -- the idea of an assault weapons ban. That's misunderstood.
GLADWELL: This another thing. This drives me crazy actually. I have a whole chapter on -- I went out and shot an assault rifle with this wonderful guy named Greg Wallace in North Carolina. And he gave me a kind of tutorial on the on the rifle.
My problem with that debate is it's become -- it's a sacred cow for progressives in this country that we need to ban assault rifles. If you look at the legislation that purports to ban assault rifles, it doesn't ban assault rifles. It doesn't even come close. It bans a series of cosmetic attachments from being added to the kind of core of an assault rifle. But the essential -- the rifle itself is completely legal. And, in fact, if you look at the appendix to assault rifle bans, there are pages and pages and pages of lists of all the rifles that are unaffected by the ban. It's -- the whole debate is a kind of falsehood that we're pretending -- one side is pretending they're doing something and the other side is pretending to be outraged.
COOPER: And what about murder rates? You look at that in the book as well.
GLADWELL: I do. I think there's a couple as many fascinating things about that. But one is we should be clear that what distinguishes America from our other Western European countries or other countries around is not our crime. Crime rates in America and in Europe are just about the same.
[20:50:16]
By crime, I mean burglary, stolen cars, you know, your chance of your wallet being picked when you walk out in the street. What is different about America is violence and crime and violence are not the same thing. Different people commit crime and violence for different reasons. It has different consequences.
And so when a politician stands up and says, you know, I want to get tough on crime, that's not accurate. We don't need to get tough on crime. Crime's fine. Your car is more likely to be stolen in Montreal than it is in New York City. The problem is --
COOPER: Is that really true?
GLADWELL: Oh, yes, I mean, your pocket is more likely to be picked in Paris than in Chicago.
COOPER: Well that's -- yes.
GLADWELL: Your -- I could go on. The problem in this country is lethal violence. And we need to be very specific because otherwise we're dispersing our energies and all kinds of --
COOPER: Is that a -- is lethal violence in America the -- a consequence of easy access to guns?
GLADWELL: In part. But I think that the -- my sort of issue that I have in the book with the overemphasis on gun control as a kind of way of attacking lethal violence is I think it's 100 percent the right idea, I think would have a real effect on levels of gun violence. It's not happening, Anderson.
It's like we're going in the opposite direction. You know, what victory can the gun control movement point to over the last 25 years in this country? The court on two occasions, the Bruen case and the Heller case, has actually gone in reverse. You know, New York State had the strictest handgun legislation in the country for 100 years. That's gone now. I mean, so if we're waiting for gun control to save the day, we'll be waiting a long time.
COOPER: Malcolm Gladwell, it's always fascinating. Thank you so much.
GLADWELL: Thank you so much, Anderson.
COOPER: The new book by Malcolm is "The American Way of Killing: The Invention of an Epidemic." It's fascinating.
Coming up next, thankfully, a subject that's worlds apart, a new era of panda diplomacy. Yes, we're talking about pandas, apparently. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:56:23]
COOPER: A new era of panda diplomacy is underway between the U.S. and China. Two giant pandas, Ping Ping and Fu Shuang, arrived safely in Atlanta on Sunday. They traveled to the U.S. on their own special FedEx plane nicknamed Panda Express. Was that sponsored? I wonder. Their arrival comes just days after Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
ANDY COHEN, CNN HOST: Are you reporting panda news?
COOPER: What are you doing?
COHEN: You know, when I text you at 4:21 p.m., do you not think that you could respond back to me?
COOPER: I didn't see you --
COHEN: Huh? You didn't see my text. That was hours ago.
COOPER: OK.
COHEN: Listen, I have been enjoying this AI news so much.
COOPER: Oh, yes.
COHEN: I am so bullish about all that's to come.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: Yes. But, listen --
COOPER: What are you doing here?
COHEN: I am here because --
COOPER: Your hair looks very silver.
COHEN: Yes. Well, look at yours. I mean, the translucence. You have a little color on your face tonight. Anderson, I have huge news.
COOPER: OK.
COHEN: You and I, October 10th, are going to Washington, D.C.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: Yes. We're appearing on October 10th.
COOPER: Yes, of course.
COHEN: And we're going to Philly, November 14th when I thought --
COOPER: You're here to plug our show?
COHEN: Yes. I thought it would be a great opportunity to plug our show. And I --
COOPER: I thought I had some tragedy here.
COHEN: No. Well, I mean, I've been watching. There's plenty of tragedy. If you want to talk --
COOPER: That's right, we're going to be in Philly and --
COHEN: We're going to be in Philly in November. But, you know, this October 10th date is just coming right up.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: And I did think that if I asked you if I could come on to promote it --
COOPER: Yes, I would --
COHEN: -- you might say no.
COOPER: I would say no, 100 percent.
COHEN: Yes. So then I said, you know what? I texted your producer. And I said -- and by the way, got a response right away as opposed to my 4:21 missive to you.
COOPER: Wow.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: OK. Yes. So what's the show going to be like?
COHEN: It's going to be so fun.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: It's kind of going to be like New Year's Eve.
COOPER: It's us kibitzing on the stage.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: It's like New Year's Eve.
COHEN: I's like New Year's Eve on stage.
COOPER: Except the entire audience usually has had a few.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: It's interactive.
COOPER: It is very interactive.
COHEN: In D.C., October 10th.
COOPER: We've done probably like --
COHEN: We've done like 60 --
COOPER: -- 60 shows over the years.
COHEN: Yes, exactly. Yes.
COOPER: Which is crazy. And I have no memory of those shows.
COHEN: I know. I remember all of them. Ask me a city and I'll tell you what happened. But also, I twisted your arm to get back on the road.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: So I just want to make sure --
COOPER: We're only doing this year.
COHEN: -- that these are great. We're only doing these two.
COOPER: Yes, yes.
COHEN: Exactly.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: How's the panda diplomacy? Is Kaitlan going to be reporting on that?
COOPER: I was like, you know what? It's funny you're here because I was like, why are we talking about pandas?
COHEN: You know why?
COOPER: Why?
COHEN: Everybody loves a panda story.
COOPER: No, listen, I got nothing against pandas. I do not -- I don't want the panda community to come after me.
COHEN: No.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: Oh, God, no.
COOPER: You're getting a big award tomorrow night.
COHEN: I am.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: Congratulations.
COHEN: Thank you.
COOPER: Broadcasting and cable --
COHEN: And cable of hall of fame.
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: I wonder who's going to induct me.
COOPER: I'm doing that.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: Yes, I am.
COHEN: Wow.
COOPER: Yes. In fact, literally it's --
COHEN: By the way, it's black tie. Did you know that?
COOPER: I just learned that.
COHEN: Yes, I just learned that.
COOPER: It seems -- I mean, that seems a lot to ask. You didn't tell me that.
COHEN: But it is a very big honor.
COOPER: It is an honor.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: It is a huge honor. COHEN: And are you -- you know who else is in there?
COOPER: Mr. Wolf Blitzer.
COHEN: Wolf Blitzer --
COOPER: Yes.
COHEN: -- tomorrow night.
COOPER: Yes, yes.
COHEN: And are you going to be like tequila-ing it up at Wolf's table?
COOPER: Something like that.
COHEN: Yes, OK.
COOPER: Sure. Something like that. So, OK, so we got it like 20 seconds left. You want to plug again?
COHEN: OK, so October 10th, D.C., November 14th.
COOPER: These are like big -- there's like large places.
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: Like thousands of seats.
COHEN: Yes. You can get a ticket and it's going to be so fun.
COOPER: OK. Where do people find tickets?
COHEN: Well, just all over. Just Google it, sweetie. AI will tell you.
COOPER: Or your Instagram.
COHEN: Before it kills us all.
COOPER: Or your Instagram.
COHEN: Or my Instagram.
COOPER: That's it. Andy, thank you. You can stream the show live or watch any CNN program On Demand in addition to getting original programming as well anytime, any screen, any mobile device. All you need is an all access subscription.
Do you have yours, Andy?
COHEN: Yes.
COOPER: Scan the QR code on your screen or go to CNN.com/Watch to learn more.
COHEN: It's so easy. COOPER: It is.
COHEN: Is The Source with Kaitlan Collins starting right now?
COOPER: Yes.
