Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Polling on Border Security; Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) is Interviewed about Congress' Epstein Interviews; Deadlocked Jury in Palisades Arson Trial; Anthropic and OpenAI join an A.I. Jobs Push; Tupac Shakur's Brother Mopreme is Interviewed about the Murder Trial. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired June 26, 2026 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:08]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Two Supreme Court rulings with real and possibly immediate fallout. The high court clearing the way for the Trump administration to end a humanitarian program known as Temporary Protected Status, as it applies to people from Haiti and Syria. A program that's been in place since the 1990s. The justices also, in another ruling, ruling that the administration can turn migrants away at the border. All of this not only thrusting immigration back into the spotlight, but also the president's promise and push for mass deportations for quite some time.

CNN's Harry Enten is running the numbers on this one for us.

So, Harry, just, how is border security in terms of polling playing right now?

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: You know, President Trump has been the most transformative president when it comes to border security. And when it comes to border security particularly, it's paying off for him in the polls.

So, just take a look here. OK, net approval rating on border security at this point in a presidency. Look at where Joe Biden was. In June of 2022, he was way underwater. Look at this, 23 points underwater. Look at where President Trump is right now. He's actually above water. He is on the positive side of the ledger at plus two points. So, he's 25 points more popular than Joe Biden was at this point in his presidency. And the American people, when it comes to President Trump, actually like the job that he's doing when it comes to border security in particular.

BOLDUAN: How does this -- how does this trickle down?

ENTEN: Yes, how does this trickle down, right? So we're talking about President Trump. But what about Republicans who are running for Congress come the midterm elections? Well, they would love to run on border security because just take a look at this, party trusted more on border security. Among all voters, look at this Republican lead. It's a 16-point advantage. Republicans running away with it. Republicans far more trusted than Democrats are when it comes to border security.

And look at among independents. Look at this lead among independents. It's nearly double what it is versus the entire electorate overall. A 30-point advantage for Republicans on border security. They are trusted far more on border security than Democrats are. And, of course, that's because at the top of the ticket, right, the top of the very top in the executive branch, President Trump actually is running a positive net approval rating when it comes to border security.

BOLDUAN: You know, there is a difference on the approach, right, from term one to term two. During the first term, all the talk really was centered around building a border wall, right?

ENTEN: Yes.

BOLDUAN: Where is the conversation around that now?

ENTEN: Yes. OK. When it comes to extending the border wall, it was -- used to be quite unpopular. But now, if you look at the latest data, take a look at here, net support for extending the border wall on the U.S.-Mexico border. Look at this, in term number one, in 2019, the net support, more people opposed it than supported it. Seven points more opposed it than supported it back in 2019. But look at where we were by 2025. Look at that. There was actually net support for a border wall, or at least extending the border wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

So, what we're seeing is, versus term number one, there are more hawkish views in the electorate when it comes to border security, in particular. That's why President Trump is on the positive side of the ledger. That's why Republicans are trusted so much more on border security. And when it comes to extending the border wall, you can see, more people support than oppose it, at least in the latest polling that we have. And that is very different from what we saw in term number one.

BOLDUAN: Got it. It's great to -- a great kind of check in on this as this now is back in the headlines.

ENTEN: Yes.

BOLDUAN: Thanks so much, Harry.

ENTEN: Thank you.

BOLDUAN: Sara.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Thank you so much, Kate.

On Capitol Hill, a billionaire tied to Jeffrey Epstein is on the hot seat today. Members of Congress are expected to question Leon Black. He was a powerful force on Wall Street. His name shows up in the Epstein files at least 300 times. Congress members are hoping to find out about the financial web Epstein wove that funded his sex trafficking operations. Lawmakers want to know about Black's long running association with the late convicted sex offender and payments he made to him. Black, for his part, has said, with the benefit of hindsight, and I'm quoting here, "working with him was a horrible mistake."

[08:35:01]

And he's denied any wrongdoing or knowledge of Epstein's behavior.

Joining me now to discuss, Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi. He sits on the House Oversight Committee.

All right, what questions -- it's good to see you. What questions do you think are crucial for Leon Black to answer after it was found out that Black made about $158 million in payments to Epstein?

REP. RAJA KRISHNAMOORTHI (D-IL): Well, that is at the heart of the questioning actually because even after Leon Black basically knew that Jeffrey Epstein had been convicted of child prostitution, Leon Black basically paid $158 million in payments for supposed tax advice. And that just doesn't pass the smell test.

In addition, there are various lawsuits against Leon Black for sexual abuse. There are all kinds of documents that mention Leon Black in connection with massages. And then finally, Leon Black actually paid $63 million to the Virgin Islands with regard to their investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. And the question is, why?

SIDNER: Those questions, I'm sure will be asked. But the public will not be able to see them. Why is Leon Black's questioning not being made public and being done behind closed doors?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: That's a good question. The Republican majority did not want it to either be a deposition or to be videotaped, despite the fact that, as you know, various witnesses have been videotaped, including the Clintons, including Ghislaine Maxwell and others.

And again, I think that that goes to the heart of the lack of transparency. We don't have all the files yet from the Trump administration, and the majority has not pressed them enough with regard to the 3.5 million pages of documents yet to be released. And basically, the women, then girls, now middle-aged women, the more than thousand plus survivors of the Epstein trafficking ring have yet to receive a single measure of justice and full transparency as to what exactly happened to them.

SIDNER: And they have been demanding it. It has been bipartisan, their demand. They just want to know why he wasn't punished earlier and why this wasn't stopped earlier, really.

I want to change subjects here to the Supreme Court ruling. A couple of them having to do with immigration and migrants.

The six-three ruling overturned decisions by federal judges that had blocked the administration from terminating temporary protected status for Haitians and Syrians. Now, they don't have that status. The Supreme Court says they don't -- they no longer will have that status. What does that mean for these families, and how are you viewing this ruling?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: I thought it was a horrible ruling. And again, it doesn't make any sense to say that, for instance, in the case of Haitians, that they are somehow safe to return to a country that is rocked by instability even today. And on top of that, Donald Trump made very clear his overtly racist intentions in sending them back to Haiti. He called Haiti a shithole country. And he basically said that they eat cats and dogs during the 2024 election, as Justice Kagan pointed out in her dissent.

And so, again, this is a horrible decision. And those families, unfortunately, are going to face the consequences of this decision in terms of not being able -- not being able to stay here, not being able to adjust their status and not being able to work, despite the fact that right now, as you know, we're facing an affordability crisis. And so, sending more workers packing is only going to worsen that as well for the average person.

SIDNER: Look, there was a separate ruling. The court also said that migrants arriving at the border are not entitled to apply for asylum until they set foot on U.S. soil. Something that the Trump administration wanted.

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Right.

SIDNER: What does that mean? Because normally, right, you don't necessarily -- the administration didn't want people to come over, as they said it, illegally, to require or to request asylum. How is this going to change things?

KRISHNAMOORTHI: Well, I think that more people are going to be prevented from being able to, you know, reach the United States to make their asylum claims. And look, I think that our asylum laws probably need to be revised. But let's do it in an orderly fashion.

[08:40:00]

And right now, you know, I think that what's going to happen is that even deserving people who want asylum are not going to be able to get it because of this ruling.

SIDNER: Congressman Raja Krishnamoorthi, will be interesting to hear what you have to say after this hearing with Leon Black. We do appreciate your time this morning.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, this morning, the jury in the trial of the man accused of starting the devastating fires in California's Palisades neighborhood is set to return to the courtroom for further instruction. They told the judge they were deadlocked.

I want to get right to CNN's Nick Watt, who has been covering this trial from the beginning. So, what now, Nick?

NICK WATT, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the word mistrial has already been used, John, in court yesterday. And unless there's some kind of miracle in that jury room, that appears to be where we're going.

Overnight, lawyers from both sides and the judge, frankly, were looking at case law, trying to figure out what to do next and in exactly what order because, as you say, that jury says they're deadlocked. We had notes from them yesterday saying both sides -- we've got people on both sides dead set in their positions. And also, we cannot reach a unanimous verdict on any of the counts. The word "cannot" was underlined in that jury note.

So, the guy on trial, 30-year-old former Uber driver Jonathan Rinderknecht, nobody doubts that he was on the hill the night the fire erupted. His defense team admits that. He had a lighter in the glove box of his car. But this case is built entirely, John, on circumstantial evidence. Nobody actually saw him light the fire. There's no video of him lighting the fire. There's no confession that he lit the fire. So, as his defense attorney said, hey, I could sit here in court and play tic tac toe. The burden of proof is on the government. The government has to prove he did it. And some of those jurors clearly are not buying that. Do not believe that the government went far enough.

Now, the government claims that this guy was angry, he hated the rich, lit this fire as revenge. And remember, the devastation that it caused, 12 dead, over 6,000 structures, many of them homes. But interestingly, we have not seen homeowners who lost property in that fire at this courthouse baying for this guy's blood. A lot of those people are waiting for the civil trials. There have been suits filed against the city, against the state. And a lot of people believe that that is where the real information will come out.

And one woman who lost her home said, I don't want this guy convicted if he's just a patsy. I really want to know the truth. I want to know why the home that I spent 25 years paying off was destroyed and I'm now back in debt.

So, as I say, it's looking like a mistrial. What they'll have to do is ask each individual juror their position and say, really, you really can't do it? And then there'll be an Allen charge. The judge will say, please go back and try. But right now, it's looking like this could go to a mistrial. Then the government has to decide, do they try again?

John.

BERMAN: I got to say, Nick, you've done such a great job from the beginning of this explaining why this is such a complicated case.

WATT: Yes.

BERMAN: And maybe now we see in what appears to be a likely mistrial, that playing out really before our eyes. Nick Watt, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: In a country seemingly more divided than ever, what does patriotism really mean? Comedian and host Craig Ferguson is on a journey to find out.

Here's a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: American patriotism is probably unique amongst many nations. It's an oath to an idea.

CRAIG FERGUSON, HOST, "CRAIG FERGUSON: AMERICAN ON PURPOSE: True. It's not an ethnicity.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nor a royal family.

FERGUSON: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nor a piece of land.

FERGUSON: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nor even a language.

FERGUSON: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's nothing there except the ideals that the nation was founded upon. And, you know, even in your naturalization oath.

FERGUSON: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You said, I'm going to support and protect the Constitution of the United States and the laws therein.

FERGUSON: Yes. And defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Foreign and domestic.

FERGUSON: Because patriotism, on a surface level, which is like, this is awesome, but patriotism could be, I really don't like the government and I really don't like what they're saying and I really don't like the way things are going, but I love this country and so I'm going to speak up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.

FERGUSON: Right.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Which sounds like, on face, the most un-American thing you could say, but it's that most pro-American. FERGUSON: Right, it's pro-America because you're saying I participate in the giant (EXPLETIVE DELETED) off experiment that is the United States of America.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: A new episode of "Craig Ferguson: American on Purpose" airs Saturday at 9 p.m. Eastern on CNN and the next day on the CNN app.

The chances you, me or anyone will win the lottery are basically zero, but that is unless you are the man who somehow was able to win the same lottery twice.

A diamond-studded Lego replica of the FIFA World Cup statue. The ooh- la-la details coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:49:24]

BERMAN: All right, this morning, two giants in A.I., Anthropic and OpenAI, are joining a $500 million jobs push to tackle problems that their technology could create.

Joining us this morning, Madison Mills, senior A.I. reporter for "Axios," who has been writing about this.

So, Madison, explain to me exactly what these rivals are getting together to do and why.

MADISON MILLS, SENIOR A.I. REPORTER, "AXIOS": Well, they're all in agreement that to a degree their technology could displace workers and they're now putting money behind that belief as part of this effort, led by former Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.

[08:50:02]

And they're putting cash towards this problem about where the labor market could go in an A.I. driven economy. OpenAI, Amazon, Anthropic, obviously, IBM, several of these tech giants, Microsoft, all putting money towards this, which is obviously interesting because I spend most of my time as an A.I. reporter talking about how these companies are hoarding secrets and money from one another in this massive competition to be the best, the single best A.I. lab in the world. So, it's an interesting dichotomy there.

BERMAN: Yes. So, I think there will be people who see this and say, OK, I'm skeptical. These companies that are taking away my job are all of a sudden claiming they're trying to help me get a new one? How much reason is there to be skeptical?

MILLS: Of course there's reason to be skeptical, right? This is part of what we've been covering so much, is this idea that the A.I. CEOs are the ones who are being the most vocal about how this technology could displace workers. That's not necessarily what you might expect. I've done a lot of reporting on how venture capital, private investors

have been sort of lured by that idea, that the technology could replace workers, because then these companies massive, historic valuations start to make sense. They, in some cases, only make sense if you believe that they could displace a significant portion of the workforce. So, that's sort of a pitch from the A.I. labs that has landed very well with private market investors, not as well with the broader sentiment of humanity, as we've seen in these commencement speeches over the last couple of months.

So, that's also something that has been kind of a pitch that has landed very differently in different parts of the country.

BERMAN: So, the other thing, Madison, is I'm old enough to remember, literally, things like, you know, NAFTA and the internet age, all these promises of retraining during times of systemic change. And the promises don't always match the reality of what's fulfilled here. So, how can they make sure that, you know, this time it will work?

MILLS: There's no way to make sure that it will work. And I think this is part of the challenge. I've covered so many of these multimillion dollar efforts to protect workers or reskill, upskill workers. And the problem is that, you know, the best A.I. researchers in the world that I talk to every single day can't even keep up with this technology because it is accelerating so quickly.

And to your point, we've seen this movie before. It's very difficult to reskill workers. And so, when you've got a technology that is changing incredibly quickly, meeting that with a system that we've seen historically has not necessarily prepped workers for digital transitions, that's a challenge. This particular program that I covered, Raise Us, is trying to meet the moment by sort of public- private partnerships, making sure there are those A.I. experts in the room to help inform how governments and employers react to this technology. But it's going to be a very difficult road for them. And I don't think that anybody has the answer right now.

BERMAN: Yes. Yes, look, just because it hasn't always worked doesn't mean it isn't worth the effort either.

Madison Mills, thank you so much for sharing your reporting on this. Really appreciate it.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: So, you can file this one under the category of busted. In Florida, police arrested a 46-year-old man after he allegedly tried to conduct a -- conduct a fake traffic stop. How did they find out? Because the vehicle that he flashed his red and blue emergency lights at actually turned out to be the vehicle of an undercover sheriff's deputy. Real deputies quickly stepped in, arresting and charging the man then of impersonating an officer. Pretty remarkable.

So, a Chicago area man has now hit the ultimate stroke of luck, winning the same lottery game twice, 15 years apart. The first time he won $45,000, and he's now hit a -- hit it a bit bigger, winning a $1.3 million jackpot. So, what is he going to do with all of this? He says the plan is now simple, a new home and a more secure retirement for him and his wife.

So, take a look-i-lu (ph) at this. A jeweler in Dubai gave a Lego replica that his son built of the World Cup trophy a luxury upgrade, covering the trophy in 18 karat gold and 900 diamonds. Now the Lego trophy is worth more than $81,000. The jeweler, though, has no plans to sell it. He actually hopes to eventually donate it to the Dubai Museum of Future to help inspire kids. Very cool.

SIDNER: It's inspiring me with all that bling on it. That's nice.

BOLDUAN: It's inspiring me to somehow access more diamonds.

SIDNER: Yes. How can we do that?

BOLDUAN: I'm sorry, and do more Legos.

SIDNER: Yes. All of it.

BOLDUAN: Like -- yes.

SIDNER: That's cool, though. It looks good.

All right, thank you so much, Kate.

SIDNER: The man accused of orchestrating the drive by shooting that killed rap superstar Tupac Shakur was back in court this week ahead of his murder trial.

[08:55:04]

Duane Davis, known as Keefe D, is the only person ever charged in connection with the 1996 killing of Tupac. Yes, it was that many years ago. His attorneys are now trying to keep police interviews and a tell-all book from being used as evidence in court. That book written by Keefe D makes some admissions.

Well, I spoke with Tupac's brother, Mopreme Shakur, about his brother's legacy and the murder charge. He's also the author of a new book, "This Thug's Life." Here is part of that conversation.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SIDNER: Let's talk about the name of this book first, because this is going to remind everybody of that famous 1994 album, "Thug's Life." What is it about the life that you and Tupac had that have you -- that has you talking about thugs? Because when people think about thugs, they think about strong armed robbery.

MOPREME SHAKUR, TUPAC SHAKUR'S BROTHER: Yes. Yes.

SIDNER: You're talking about something else here.

SHAKUR: We were talking about people from our communities, the black and brown from our communities. Those that might be partaking in the underground economy, but they're still ours. They're still our family. They're still our people. You know, and we use the music as a way to reach him, you know. Pac wanted to reach, you know, he's sticking in a community organizing way. You know, we had to have a tool to be able to reach our people.

SIDNER: I do want to ask you what it was like growing up with him, and you were there, not just for when he was a small boy, but you were there when he started his music career. You were right beside him. Give me some -- give me a taste of what that was like.

SHAKUR: It was a charmed time in our lives. My first record was "Feels Good." A lot of people know that record. It's a -- it's a -- it's a classic to this day. People love that record, "Feels Good" with "Tony! Toni! Tone!" Shout out to "Tony! Toni!, Tone!" and the bay area.

SIDNER: Has done it again.

SHAKUR: Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am. And then, you know, Pac was super amped up. He was inspired. He was happy for me. He linked up with Digital Underground, rest in peace, Shock G, Digital Underground, and -- which led to more opportunities.

I was cool because "Feels Good" was a number one hit. So, my first record was a number one hit. Then baby bro (ph) come along to do his thing. I wanted him to have a number one hit. So, I --

SIDNER: And boy did he.

SHAKUR: You know, so we just worked hard. We worked hard. We didn't know much about the business, but we had a lot of talent. And it was, you know, magnifying that.

SIDNER: Look, most people know Tupac from the music. They don't know him know him from who he was. Who was he? When he wasn't performing, when he wasn't in front of a crowd, when he was at home or standing next to you talking, or you guys were in the studio, who was he?

SHAKUR: He was -- Pac was a lot of fun. Those that are still around who got to experience being around him, Pac was a lot of fun. He had a lot of energy. It was like his governor on his -- his governor was set high. You know, come on, man, let's go. Let's do this. You know what I mean?

And I -- he would mess with me a lot because we'd be in meetings or at the studio. I'd fall asleep. And he'd come over and, you know, and heat up a coin and put it on my head. You know, brother stuff.

SIDNER: Yes.

SHAKUR: So, I miss him a great deal. But we still carrying it on, you know what I mean?

SIDNER: Yes. That's what we call brotherly love right there.

SHAKUR: Yes, ma'am.

SIDNER: The teasing, the taunting. It's all a part of it.

SHAKUR: Yes, ma'am.

SIDNER: I do want to end with the most recent thing that has happened in the case in the murder of your brother. Duane Keefe D is the person that was arrested and charged in connection with his shooting death that happened in Vegas. Do you think that Tupac's murder has finally been solved?

SHAKUR: Almost.

SIDNER: Why do you say that?

SHAKUR: We almost there.

SIDNER: Why do you say that?

SHAKUR: Well, the guy said he did it. He said he did it. He wrote he did it.

SIDNER: Right.

SHAKUR: Or was part of what happened there. And now he's saying he didn't. So, we will see in court. I don't know.

SIDNER: Do you think you'll go to the case? Will you go and watch it in person or no, that would be too hard?

SHAKUR: Some of it. Some of it. Yes. Pac deserves -- deserved justice. You know, he was done dirty. He was unarmed. So, you know, we in God's hands right now. We in God's hands right now because not for his arrest 30 years later we wouldn't have no chance at justice. So, keep on praying.

SIDNER: You're waiting and you're praying.

SHAKUR: Yes, ma'am.

SIDNER: The book is really -- it's in depth.

[08:59:58]

It has all kinds of pictures of y'all. And it is really interesting. It does give us a real look into, not just your life, but the family's life and the life of Tupac Shakur, which so many people revere.