Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Warning Signs For GOP As Early Voting Begins In Some States; Clancy Holdout Juror Issues Statement: "I Didn't Have Any Doubts"; Diana's Brother: Charles Was "Giddily Elated" The Night She Died. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired September 18, 2026 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:30:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Happening now, it's on. Early in- person voting starts today in multiple states. It is, as of now, the midterms just as new cracks emerge within the Republican Party.

In one commercial Florida Republican Congresswoman Maria Elvira Salazar stares right into the camera with the White House behind her -- this is a Republican -- and slams the president's immigration crackdown.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR (R-FL), CONGRESSIONAL AD: Mr. President, some of your immigration enforcement efforts have gone too far. In July, 50 percent of the 50,000 people that were detained had no criminal record. Be careful what your advisers are telling you about immigration policies. The same Hispanics who helped you get to the White House in 2024 feel betrayed today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: All right. With us now, CNN political analyst on Zolan Kanno- Youngs of The New York Times and Margaret Talev, senior contributor to Axios.

And Zolan, I have to say, I first saw this ad yesterday morning. My reaction then is the same as it is right now, which is, wow, we just haven't seen anything like this with Republicans who are generally loyal to President Trump.

ZOLAN KANNO-YOUNGS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Yeah, this ad is pretty remarkable for a number of reasons.

One, the reason you just stated, it's just increasingly a rarity to see Republicans bucking with President Trump and, you know, pushing back on his agenda, particularly in this sort of blunt way where she's staring straight into the camera. There's no way to mince words here --

BERMAN: Yeah. KANNO-YOUNGS: -- or have any sort of mixed message.

And then second, on this issue, it really does highlight a point of anxiety for Republicans. Remember, this was immigration. The issue of immigration was a weak spot for Democrats. It's something that President Trump and many of those around him thought was a point of strength during the last campaign -- presidential campaign.

But at that time, President Trump was talking -- but at that time during the campaign, you know, much of his rhetoric was around deterring illegal immigration. And at times, surveys showed that even the gains he was making with Hispanic voters, they were saying, yes, we support some of these policies when it comes to recent arrivals and those who have illegal status. But since he's come into office, you have seen an agenda that has wrapped in not just those without status, but those with status.

Even in the Congresswoman's state, think about how TPS was recently eliminated for Haitians as well, and you're going to start to see deportations there. The recent DHS IG report when it comes to Alligator Alcatraz as well and the conditions in that facility.

The reality of what we've seen on the ground has gone much further than what polls showed voters were supporting during the campaign and it's resulted in this now point of vulnerability for something that used to be a strength for President Trump.

BERMAN: That's exactly right. Immigration is an area where Republicans want to point to it as success and strength in doing what they promise. Yet, here's a Republican member of Congress saying, basically, it's a weakness.

And Margaret, it's interesting. Our Jeff Zeleny and David Wright did a pretty interesting analysis or got some -- got some insight into Republican ad spending and just $1 million worth of Republican ads from September 1 to September 15 mentioned Donald Trump by name. One million out of 160 million. That's less than one percent. So they're not really running --

MARGARET TALEV, SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR, AXIOS, DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR DEMOCRACY, JOURNALISM AND CITIZENSHIP, SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY (via Webex by Cisco): Yeah.

BERMAN: -- on Donald Trump.

I am curious if you think Maria Salazar is going to be the only one -- the only one who breaks like this on camera from the president this election cycle.

TALEV: It's a really interesting question, John. We saw the president in Dallas at that midterm convention just a few days ago saying I'm not on the ballot, but I am on the ballot, or this is about me. The ad spending is not reflecting that message. Well, Democrats want to reflect that message. Republicans are not.

What makes Salazar's district potentially special is that this is Miami-Dade County. Once upon a time when you and I started covering politics, this was a Democratic area, but it has become increasingly Republican, and it's because of that Cuban-American vote in her district that has really pushed a more conservative track. That district is about three-fourths Hispanic, which is really significant. And the president carried that county by about 15 points the last time around in the election.

Now Salazar's race is tied. That tells you why she is taking this extreme step. Will others follow? I don't know -- we'll certainly be watching. But at a minimum, that ad strategy for many Republicans in races that are at all competitive are keep President Trump out of the language of the ad.

BERMAN: So I woke up and one of the things I do when I wake up first, of course, I read Axios. I read the New York Times. I also read The Wall Street Journal, right? So I opened The Wall Street Journal on my phone and the top headline in the journal is "Weeks Before the Midterms, Almost Everything Is Getting More Expensive." That's the headline. Then it says, "Everything from buying a house to filling up your gas tank now costs more than even a week ago -- putting affordability back in the spotlight just before the midterm elections." I mean, it's been in the spotlight. I don't know if it's back in the spotlight.

But that's a -- that's a doozy of a headline, Margaret, in the Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal, you know, six weeks before the election.

KANNO-YOUNGS: Yeah.

TALEV: Yeah, and the lead quote is from an economist. It's quite a memorable quote. It says the average American right now is asking themselves what did I do to deserve this.

The reason that the Journal cites as some of the driving reasons for this trend where everything feels worse and is, you know, data-wise getting worse are three big data points: the Iran War, tariffs, and data centers. Two of these are President Trump's policies, and the third is one which the Republican Party is really struggling to deal with while the president is saying, let's go full steam ahead on AI. So, yes, a stunning headline that reflects a mood.

We're seeing Kevin Warsh now saying, look, the fact that things aren't worse tells you how resilient the American economy is. But for many Americans, things are worse, like every time you fill up the gas tank, every time you go to the grocery store, and you pay the rent. So these are headwinds that Republicans standing for re-election are going to be bearing probably the brunt of in most districts.

BERMAN: Margaret Talev, Zolan Kanno-Youngs, it's great to see both of you this morning. Thanks so much -- Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: So for the first time, we are hearing from the lone holdout juror whose vote forced -- whose vote forced Lindsay Clancy's murder trial to end in a mistrial. In a statement to News Nation, that juror said that he had "No doubts

that Lindsay Clancy was fully aware of what she was doing when she killed her three young children." Also adding in the statement, "Based on all the physical evidence, key witnesses and what the prosecution presents, I thought it was enough proof that Clancy knew exactly what she was doing and planned."

That contradicts accounts somewhat from some of the other jurors you'll remember who have spoken out publicly and claimed that this juror acknowledged having reasonable doubt during their discussions.

Joining me now, CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson for more on this. It's good to see Joey.

So this juror says that he had no doubts, but I want to remind everyone what the other jurors who came out of this who spoke out after this mistrial, what they said and how they characterize what went down. Let me play this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RONI CARLSON, JURY FOREPERSON IN LINDSAY CLANCY TRIAL: He had reasonable doubt. He admitted he had reasonable doubt after we watched that video of the interview. There were three forms I had to fill out, and I started filling them out. I wrote my signature on each one and then he said, "But I'm still not gonna say that she's not guilty by reason of insanity."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Put these things together. Is this significant now?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: So Kate, it's very significant and I will say -- good morning -- that these things are hard. Jury deliberations are significantly difficult. You have competing views in the jury room and just because you're the odd man out, just because you have an alternative view, just because your worldview might be different such that you evaluate the evidence differently doesn't mean that there's a legal issue.

Now to your question, does this change things? It could and here's how. You know the defense is certainly moving to moot this whole thing. Why and how? What they're arguing -- the defense is arguing is that there was no "manifest necessity to declare a mistrial." What does that mean? What it means is that the judge didn't have a compelling basis to declare a mistrial.

Now the fact is, is that it appears the judge did have a compelling basis. Why? Because you had one juror that said she's guilty. You had one juror that said, you know what, I heard the facts -- the evidence like you -- based on the physical evidence, based on all I heard and all I saw I believe she was guilty. That is my point of view. You, 11, say what you say. I'm going to say what I say.

And that's important because, Kate, when it comes down to it, this is not misconduct. This is not someone who was not negotiating or deliberating in good faith. This is someone who differed from you, totally permissible under the law.

BOLDUAN: So a retrial for Lindsay Clancy is still possible. That's -- I mean, when you look forward --

JACKSON: Yes.

BOLDUAN: -- does the look-- you're saying the looking back actually matters here?

JACKSON: So I think that there's a couple of things at play.

The first thing is that the prosecutor has to make an assessment here, and I think there's a lot to be learned from this jury. If you listen to the jurors, some who have spoken, they believed that something went amiss here with Miss Clancy.

BOLDUAN: Um-hum.

JACKSON: That she had these three beautiful children. She had this wonderful life and then bam, she snaps and does something that was so out of character. If you hear the other jurors, they say no one had a bad thing to say about her. So what can we base this on says the jurors who said she was insane. And that is, we can base it on the fact that she was not treated appropriately in terms of her mental health maladies, that she was overmedicated, etc.

[07:40:10]

Why is that significant? Because if you're the prosecutor -- yes, when you look to retry, you're looking at the severity of the case.

BOLDUAN: Um-hum.

JACKSON: The nature of and circumstances surrounding the case. Three kids dead, five, three, eight months old -- wow.

But you're also looking at something very critical, and this is what every prosecutor looks at every day. Can I prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt?

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

JACKSON: Exactly.

And then the final thing is, is it in the interest of justice?

So there's a lot to be learned from those jurors. One juror says, hey, you're guilty; 11 say not. So this could affect not only whether there's a retrial, but whether there are plea negotiations such that a trial does not happen.

BOLDUAN: Fascinating.

JACKSON: Yeah. BOLDUAN: Yeah. And again, just so horrible all around.

JACKSON: Absolutely.

BOLDUAN: Thank you so much, Joey.

JACKSON: Thank you, Kate -- John.

BERMAN: All right. New this morning, we're talking about rising gas prices hitting so many Americans, mortgage rates that are soaring. Well, so the average American is struggling. A new report finds that the country's CEOs, what's happening to them? They're getting richer and the pay ratio compared to the average employee it's pretty staggering.

Let's get right to CNN's Matt Egan for the latest on this. What are you seeing?

MATT EGAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, John CEO pay, it's still on fire. CEOs at top companies last year -- they hauled in just under $28 million in salary, stock awards, and stock options. That's up 14 percent from the year before. Now this reflects the fact that last year was a good year for the stock market and we know that CEO pay tends to be aligned to the stock market.

But what's really eye-popping here is the gap -- the gap between how much CEOs are making and how much workers are making, right?

So this is coming from EPI, the progressive think tank, and they found that CEOs last year made 325 times more than the typical worker. Yes, 325 times.

Now what's also notable here is that EPI -- they excluded Elon Musk's trillion-dollar Tesla pay package because a) it hasn't been paid out yet, and b) they say it may never get paid out. But if it were included here this number would be even higher.

Now what's notable is that it wasn't always this way. When you look back in history, back in 1965, all the left side of this chart here, CEOs made about 21 times more than the workers. But look at how this has exploded over the years, especially in the 1990s. Last year, one of the biggest gaps on record, although it was even higher about 10-20 years ago.

Now the problem for workers is that CEOs have just completely left them in the dust when it comes to pay. Workers, since 1978, according to EPI -- workers are making about 28 percent more now than they did back then. But look at this -- CEO's 1,300 percent more.

Now defenders of CEO pay would say, look, these companies, they're doing really well. In some cases, they're making billions of dollars a quarter. Some of them are worth trillions of dollars. And so why shouldn't the captains of industry join in here? Of course, critics of CEO pay would say that it's only happening because in some cases CEOs have stacked these boards with friends and allies who are green- lighting excessive pay. Some people are calling for reform here. And John, look, it's easy to see how this could become more of an

issue on the campaign trail this fall because it really highlights the affordability and the inequality problems at the heart of this economy.

BERMAN: CEOs -- it doesn't seem like they're suffering --

EGAN: No, not at all.

BERMAN: -- right now very much.

Matt Egan, good to see you.

EGAN: Thanks, John.

BERMAN: Appreciate it -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: So this morning, Princess Diana's brother is making another explosive claim about the royal family. He now says that King Charles "sounded giddily elated like a lottery winner" on the night that Princess Diana died. This all comes from and has to do with the new book that Charles Spencer is selling about his sister, and his claims have sparked a rare response from Buckingham Palace.

CNN's Salma Abdelaziz is in London following this. Salma, what are you hearing about this one now?

SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kate, I mean, these are some very shocking and gut-wrenching claims to read. And as you mentioned, this is part of a book that is going to be released next week by Princess Diana's younger brother. In this book, he is recalling the hours and days immediately after her shocking and tragic death. He describes, as you mentioned there, the now King Charles as "giddily elated."

And he goes on to recall a conversation that he says took place between him and the now King Charles over the presence of the boys -- of William and Harry -- at the funeral procession for their mother. And I know we have that image to show you. It is absolutely iconic because it is so heartbreaking. The boys, just 15 and 12 years old, behind the coffin of their mother. And he says in the book that he was arguing that is not what Princess Diana would have wanted for her children. She would not have wanted their presence there so shortly after her death.

[07:45:05]

And he goes on to say that prompted Prince Charles to unleash a stream of anger at him. And I'm going to read directly this quote here. "Prince Charles continued his stream of anger without me interrupting. Then he stopped. I assume the pause signaled an effort to bring himself under control, but then he unleashed down the phone what I have always taken to be his pent-up contempt for Diana and his horror that the world was so bowled over by her death. Rest assured, we will forget her soon enough." And again, this is a direct quote.

Now, we have a response from Buckingham Palace, but before I read that to you, Kate, I have to point out just how rare it is for the palace to directly address something like this, but it shows you just how sensitive and controversial it is. I'm going to read you again. This is the statement from Buckingham Palace yesterday.

"While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful of the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment, and color memory in ways others do not recognize even many years after such a loss." You do not have an explicit denial there. You have an implicit denial there.

But there's something else I want to point out here. This seems to be a wide-ranging denial, questioning the timeline. It's been 30 years since Princess Diana's death. Questioning the ability of Charles Spencer to remember in all of this, of course, because there is more to come, Kate. That book is releasing next week, and it is sure to bring more allegations with it.

BOLDUAN: Salma, thank you very much for that. Clearly, what is expected to be more to come.

A terrifying collision at first base sends a Mets player to the hospital. How he is doing this morning. Oh, my goodness.

And there's also new details about what caused a construction crane to suddenly collapse, falling on top of two homes.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:51:30}

BOLDUAN: So it is being called one of the most interesting races in the nation, and it may not be on your radar much at all -- the battle to become Indiana's next Secretary of State.

So a year ago, Larry Sabato, one of America's preeminent election forecasters, had predicted that this race would likely go in Republicans' favor. After all, Indiana has not had a Democratic Secretary of State since '94. But in a new update just out from Sabado's crystal ball, things have shifted. Now, he says that this race has turned into a three-way contest between the Republican, the Democrat, Beau Bayh, you see there in the middle, and the Republican- turned-Independent Greg Ballard.

Here's Sabado's take on this shift. He writes about it this. "With little in the way of competitive races in Indiana this year, the Secretary of State race will get the lion's share of the attention and we have no clue who will win. This is a pure toss up."

With me now is the Democratic candidate in that race, Beau Bayh. Thanks for being here. I appreciate the time.

So what do you think is driving this shift in this race?

BEAU BAYH, (D) INDIANA SECRETARY OF STATE NOMINEE (via Webex by Cisco): Yeah. Well, first of all, thank you for having me on, Kate.

It's not surprising that Larry Sabato has changed this race rating. Every day I'm hearing on the ground that Hoosiers are sick and tired of the corruption and the insider dealing in this secretary of state's office and in our state government broadly. Our secretary of state spent $92,000 of taxpayer money on a luxury SUV for himself. He's hired his family members and given out no big contracts to his largest donors.

And so my opponent has been unable to call out some of this corruption. I have been calling it out for the past 10 months and I'm going to continue to do that until Election Day. Hoosiers are ready for something better in this very important office.

BOLDUAN: There has definitely been -- and probably people not in Indiana have not been following it, but there's definitely been quite a bit of controversy around the current sitting Secretary of State, which is why Republicans did not nominate him to be the nominee this time around.

But looking at this now, it has been a long time since a Democrat, well, has run the state or even helped run the state. And a lot is being made about how much President Trump is on the ballot in races across the country.

If you would win, do you think it has to do with Donald Trump? Do you think it is -- would you call it a rejection of Donald Trump policies if you would win?

BAYH: Well look, Hoosiers are fed up with high costs. The president's tariff regime has raised costs for people all over my state. It's the largest -- single largest tax increase in the history of our nation. The price of diesel and fertilizer is through the roof, nearly $7.00 a gallon in my state. We come from an agricultural state for farmers, making it really hard just to get by.

The rural health care system is being stressed beyond belief. I can't tell you how many times I'll be somewhere in our state, and I'll hear about a hospital forced to close its doors. Our public school system is not getting the support that it needs.

So Hoosiers are ready for something different. They're ready for better leadership, lower costs, and we're looking forward to delivering that here in November for them.

BOLDUAN: One of the important things that we all well know that a secretary of state is -- a secretary of state is in charge of is running the elections. And so with all that is being made and discussed around mail-in balloting in the country right now, the Indiana AG was one of the attorney generals at the -- the attorneys general that supported the president's move to overhaul the mail-in ballot rules. The Supreme Court we know stopped that for 2026.

What does that mean for 2028, do you think, and what are you going to do about it?

BAYH: Yeah, a few things here.

[07:55:00]

So first of all, the president -- it seems odd that he's calling out our mail-in voting system, seeming to be implying that there's some fraud going on given the fact that he votes himself by mail.

You know, I was in the United States Marine Corps. When my brothers and sisters and I were serving in our nation's military overseas we didn't have another option but to vote by mail and there's been no evidence of widespread fraud in that system. So it's important that secretaries of state throughout our country of both political parties stand up for Americans' right to participate by mail.

The Constitution is very clear. Article one of our Constitution delegates authority to the states to run our elections. Our framers were very smart in how they did that. It's much harder to corrupt 50 individual systems operating individually than it is to corrupt one federal government. So it's important that we stand up for the state's ability to run their own elections.

Our state does a very good job of that in a bipartisan fashion. Ninety-two county clerks working together across county lines -- or across party lines, rather, to deliver results and make sure that we have free and fair elections here in Indiana.

BOLDUAN: Beau, while I have you, I want to ask you about the Democratic Party's -- Democratic Party politics writ large. I mean, you've been around politics a long time. Your father -- well, your father well-known -- well, first Secretary of State, then governor, then senator. Your grandfather as well.

So would -- I'm curious what your view is from a Democrat in a Republican state in Indiana on the debate conversation and tension within the Democratic Party now and its direction.

The latest on this is you have this left wing streamer and activist Hasan Piker, who's back in the headlines right now, telling Axios in a new interview quite a bit, making comments that he believes that the United States commits pound for pound more terrorism than al-Qaida, and also saying that the Middle East would be more stable if Iran had nuclear weapons.

Is the Democratic Party big tent enough in your view to be a party for both you and someone with those views?

BAYH: No, those views are reprehensible. That's unacceptable. We live in the greatest country in the history of the world, United States of America. Sure, can we do better in some areas? Of course we can, but it's important that we all embrace what makes our country so great and that our love of our country actually spurs us to have constructive conversations about how to improve it.

And in my state, that means lowering costs for Hoosiers, improving people's material lives, better schools, better roads and bridges, safer streets, supporting our police and firefighters. The Democratic Party needs to focus on those issues and not go down these paths of division and focusing on issues that don't matter for 100 percent of people 100 percent of the time. We have to be very strong in calling out hateful rhetoric like that. It has no place in my party.

BOLDUAN: Beau Bayh, candidate for Secretary of State of Indiana. Thank you very much for your time this morning -- John.

BERMAN: All right. Firefighters in Italy rescued a lost shepherd dog from a cliff's edge there. You can see the wind blowing on that poor thing. The dog had wandered away from its owner and was stranded for two days. There was no ground access, at least not for humans, hence the need for the helicopter. We are told the dog is doing fine.

More important canine news. In San Diego, proof that Golden Retrievers are nice, but maybe too nice. So this dog Nash was home when this intruder broke in. His owners were watching this all on their Ring camera while they were on a flight. Nash did not attack or bark as the intruder there got something to eat. Instead, Nash brought the guy toys, hoping to play. That's how the dog handled watching the house.

His owners did contact police when they landed. Nash tried to play with the police, too, when they arrived. Officers arrested the suspect as he tried to escape out of the back of the house. Nash, you seem very nice.

All right. New York's only pro football team is pretty good. So is Josh Allen.

CNN's Andy Sholes was up watching the game. I saw the beginning and I had to go to sleep ultimately. But man, Josh Allen's good.

ANDY SCHOLES, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: Well, yeah. The beginning was the whole story, John. I mean, if you're playing Josh Allen and Fantasy Football this week, like I am, good luck. Just another monster game from him. And it was a fun night in Buffalo as they opened up their brand new Highmark Stadium. The new digs right next to the old stadium cost $2.1 billion.

And the Bills offense putting on a show on opening night. First quarter Allen -- he's going to read the blitz perfectly here and find Joshua Palmer wide open -- a 43-yard touchdown. So that made it 14 to nothing.

Then in the second quarter, Allen was still firing on all cylinders. A strike over the middle here to Dalton Kincaid. That made it 27-7.

Allen finished with three passing touchdowns, two more rushing. He now has 10 career games with at least two passing and rushing TD's. No other player has more than four.

The Bills would win big 41-31 to open Highmark Stadium.

All right. Elsewhere in New York, the Mets were hosting the Phillies, and we had just a terrifying moment in the sixth inning of this game. On this slow grounder right here, first baseman Jared Young is going to try to go make a play, but he gets kicked right in the head by pitcher Nolan McClain's knee.