Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

TV Pool will Not Cover President Today at the U.N.; Rep. Johnny Olszewski (D-MD) is Interviewed about the White House Press Ban; Venezuelan DoorDash Driver Shot by ICE in Austin; Patrick Clancy Opens up about His Loss. Aired 9-9:30a ET

Aired September 21, 2026 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Leaders are also meeting, while Congress may or may not be doing anything as well?

LISA EADICICCO, CNN BUSINESS TECH EDITOR: Exactly. There's a lot going on here. They're calling for a trial by jury. So, again, we don't really know where this is going to go or what exactly is going to happen just yet, but it is another wrinkle in this kind of ongoing concern around the future of A.I. development and who's in control of it and how fast it could go.

BERMAN: Meanwhile, the House of Representatives gone until after the election.

Lisa Eadicicco, thank you so much for sharing this new reporting.

A brand-new hour of CNN NEWS CENTRAL starts right now.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: This morning, a brand-new development in the First Amendment fight. CNN, MS Now and "Politico" hitting back with a new lawsuit after the president banned them from the White House. Now it's going to affect the way he's covered at the U.N. General Assembly.

And Donald Trump is responding this morning. New reporting on who showed him media clips just before he barred reporters from the White House.

Plus, protests and a family looking for answers in Texas after an ICE agent shot and wounded a 28-year-old DoorDash delivery driver from Venezuela.

Also, two people rescued after their boat capsized and floated away in Florida.

Kate is out today. I'm Sara Sidner with John Berman. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

BERMAN: All right, the breaking news this morning, this is now a court case. CNN has joined other organizations in filing a lawsuit against the administration. This is after the White House banned CNN, MS Now and "Politico" from the White House. Issuing a joint statement, all three released a statement saying, quote, "this morning, we notified the government that we are filing a lawsuit today to protect our First Amendment rights and defend the principle that the government does not decide what the press reports or publishes. Without notice or process, the White House revoked our journalists' credentials because it objected to our reporting. Left unchallenged, this threatens press freedom and the public's righto independent journalism free from government interference."

After that, the president posted this. "The White House is not instituting an assault on the free press, something which I cherish," he says, "it is instituting an assault on the fake news," which he calls a "threat to our national security that must be stopped now."

OK, in addition to that, the White House removed CNN from today's TV pool, breaking with decades of precedent.

And now the breaking news, this just in, the pool released a statement saying, this is the White House pool, "this is to advise that, effective today, the TV pool will not be covering events designated as pool coverage of the president. This follows the White House's position preventing CNN from fulfilling its assigned pool duties. There will be no replacement pool put in place."

OK, with us now, CNN chief White House correspondent, anchor of "THE SOURCE," Kaitlan Collins.

No one better to explain what this now means, because we've never seen anything like this before.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: No. And that statement there is really important, John, because it means that when the president does anything today, there will be no TV camera with the president that is broadcasting and sharing this footage of what a president does on a daily basis. It's 9 a.m., which means typically at this time, when CNN is the assigned pool, all of our reporters and photojournalists would be at the White House at this time, prepared to cover whatever it is the president does that day. Every day it rotates. It's a different outlet.

And so, you know, when I'm in the Oval Office asking the president questions, I'm not just there on behalf of CNN. I'm there on behalf of the entire TV pool. We're asking questions on behalf of Fox, CBS, ABC, NBC, and then that footage that our photojournalist shoots in the Oval Office of whatever the president is saying is distributed and shared with everyone. It's a time and a resource and space issue basically. That's why the pool was created and has existed in some form since the FDR era. And so that's why this matters so much today, because it's not just about CNN, it's about all these other outlets and how they have access to the White House and how we cover the president.

And so, because of this ban that the president announced on Friday, instead of us showing up at the White House on our assigned time today to travel with the president to New York, we're blocked from accessing the White House. You cannot scan your badge. You cannot enter the White House. We cannot go to Joint Base Andrews to board Air Force One with the president, as I was scheduled to do, to fly with him here to New York today. We are effectively blocked from doing all of that.

And because of that, and with this new statement from the TV pool, the Correspondents' Association, that means there will be no camera there on behalf of that group that serves as the TV pool covering the president.

And it's a major moment in White House coverage and the presidency where he is not going to have access to that with him in this moment. And, obviously, has major implications for the free press.

[09:05:01]

BERMAN: And when we're talking about the press pool, this means -- CNN, MS Now and "Politico" were singled out, but this means that NBC, and CBS, and ABC, and Fox News are, in a way, standing by CNN, which was pushed out of the pool.

COLLINS: Yes, because, alternatively, the White House could say, well, actually, we're not going to let CNN today. Another outlet could come in and bring their cameras and their reporters and their technicians. But instead, the pool is banding together in solidarity and saying, actually, no, that's not going to happen because the president is saying that these certain outlets can't come in the Oval Office because he doesn't like their coverage. I mean he himself called it a free speech ban on Friday.

BERMAN: All right, Kaitlan, I understand you've got some new reporting also this morning on the role that Natalie Harp played here in the timeline.

COLLINS: Well, this has been one of the biggest questions that I've asked and that I've been asked since Friday, which is, why is the president making this decision now? Why is he banning these outlets now? Because, obviously, as you know, John, this is a president who has complained for decades about negative coverage and coverage he doesn't like, long before he entered political office. But last week we're told that Natalie Harp, who was one of the president's closest aides, often traveling with him on Air Force One, often in the background in the Oval Office in these moments, she was showing him a graphic of negative coverage from "Politico" of the president and of his administration. And I'm told that it infuriated him.

And my colleague, Kevin Liptak and I are both hearing, that is, in part, what drove the president's decision to make this move on Friday. It was because he saw that and then he also watched clips of television coverage that did not show him in a favorable light to which he was seeking, obviously. So, that is why he ultimately made this move on Friday.

He's actually talked about this before. He's wanted to ban outlets from the Oval Office before because of the coverage or the questions that he doesn't like. And now he's taking this move here by instituting this.

And it actually caught a lot of people in the White House off guard, John. I mean I asked people this weekend, and a lot of them said they weren't really sure. The only thing they could point to was the president being shown that negative coverage by Natalie Harp last week. And so that drove this decision. A lot of people weren't aware of it. Susie wiles, the chief of staff, actually wasn't even in the West Wing on Friday when this decision came down. And so, it's something he's thought about before and now is carrying out. And, obviously, as you saw on Twitter and Truth Social this morning is saying that it's not a speech ban, but he's linking it explicitly to coverage that he does not like.

BERMAN: He saw something he didn't like Natalie Harp showed him.

All right, Kaitlan Collins, thank you very much for this update. We will sure be seeing you over the course of the day. And don't miss "THE SOURCE" at 9:00 tonight.

With us now, CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter.

So, Brian, what's your read on all this? And the pool sort of stepping in here and saying, OK, no CNN, no dice.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: TV networks are standing with CNN because they know they might be next. They could be the next to be banned. And as you and Kaitlan just pointed out, this includes Fox News. The five major networks that make up the TV pool, and have for decades, are NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN and Fox News. And I've heard from a lot of viewers wondering what's going to happen now that CNN has been kicked out. Will the other networks stand in solidarity, or will they just go on their own and keep doing their thing? Well, now we have the answer thanks to this email. And we can put the full email on the screen.

It actually comes from the D.C. bureau chief at Fox News, because he happens to be in charge of the TV pool right now until the end of the month. All the networks take turns as the pool chair. So, the pool chair said -- he wrote, quote, "this is to advise that, effective today, the TV pool will not be covering events designated as pool coverage of the president. This follows the White House's position preventing CNN from fulfilling its assigned pool duties." And here's the important sentence, "there will be no replacement pool put in place."

John, that doesn't say this is only today. That says this is effective today. CNN was scheduled to be the travel pool in New York with the president both today and tomorrow. Now, it's possible the court will weigh in and overrule the president, and maybe things will be back to normal by Wednesday. But my reading of this email is that the five major networks in the United States are willing to hold the line and are willing to stand in solidarity with CNN at this moment.

And like I said, John, it's because they know they could be next. The president said on Friday that he might kick out "The New York Times" and "The Washington Post." He called those papers "crummy." He seems to be doing this based on his moods. And so, I've been hearing from top editors and newsroom leaders all across the U.S. who believe this is an important moment to draw a line and stand firm. BERMAN: Does this mean that the president -- the White House can't

film it itself? Does this mean they can't find some reporter out there or some camera from some organization, not the five major networks, who would be willing to come in and do it, and then the White House just distribute it itself?

STELTER: That's a great point. Yes, the White House can and does bring its own cameras. It can post that video to social media. You'll remember when the president announced the start of the war in Iran, he didn't do it with the press in the room, he did it by himself, I think it was at Mar-a-Lago, with the White House controlled cameras.

[09:10:04]

And that was controversial at the time because it would be more appropriate for an American president to speak in front of independent journalists. That's a principle that presidents have supported and respected going back as far as the days of the birth of television.

But, yes, the White House can and does use its own cameras, and the White House could try to go out and recruit pro-Trump news outlets, far right streamers, I don't know, Laura Loomer. They could ask others to fill in. But what's notable here is that the big networks that actually have the money and the infrastructure and the technology and the capabilities to do the work, they are all saying that they're not willing to do it. And that is a notable development this morning.

There will be other reporters in the pool today. There will be a print reporter. There will be a radio reporter. We will get information wherever the president is, whatever he says. But we're not going to have it on camera the way we usually do. And I don't know about you, John, but I think the president kind of likes being on TV.

BERMAN: It would seem that way. And the questions one always has to ask when there are press bans is, what does the president not want asked? What does he want to avoid? Why is he so concerned with the current situation?

Brian Stelter, great to see you. Thank you for your reporting on this. I am sure there will be more and perhaps even soon. Thank you.

Sara.

SIDNER: With me now -- thank you so much, John.

With me now, Democratic congressman from Maryland, Johnny Olszewski.

Thank you so much for being here.

Look, the president is coming to the U.N. General Assembly, where world leaders are gathering. And at the same time he's banning three media outlets from the White House. He will not be covered on camera because he's removed CNN, which was the pool.

What message is he sending to the world with his moves? What are your concerns about this? REP. JOHNNY OLSZEWSKI (D-MD): This is a terrible message. And I want

to commend the other news outlets for standing in solidarity with CNN and the other outlets who have been inappropriately and unconstitutionally banned from access to the president. I mean, look, I'm a former history teacher, and I remember teaching my students about Thomas Jefferson, who was no friend of the media in terms of his coverage, but he understood just how important they were. This is the kind of stuff that we see from authoritarian leaders all the time. When they get coverage they don't like, they ban it.

And so, as we're convening in New York with other countries around the world, we're sending the message, unfortunately, that we are moving towards more and more like this authoritarian style of leadership that we've seen, unfortunately, from this administration. This is yet another example. And I'm really encouraged to see both other outlets and hopefully the public standing with CNN and others who have been iced out at this point.

SIDNER: I'm curious if you think this is just a distraction in the end from other really pressing issues that are hitting Americans now.

OLSZEWSKI: Absolutely. This president does not want to talk about the fact that he made two basic promises to the American people, that he would lower their costs and keep us out of wars. Instead, we've seen an administration line their own pockets, support their buddies and their allies, put us into a war that is as unpopular as the Vietnam and Iraq war. We've seen a president who absolutely has done nothing for corruption, has lied about the Epstein files. And so, yes, I mean, every day the president is not talking about his failures as president. Every day that we don't talk about the fact that this Republican-led Congress is not holding him accountable is exactly what the president wants heading into the midterms, knowing that he is deeply unpopular and Democrats are poised to both take back the House and potentially the Senate.

SIDNER: I want to ask you about the war. "The New York Times" has some new reporting this morning that President Trump was planning to expand the war with Iran after being employed by the Saudi crown prince to help with strikes against the Houthis in Yemen. It went so far that "The Times" says commanders had approved target list. Troops were loading bombs onto U.S. warplanes selected for the missions, and the wave of attacks was just about to begin. But then the president decided not to go forward with this.

What do you make of this? What is your concern here when you hear that this was about to happen at the behest of the Saudi crown prince in the midst of the administration talking about problems with ammunition, for example, munitions.

OLSZEWSKI: Absolutely. I'll say two things. One is that we are clearly losing this war, and the president does not have a plan or a strategy to get us out of it. And, two, we've got an administration in both the president and Secretary Hegseth that has completely decimated our Department of Defense. When you fire those experts who know best about how to conduct war and replace them with social media influencers, this is the result. And I think that the president's decision is a reflection of the fact that we are really in a much weaker place, not just because of the Strait of Hormuz and the expansion recently by the Houthi actions, but also by the fact that we have no clear strategy moving forward.

So, I'm really concerned about this president who is very knee jerk, whether it's about making decisions about war or kicking out press coverage when he sees something from Natalie Harp that he doesn't like.

[09:15:04]

And I think it's just deeply concerning to have an administration that both doesn't have those experts around them anymore on these issues, and who's also so knee jerk in all of his decision making.

SIDNER: I do want to ask you about the president's triumphal arch that he plans to build. He now says it will double as a military complex for snipers and drones and ammunition. He wrote on Truth Social that he's agreed to convert the arch at the strong request of the U.S. military and for national security purposes. Does that make sense to you?

OLSZEWSKI: Nothing this administration does make sense to me. And what I'll tell you is that what it appears is that the president's going to try to use this as a backdoor way to get additional funding for the military that should be used to replenish our depleted missiles and instead build something that is specifically for him and in honor of him.

Again, we talked earlier, the fact that we have tariffs and the cost of gas and groceries are up because of the war, this is a president who is so focused on himself, lining his pockets, building ballrooms and arches in his honor. It's not what the American people want. And we have an obligation to fight back between now and November to say there's a better way forward.

SIDNER: Congressman Johnny Olszewski, thank you so much for coming on early this morning for us. Appreciate it.

John.

BERMAN: All right, new questions this morning after a DoorDash driver from Venezuela was shot and wounded by ICE in Austin, Texas. Video shows what appears to be his car with bullet holes. Federal authorities have yet to explain what led up to the gunfire. There's also new video of the aftermath.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hey guys, what you do that to him? Why you do that to him? You're not supposed to be do that to him, man.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: The man survived. DHS says he is now in federal custody pending removal. Let's get to CNN's Ed Lavandera, who is in Austin this morning.

What are you learning, Ed?

ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, John, in that video you just saw, you can actually hear 28-year-old Wilber Garces Perez saying that the ICE officer rammed his vehicle into his small blue car there just underneath the overpass where we're standing here in north Austin. There's still a lot of questions as to exactly how all of this unfolded and what led up to the shooting, and presumably no explanation so far as to why the ICE officer felt that his life was threatened, had to engage and fire his weapon.

What we can tell from the videos that we have seen so far is that there is damage to the -- to the body of Wilber's car along the passenger side, as well as two gunshots in a back rear window. And in that video that we just obtained as well, you can see that there is a wound on Wilber Garces Perez's back and that he's reaching over his shoulder talking about the pain that he's in there.

We are waiting to hear more from the Department of Homeland Security as to what led up to this shooting. So far, they've only put out a statement saying that Wilber Garces Perez was in the country illegally. His attorney says something very different. So, we're still trying to get to the bottom of his immigration status and his -- and whether or not he was here legally or was at one point and then trying to unravel all of that. We'll continue to do that. But right now, officials here in Austin say they need an independent investigation about this shooting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. GREG CASAR (D-TX): I think it is appropriate for this community to ask for independence, to ask for transparency, and to ask for accountability. This is a pattern. It's a disturbing pattern. And it's got to stop.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LAVANDERA: And, John, you know, after the shooting that sparked a round of protests here at the scene for much of the afternoon yesterday here in Austin, we should point out that this initial statement from the Department of Homeland Security is very interesting in what it does not say. Previous statements regarding shootings involving ICE officers have pointed out that ICE would say that an immigrant, you know, weaponized a vehicle or attacked an officer, that they fired essentially in self-defense. That kind of language is totally missing from the initial statement here so far. So, this is very different from what we have seen in the past, in other ICE involved -- ICE officer involved shootings.

So, we'll continue to ask questions on that front to get more details about what led up to this particular shooting.

John.

BERMAN: All right, great to have you down there, Ed.

Ed Lavandera, on the scene for us, thank you very much.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you, John.

Coming up, Patrick Clancy opens up in his first interview since his ex-wife Lindsay Clancy's mistrial.

[09:20:01]

He reveals what she told him moments after she killed their three young children.

And families demanding answers after they say they're seeing a string of rare pediatric cancer cases in one community. They're demanding an investigation.

And the catch of the day on a fishing trip was not, even close to a fish, it was that, a military drone.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: New this morning, we're hearing from Patrick Clancy and his wife, Rachel, for the first time since the murder trial of his ex- wife, Lindsay Clancy, that ended in a mistrial. This was part of a new interview with "60 Minutes."

With us now, CNN's Jean Casarez.

So, Jean, what did you learn here?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, we've learned so many new things. The night when it all happened, Cora and Dawson, they were pronounced dead almost immediately.

BERMAN: Those are two of the kids?

CASAREZ: Yes, two of the children. But Callan, eight months old, his heart was still beating, so he was flown to Boston Children's Hospital.

[09:25:02]

What we didn't know is that Patrick went with him. And Patrick was there with him for four days as his heart was beating. And he was holding his hand, but he was writing to his other children. He didn't want them forgotten. He talked about that last night. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATRICK CLANCY, LINDSAY CLANCY'S FORMER HUSBAND: I got to lay down next to him. And he died in my arms.

That night I really thought there was a chance that Callan would live. And I remember just thinking, just give me one. Just give me one kid. And I would raise him as best I could. And I would give him the best life I possibly could.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: But he died in his arms.

Now, that was January. And so, in April, John, he wanted anonymity and he just couldn't get it in Massachusetts. So, he moved to New York. And May 26th would have been Callan's first birthday. And he said, what do I do? Where do I go? He went to church.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATRICK CLANCY, LINDSAY CLANCY'S FORMER HUSBAND: Five weeks after I moved to New York on May 26th, I had to figure out how I'm going to celebrate Callan's first birthday. And how do you celebrate your son's first birthday months after he's passed away? And so, I go to Saint Patrick's Cathedral. I light a candle. And I say, I love you, buddy. And I walk out on Fifth Avenue and I start crying my eyes out. And nobody cared.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And was that good? Were you grateful for that?

CLANCY: I thought, this is where I need to be. I can grieve.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: He said he also had thoughts of taking his own life, that he had no desire to reach the age of 35.

But then when it came to the trial, something else that we never knew before. He was -- he testified for two days. And on the second day, right before the 911 call was played, he walked out. I saw him. He walked out. Well, he was having a panic attack. And in the back room they called an ambulance. He went out to the ambulance. They put him in the ambulance. They wanted to give him medication. He said, no, I've got to get through this. I want to get through this. He returned and finished his testimony.

But he also talked about, at that point, after he testified, social media just started to pin it on him and focus on him. Here is his very strong response to that.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PATRICK CLANCY, LINDSAY CLANCY'S FORMER HUSBAND: It's deeply harmful to the legacy of my children. It is a huge distraction from what really matters here, which is perinatal mental health. And it's done real harm to real people, myself included, but also others.

It's painful to see, and it makes it difficult to be in public.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: What was missing in this interview were conversations with Lindsay. And there may not have been many after this. But he did say that he didn't ask her why she did it. He asked her if she remembered doing it. And he -- she said it was like a dream.

BERMAN: All right, Jean Casarez, a lot of new information there. Again, thank you so much for sharing.

All right, a rare string of pediatric cancer cases has families asking whether their community is making their children sick.

And the two boaters found clinging to a tree after their boat capsized and drifted away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)