Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump Signs Greenland Deal with Denmark After Threatening Annexation; Trump: Administration Held Very Good Meeting with Iranian Delegation; Ex-Vice President Harris Hits Campaign Train with El-Sayed in Michigan; 26 Percent Approve of Trump's Handling of Iran War; Rubio Says U.S. Looking into Potential AI Hotline with China. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired September 22, 2026 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: After months of threatening to annex Greenland, today at the U.N., President Trump took part in a trilateral signing ceremony with the leaders of Denmark and Greenland, formalizing a new Greenland security agreement. The president struck a notably warm tone at the signing, saying that the new deal opens the way for the U.S. to begin developing a large military presence on the island, including two, quote, very major military bases.

Let's discuss with retired Army Colonel Peter Mansoor. He's a professor of military history at Ohio State University. Colonel, thank you so much, as always, for being with us. Walk us through what this deal is going to mean for U.S. national security.

COL. PETER MANSOOR, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Well, it gives the United States the ability to establish two new military installations in Greenland. One of them will undoubtedly be an air base. And this augments the existing Space Force base, which is already in Greenland.

But I think the listeners need a little context here. This is actually a drop in the bucket compared to our presence during the Cold War, when at its height, the U.S. had 17 bases in Greenland and 10,000 personnel in total on the island. So this is an agreement that does augment the U.S. capability in Greenland. But again, we've been here before, and I'm not sure it would have taken the threats that the Trump administration made to Denmark to make this happen.

SANCHEZ: To that point, what does it mean for U.S. security in a geographic context that we'll have these bases essentially between the mainland and Russia and, of course, very close to Northern Europe?

MANSOOR: Well, the importance of Greenland is both its Atlantic presence, but also its Arctic presence. And with the climate change and the melting of the sea cap ice in the Arctic, we can see commercial shipping being able to use those navigational corridors over the polar ice cap at some point. And having bases in Greenland, then, is absolutely critical to ensure that our security needs are met in that area of the world.

SANCHEZ: Looking at the Middle East, the U.S. has weighed how much support to lend Saudi Arabia as the Iran-backed Houthis are now gaining significant ground and disrupting energy flows on the Arabian Peninsula. What happens, in your estimation, if the U.S. ultimately decides to strike the Houthis militarily?

MANSOOR: Well, we already have one major war going on with Iran, and this would be another front in that war. It would be a major escalation for the United States. I'm not sure it's one that we're prepared to undertake, given the shortage of critical munitions that the war with Iran has engendered.

[14:35:00]

So this, again, would be a major step. I think this is why the Trump administration has backed off Saudi demands to enter the conflict and bomb the Houthis in retaliation for their closure of the Bab al-Mandeb Strait to Saudi shipping.

SANCHEZ: Do you think not acquiescing to those demands from Saudi Arabia hurts U.S. legitimacy when it comes to security guarantees, not only with Saudi Arabia, but with the other Gulf allies that the president is going to be meeting with today at the U.N.?

MANSOOR: Well, I think our security guarantees are already endangered by the fact that we weren't able to bring Iran to an agreement to end the war. And Iran's next step may be escalation by targeting energy facilities in those Gulf Cooperation Council nations. So the U.S. is already in a precarious position in the Middle East, regardless of what it does vis-a-vis the Houthis.

SANCHEZ: Members of the Trump administration apparently met with the Iranian delegation today on the sidelines of the U.N. for about three hours. We know that Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were both involved in those discussions, the first that we've seen in quite a while. I wonder if you see the fact of this meeting happening as progress.

MANSOOR: Well, it's a nice step. I'm not sure it will lead to any sort of agreement. I think the one thing that came out of the president's address to the U.N. today was his focus on the midterm elections, believing that Iran would come to the table after the elections in November. I'm not sure that's the case. I think the Iranians are hoping that Congress will turn over into control of the Democratic Party and that the Congress will then force the president's hand into ending the conflict. So that's what I think Iran is hoping for.

If that doesn't happen, we'll see. But this is the one thing in the president's address that was noteworthy, that he and the Iranians are both focused on the outcome of the midterm elections.

SANCHEZ: And what did you make of Trump saying that it's not true that the U.S. is low on munitions? He said quote, "We have more munitions than we could ever possibly think of using." Also claiming that the U.S. is building munitions at levels that we never have before.

MANSOOR: Well, the latter may it might be true, but the question is, when will they arrive? And I think that's several years out before those new factories can start producing. You know, I think this is probably bluster by the president.

He may be right in terms of conventional munitions, but it's the air defense weapons that are critically short. And he may have just been doing a broad brush. Oh, yes, we have plenty of weapons without naming the specific ones that are that are in shortages right now.

SANCHEZ: Colonel Peter Mansoor, always appreciate the perspective.

MANSOOR: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Of course. Still to come, the midterms are still several weeks away, but potential 2028 presidential hopefuls are already weighing their options. Who's making moves? What could it signal for the next race for the White House?

[14:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Happening now, a high profile appearance in the Michigan race for U.S. Senate. These are live images coming to us from Michigan, a former Vice President, Kamala Harris, joining the Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed on the campaign trail there in the Detroit area today focusing on Black maternal health care. Harris is seeking to rally voters behind El-Sayed, who is in a tight race against Republican Mike Rogers.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: She may also be trying to raise the prospects of a 2028 White House bid. She has yet to announce whether she is running. So let's talk about all of this with CNN political commentator Jamal Simmons, former communications director for Kamala Harris when she was vice president and Republican Charlie Dent, former congressman for Pennsylvania.

So Jamal, to you first, polls have actually shown how hard it is for Abdul El-Sayed with this very key voting bloc, right? He's doing worse with Black voters than Joe Biden did in 2020 or than Harris did four years later.

How much can Harris help with that now?

JAMAL SIMMONS, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR THEN-VICE PRESIDENT HARRIS: She can help. You know, I'm from Detroit and I will tell you, I have heard from older relatives that they have concerns about Abdul El-Sayed. So but I think what he's doing is to try to bring particularly these older Black women who are big fans of Michelle Obama, big fans of Kamala Harris, and they bring them back to the fold.

I think she's going to help them do that. At the same time, the vice president didn't do really well in Michigan. She lost Michigan by about a point and a half or less than a point and a half.

And so this is helpful for her. She's thinking about running for president. She spent some time particularly with younger and more progressive people who are following Abdul El-Sayed. They may be voters that she needs to get to. So this is a case of mutually desired appreciation. They both want to make sure that they are going to make the other person stronger.

SANCHEZ: Charlie, Republican Mike Rogers has tried to take advantage of El-Sayed's weakness among Black voters, openly trying to appeal to Black Democrats in the general election. I wonder, given Harris's struggles with Black men in particular, many of them going to the Republican Party, whether you see some of that now eroding given the political climate.

CHARLIE DENT, FORMER REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN FOR PENNSYLVANIA: Well, certainly the political climate is bad for Mike Rogers and Republicans, but he does have a real opportunity here to make inroads with African-Americans and Jewish voters in Michigan.

[14:45:00]

El-Sayed is certainly underperforming compared to the Democratic gubernatorial candidate in that state. So I think that actually Rogers is very much in the game. He's smart to do this.

Whether he'll be successful or not, it's hard to say at this point. I mean, his big challenge is the boat anchor called the president and his low approval rating. But beyond that, you know, Rogers does have, I think, broader appeal.

El-Sayed, I think, has a fairly low ceiling. I don't think his appeal is that broad. We saw in the primary that he was struggling with older voters, African-American voters, Jewish voters, and those without college degrees. So Rogers is in the game.

KEILAR: He's trying to cut that boat anchor that he's towing. He knows that, right? We see him in this ad.

He's got this new ad out. He's in a grocery store. And he says, the war needs to end and end quickly.

We've also seen the Iowa Republican Senate candidate try to do something similar, Ashley Hinson just making a similar decision here. Are we going to see more candidates, you think, breaking with Trump on Iran?

DENT: Well, any Republican candidate in a competitive House district or a swing state will need to find separation from the president. It's shocking to me that more of them didn't try to separate sooner. Maybe it's too late.

But you need to separate because they need to win those crossover voters. And they all know Iran is a problem, not just because the war hasn't been executed well, the military's executed well, but politically it's been a disaster, but also because of the straight line that people can draw from Iran, and the closure of the Strait, to higher gasoline prices, higher fertilizer costs, which yield higher grocery bills. So that's why these candidates are separating themselves. And frankly, in Michigan, I would recommend that Mike Rogers and Hinson in Iowa, it's not just the Iran war, it's the tariffs and the Canadian situation in particular for Rogers in Michigan. These are real challenges for Republican candidates. American people aren't with the president on those issues.

SANCHEZ: Jamal, how much can these Republicans localize these races and distance themselves from the president when he's out there saying, act as though I'm on the ballot and Trump does mobilize the base?

SIMMONS: It's almost impossible for them to separate themselves from the president. In fact, Mike Rogers has a pretty -- had a pretty tight voting record with Donald Trump when he was in Congress. And as Charlie just mentioned, you know, the tariffs are a very big deal in Michigan.

I mean, Canada is the greatest trading partner for the state and the biggest border crossing in the country. And when you think about it and you look at the tariff list, what's being hit that Donald Trump is going after? A couple of things that people ought to pay attention to, number one, he's going after hockey equipment.

Forty thousand kids in Michigan play hockey. And so you're going to raise the tariff price on hockey equipment. And he's also going after beer.

So LeBatt and Molson are going to cost you a little more when you try to go to see that game this fall if President Trump keeps these tariffs in place.

KEILAR: LeBatt, I mean --

SANCHEZ: Molson --

KEILAR: Sacrosanct.

SANCHEZ: A lot of choices, I thought you were going to respond to Jamal, Charlie.

DENT: Well, this was Mike Rogers did not serve when Donald Trump was president. So I just want to say it's pretty clear they were not serving together at the same time. But it's not just LeBatt and hockey sticks.

The president went after Bombardier, the Canadian aircraft manufacturer, which has a major presence in Wichita, Kansas. Which, of course, is affecting the Roger Marshall Senate race. So this this issue with Canada is a big deal.

SANCHEZ: Before we go, Jamal, we have to ask you about Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She revealed in an interview to The New York Times about a potential White House run. Quote, "This country has never elected a female president. Why are we pretending that this is not a factor? That doesn't make it impossible, but to act as though it's not a factor in anything ever is really a form of, like, denialism." She went on to say that it's not so much about whether you are ready

for the challenge, but whether the challenge is ready for you. I think I'm kind of like butchering what she actually said, but it's sort of the intent of what she meant to say.

Jamal, your thoughts?

SIMMONS: You know, one thing about catching lightning in a bottle, it has an expiration date. So if she does get a pretty big jolt of excitement and people want her to run, it's very hard to say, you know what? Not right now.

Let's wait a couple of years. I mean, ask Chris Christie, right? He should have run for president in 2012 and take on Barack Obama.

He didn't. And it didn't work out for him in 2016 either. So I would say that if she's thinking about running and she really wants to run, she has to go when the time is right for her.

But she has another option. She could also run for the Senate in New York, perhaps. And that might be the seat that she could win.

And then she could, you know, go from there and be the lion of the Senate. We really haven't had you know, we're going to have another big liberal lion like a Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren or Ted Kennedy. She could really inherit that mantle.

KEILAR: Yes, we'll watch and see. Jamal, Charlie, thank you so much for the conversation.

And now to some of the other headlines that we're watching this hour.

[14:50:00]

Two people have died after a helicopter crash while battling a wildfire in Yosemite National Park. Greg King, a pilot for Precision Helicopters, was identified as one of the people who passed away here on Sunday. The helicopter crew had been contracted to work for the Forest Service in Idaho. They were helping fight the dome fire in Yosemite when the helicopter went down.

The FAA, the NTSB and the Forest Service say they're investigating this incident.

SANCHEZ: Also, Hurricane Polo is quickly intensified into a Category five storm in the Pacific Ocean off the coast of Mexico. The storm's 165 mile per hour winds are being fueled by a favorable atmosphere and warmer water driven by this year's Super El Nino. Tropical storm alerts are in effect for Mexico's southwestern coast, with heavy rainfall potentially causing dangerous flooding and mudslides.

The storm's dangerous winds, fortunately, are expected to mostly stay offshore.

And watch this six-year-old make history. Yunzhi broke the female's world record for solving a three by three by three Rubik's Cube at a competition in China.

Lian Yunzhi, I should say, averaged just four 4.27 seconds across five Rubik's Cube solves, faster than the record she had just set at another competition three days before. Lian started solving Rubik's Cubes at age four. Her mom says she practices two to three hours a day.

She's become more confident since she started cubing. She seems fairly confident.

KEILAR: She does.

SANCHEZ: I don't know that I can do that in 10, 20 minutes. She's doing it in four seconds.

KEILAR: I love her right there, that reaction. That's the confidence.

SANCHEZ: Never underestimate the heart of a champion.

Still to come, the U.S. exploring a potential AI hotline with China, how it could help prevent a digital error from spiraling into a catastrophe.

[14:55:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: As experts search for a solution to the threat from AI, one under consideration is a hotline between Washington and Beijing. Secretary of State Marco Rubio floated this idea today. He pitched it as something similar to what presidents had during the Cold War to avoid a crisis with Moscow that could lead to disaster.

We're joined now by Stephen Witt, who is the author of "The Thinking Machine, a History of the AI Giant NVIDIA." Stephen, I wonder, what do you think about this idea of a hotline? Do you see this as potentially working?

STEPHEN WITT, AUTOR, THE THINKING MACHINE: Yes, I think it's a great start. I don't think it'll kind of eliminate AI risk, but we certainly have to start talking to the Chinese about this. You know, I don't know if they'll even pick up the phone.

That's been a problem before. But I think establishing quick dialogue between the leaders of these countries about potential AI risk is a great idea. And I endorse this proposal.

KEILAR: How do you see the Chinese approach at this point in time, especially as we're awaiting this critical meeting between President Trump and Xi Jinping?

WITT: You know, neither Xi nor Trump sees the risk from these systems. Both of them have been pretty vocal about it. Xi a little bit more sees the risks, but they're certainly not about to stop the breakneck pace of AI research that's going on in China, nor, I think, is there much appetite among the U.S. government to slow down what's going on in Silicon Valley right now.

So weirdly, the two of them actually see eye to eye on this particular issue. It's some of the technologists who see it differently.

KEILAR: OK, so, yes, this morning, Trump said the U.S. totally rejects calls for a global slowdown of AI. He repeated his line that whoever wins on AI development, you know, wins here. So when you look at that, what does that portend for where we are heading if you have two countries who maybe see that similarly?

WITT: Yes, I mean, it was already basically a harms race and now it's kind of officially one. We're both going to attempt to develop this technology as rapidly as possible and be the global leader at it. That is the stated position of both governments.

China has very clearly said that they want to win this one. It's in their planning documents, you know, and the U.S. has very clearly said that we want to win this one. It's in our planning documents now.

So the race is on. You know, I think we can do things like do kind of air crash investigation when an AI goes rogue and starts hacking and publish that information and share it with the Chinese. You know, I encourage more information sharing about how these systems behave, because the truth is we don't know that much about how they behave.

We're often surprised by what they can do. But in terms of a global framework for a slowdown, we're just not there yet.

KEILAR: I think we're, you know, we're talking about if these countries were to lose control of AI, what then happens? But we also have this reporting and the conversation around it. CNN reporting last week that a partially AI generated intelligence report.

So an analyst using an AI model to generate a report, it actually almost led to military action that could have caused a war between Washington and Beijing. You see how it's not exactly academic, right? We're talking about the military was poised to act here.

So is that what you expect it's going to look like? And what does it take to pull back from that?

WITT: Yes, so this year is when we've really seen concerns about AI risk going from, you know, a hypothetical thing to like a concrete, practical thing about which there is actual data. I think it's really important ...

END