Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Zelenskyy Addresses UNGA, Says Russian Oil Industry is Running on Fumes; Netanyahu, Abbas Set for High-stakes UNGA Speeches; Iran's President Pezeshkian Says We Will Never Bow Our Head; Judge Orders Trump to Restore White House Access to CNN, MS NOW and Politico; Xi in Washington for Historic Three-day Visit; Elizabeth Holmes Moves to Halfway House Next Year; A.I. Leaders Call for Global Standards & Cooperation. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired September 24, 2026 - 02:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:00:14]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

ROSEMARY CHURCH, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the United States and from all around the world. I'm Rosemary Church.

And we begin this hour with breaking news. A federal judge has just has -- a federal judge has just ordered the Trump administration to immediately reinstate White House access to three media outlets, including CNN.

Now, according to the ruling, Judge Timothy Kelly found the revocation of reporters' press badges was done without, "constitutionally adequate due process."

Now, the late-night ruling has dealt a legal blow to Donald Trump, who banned CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the premises over the weekend. The three news outlets sued, with a hearing taking place on Wednesday, just hours before the judge issued his decision.

All right, want to bring in our chief media expert and analyst Brian Stelter. So, Brian, let's have you walk us through this ruling-a very late-night breaking news, of course, and what this means in its entirety.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Yes, well, this is an important ruling in support of press freedom, although it is grounded in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, not the First Amendment.

Of course, the First Amendment details that a right to a free press and free speech shall not be infringed by the government. But Judge Kelly here focusing on the Fifth Amendment arguments, as many experts expected and thought that he would. The Fifth Amendment arguments are about due process, about exactly how

this ban was implemented without any advance notice, without any warning, without any ability to contest it. And let me quote from the judge's ruling here. He says the general rule is that individuals must receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before the government deprives them of a constitutionally protected interest.

Kelly going on to write that these three banded news outlets have shown they are likely to suffer irreparable harm absent a temporary restraining order. So, he's going ahead and granting that restraining order. It's known as a TRO. It lasts for 14 days, and it's basically a band-aid that judges can apply when there is at the beginning stage of a longer court battle.

If something is going on and there's harm being done on a daily basis, the judge can freeze it in place, can put that TRO in place for 14 days while figuring out next steps, and that's essentially what the judge is doing here, ordering the White House to reverse this ban while the larger issues are thought through.

So, the judge here is focusing, I said, on the due process arguments because everybody in this case agrees that this ban seemingly came out of nowhere. When President Trump announced it last Friday, he was complaining about negative stories and so-called fake news, even though these are real news outlets. He was not talking at all about national security.

But only in the last 24 hours has the Justice Department started to emphasize national security, making claims about these news outlets somehow threatening the U.S. when, of course, these journalists and these outlets are just trying to report the news in the public interest.

So, essentially, you've had changing messaging, changing explanations and justifications. The judge, I think, has seen right through that, and he has said there was no due process for the scores of journalists from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, who all had press passes to access the White House grounds, who have had those passes deactivated.

So, now, the White House presumably will go ahead and turn those passes back on, restore access tomorrow morning. You know, it's 2:00 a.m. Eastern in Washington. Reporters would normally go to work there in a few hours. We will see how the White House chooses to respond to this.

But what will be more interesting tonight to me, or will be in the days to come, will the White House take other steps, come up with other ways to battle this? And by the way, I am hearing just now, Rosemary, from the CNN lead counsel in this case. His name is Ted Boutrous. He's one of the top First Amendment lawyers in the United States. He was hired by CNN just a few minutes after that ban was announced last Friday, because it was pretty obvious this was going to become a court fight. Here's Boutrous texting me saying, this is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process, and rule of law. We greatly appreciate the court's swift action. CHURCH: So, Brian, what is the likely reaction from President Trump and the White House in the morning do you think? And what is really to stop President Trump from doing this again?

STELTER: You know, there is -- what is there to stop him from doing this again? Well, there is you know legal precedent, right? There are past court cases from the '70s, from the 20s, and we talked about those in the past few days, saying this was likely to be the ruling from this judge. He was likely just going to have to cite those past cases and restore these press passes.

But as we know, with President Trump, that does not stop him from trying. As an executive of one of the other networks said to me, the president's always testing. He's testing the people who he chooses to identify his opponents, he's always testing the fences, seeing what he can get away with, seeing how far he can push it, and this feels like one of those cases to me.

[02:05:18]

You know, as someone who's reported on the president for a decade, off and on. At this point, you know, he is always testing. He is always trying to see how far he can push in his war against the news media, whether he can push journalists off of the White House grounds altogether. That's been the test in the last week.

Boutrous warned in court about nine hours ago that he's worried there will be further shenanigans if the court sided with CNN and MS and Politico only on the Fifth Amendment grounds. Boutrous was arguing you should also find in favor of us on First Amendment grounds, and that could very well happen down the line if this court battle continues.

But we have also seen in some cases, Trump will move on, right? The White House will move on. The Justice Department will drop the case and move on when an initial loss is suffered in court, so maybe that will happen in this case as well, or maybe there will be those shenanigans. Maybe the White House will come up with different rules for accessing the White House and try to apply due process and then force journalists out that way.

And that's important, Rosemary, because that's what Pete Hegseth did at the Pentagon when he wanted to push journalists out of the Pentagon complex. He came up with a new supposed policy. He forced everybody out to sign it or either give up their office space, and now basically American journalists no longer work out of the Pentagon complex because of that.

So, will Trump try to do that? Will Trump and Hegseth talk about it? These are all unknowns. This is what I -- you know, we're wondering about at this point.

But more broadly, at least there's been a basic principle reestablished here overnight, and for folks who take these freedoms for granted and just assume that yes, reporters will always be at the Trump White House reporting on the president, trying to hold him accountable. In the last five days, Trump has tried to stop that, and now a court has stopped him.

CHURCH: Yes, I mean it certainly has been a wake-up call for everyone, hasn't it? But perhaps a surprise too for the White House and for President Trump that there was such solidarity and unity with all five networks standing together, and that was significant in making sure that there was no pool coverage at all for the U.N. General Assembly, for instance, which is something President Trump likes to be covered.

STELTER: And I will tell you, I was surprised by the sheer amount of solidarity. I don't want to speak out of turn. I think many of my sources at these three banned networks were surprised by the amount of solidarity because one of the storylines of Trump's return to office has been, if not capitulation by institutions, then a weakening of the knees by some institutions. Think about some of the law firms. Think about some of the universities.

Now that's been changing, especially in recent months, and it's really been different this time around, when you have four dozen. I think the number is 48 news outlets that signed onto a brief submitted to Judge Kelly yesterday. Everyone from the Associated Press to Fox News siding with these banned outlets. That was an incredible show of solidarity yesterday in court. That's the opposite of capitulation.

And what explains it? I think it's very simple. All of those outlets know they might be next. Whether it's the New York Times or ABC or CBS or Reuters, or Axios, they all know that Trump could wake up tomorrow and decide to ban them as well.

So, it has been a very important -- you know -- you know what I really think it is. I think it's a turning point, actually, in this dynamic between the press and the president, where essentially it was said if a ban of one is a ban of everyone, then the president will have to rethink his posture or his behavior.

CHURCH: Yes, I mean perhaps that is what we learn from this. Maybe he won't do this again. Maybe he will rethink it. But we'll see. We'll see in the morning if credentials are given back, and we will continue to follow this developing story.

Thank you so much, Brian Stelter for bringing us that to us very late indeed, we do appreciate it.

All right, now to a red carpet welcome. President Trump and First Lady Melania greeting Chinese leader Xi Jinping as he arrived in the U.S. Unfortunately, we can't show you video of the arrival, and that's because pool coverage of President Trump's activities was suspended amid his White House ban on CNN and other media outlets.

So, for the next two days, the leaders are expected to discuss the war with Iran, U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, and the explosive growth of A.I. And of course, the U.S. Treasury Secretary says the countries have extended their trade truce through January, but not everyone in Washington is happy about the Chinese leader's visit. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. ROGER WICKER (R-MS): Quite frankly, had the White House asked me for advice, I would have suggested the president not invite Xi Jinping to Washington for such a lavish welcome.

[02:10:03]

Our commander-in-chief should keep in mind that his guest is a brutal, unelected, and oppressive dictator.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: All right, let's go live now to Beijing and CNN correspondent Mike Valerio. Good to see you, Mike.

So, what more are you learning about this extension of this truce and what it means?

MIKE VALERIO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're learning that it would have, or not would have. It is Rosemary extending until January 10th, and why that's important, we certainly expected it. But why it matters is because if this trade truce were not extended, that would take us into the holiday season with the average, and I stress average-tariff on Chinese goods coming into America rising from 30 percent to a whopping 54 percent.

Again, when Americans are buying all of this stuff right on the precipice of the holiday season, and President Trump faces some pretty tough odds for the midterm elections as the economy is concerned.

Three other bullet points, though, that we're looking for: we're not done with the economy when it comes to both of these leaders meeting in D.C. And the first item we want to talk about, Rosemary, is whether or not we're going to see other tariffs come down. The chance that other reciprocal tariffs on non-sensitive issues, think anything that is not tech, there's the potential that they could come down in the name of goodwill. Will Xi Jinping, China's leader, press for more advanced U.S. chips?

Because right now, since the Biden administration, top advanced chips from the United States, they've been banned from being sold to China in the name of national security. And then the third thing that we're looking at, will there be more specifics on the A.I. dialog that both of these countries have agreed upon?

You know, one note about that A.I. dialog, Rosemary, is that when we were standing here in May, the last meeting between these two leaders, this was agreed upon, but it was Scott Bessent who said at the headquarters of J.P. Morgan Chase in Manhattan the other day over the weekend, yes, we will meet in two months' time, but as we hear from all the headlines and CNN and you know, outlets throughout the world, this story is changing every two hours, not let alone two months, with A.I. security.

So, it'll be interesting to see whether or not these two leaders say more about what's going to happen between now and two months from now when this A.I. dialog meets. Rosemary. CHURCH: All right, Mike Valerio, many thanks for joining us and bringing us that live report from Beijing. Appreciate it.

VALERIO: Thanks, Rosemary.

CHURCH: All right. Well, Bert Hoffman is a professor at the East Asian Institute at the National University of Singapore. He's also the former China Country Director with the World Bank. Appreciate you joining us.

BERT HOFFMAN, PROFESSOR AT THE EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE, NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE: Well, thanks for having me, Rosemary.

CHURCH: Of course. So, how likely is it that progress can be made at this U.S.-China summit on the sensitive issues that divide the two nations, including trade, A.I., and Taiwan, or do you expect very little beyond pomp and circumstance and of course, the red-carpet welcome?

HOFFMAN: Well, the red carpet was certainly something. The last time that happened was in 1962, with President Suharto from the country Indonesia where I currently live, even though I'm right now in Beijing.

Look, on the on the trade issue, the Bessent-He Lifeng talks have already foreshadowed some. I think the Chinese may not be fully happy with it, and they might still try to extend the extension of the Busan truce. That's important for them because next year is a big political year for them, the 21st Party Congress in the fall, and they'd rather not have upheaval along the way.

The second thing that has been achieved, but it's fairly limited as far as I can see, is this Board of Trade. Something floated in May. Now it seems to be yes further discussions to reduce tariffs, but only up to about $30 billion in trade, and that is not very big in the in the U.S.-China trade relations.

The other issue of A.I., look, it's great that they're talking, and it's so important for the two countries as well as for mankind, it's great that they start talking. But for now, I think the perspectives are very different across the Pacific, and even within the U.S. there's very different perspectives. The president seems to be still on the full force ahead, and the U.S. will win. Whereas, China is concerned about the effects on its own society, on the position of the party, very different security concerns than others would argue from the U.S. side.

Finally, there's Taiwan, and I'm not sure whether that's going to be discussed a lot. China has been arguing: Look, the U.S. should not deliver arms to a wayward province, but at the same time, the U.S. has the legal obligations to put Taiwan into a position it can defend itself. So, it may be mentioned. I don't see any resolutions coming from that.

[02:15:09] CHURCH: So, how critical is a summit like this when it comes to keeping the peace through dialog between the U.S. and China, particularly on trade and A.I., as you mentioned, to avoid incidents like the one recently involving a Chinese ship that was inaccurately identified by A.I. as carrying nuclear components, and could the new A.I. hotline solve issues like this, or will it not do very much?

HOFFMAN: Well, the hotline also needs to be picked up, of course, and you need to have a process that feeds into that -- into that hotline. But by itself, I think it is -- it is a good idea.

The summits themselves are important. I mean, you can have maybe a bit too many of an important thing if in two months President Trump goes to China again on the -- on the APEC summit, that will be the fourth time that they meet within a year, and that's a lot for the leadership. But having them exchange views, deeper understanding, and more personal comfort levels, I think, is important for the future of the U.S.-China relationship.

CHURCH: And as you mentioned, you know, President Trump went to greet China's leader at Joint Base Andrews, which hasn't been done by U.S. president for a very long time, why the special treatment for China's president, and should Trump elevate Xi like this? Given the U.S. has linked Chinese satellite imagery to an Iranian strike that killed three American troops in July, that's according to the Wall Street Journal, and Bloomberg is reporting on missing F-35 aircraft parts that were intercepted on their way to the U.S. and are now in the possession of the Chinese government.

HOFFMAN: Look, I think President Trump strongly believes into the personal relationship and to, if you want, charm Xi Jinping into a better -- a better composure towards the United States. I'm not sure whether that helps a lot, but that's at least in the mind of President Trump. So, for that, he gives a very special treatment, and it's a -- it's -- we'll see whether it works in the outcomes of the summit.

CHURCH: All right. Thanks to Bert Hoffman for joining us and sharing your perspective and analysis with us. Do appreciate it. Thank you, sir.

Well, there's much more to come here on CNN NEWSROOM. Iran's president highlighted a deadly U.S. strike on an Iranian elementary school during his UNGA speech, why Masoud Pezeshkian says his country has been the victim of terrorism. That is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:22:15]

CHURCH: All right, we are following breaking news out of Washington, where a federal judge has ordered the White House to reinstate access to CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. President Trump banned the media outlets last week, saying he didn't like their coverage. He later said their reporting was a threat to national security.

But the judge Timothy Kelly says the ban was done without constitutionally adequate due process. It's not clear when CNN or the other news organizations will be allowed back into the White House, but let's take a look at some of our other stories just for a moment here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: The First Amendment to the Constitution. I think it made it very hard for the administration to prevail in this, but I still think it was. It has been so far an extremely revealing episode because Trump continues to test on almost an endless variety of fronts his ability to roll back what we have understood to be the traditional buttresses of the democratic system.

And so far the courts have stopped most of these major attempts, whether it's from the you know to use the postal service to control mail balloting or this or attempts to get state voter rolls, but strikingly along the way, and again in this episode, virtually no congressional Republicans came out to oppose him. There really is no cost to him from these repeated probes, and this is far from the last time we will see him try something like this, whether it's with the media or state voting rules or intimidating voting groups and so forth. As long as there is no consequence, I think he continues to press forward.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: Ron Brownstein there, and Adam Rose joins me now, he's deputy director of advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Good to have you with us.

ADAM ROSE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ADVOCACY, FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOUNDATION: Good evening, Rosemary. It's nice to be here on what night feels like a Wednesday night massacre of Donald Trump's legal arguments in court.

CHURCH: I would love to get your response overall to this ruling. I mean, it is a late-night breaking news ruling. None of us were expecting it coming around this time of the evening. But take us through this and what it means to you and to journalists.

ROSE: Well, it's wonderful news, and you have to remember this judge is a Trump appointee, and he wrote that the bar was high for the plaintiffs, but that they met it. In the converse, he said that Trump's arguments or his team's arguments were so vague it hardly does the trick.

So, for the journalist community, it's a resounding win, as we have seen repeatedly in a number of court cases involving press access. Whether that's at the White House, you think back to Jim Acosta during Trump's first term with CNN. You can think to all sorts of other cases that have been argued recently, and whether it's the Pentagon or whether it's the White House, the press always wins.

[02:25:05]

The problem, as I've said many times now, is that the law exists in two separate but unequal places. One is in the courtroom; the other is in the street. In this case, it's the White House, and at the White House, we're going to have to see how soon those credentials are returned. The order doesn't give an exact timeline, but it seems to be immediate. And you would think that as soon as it's in hand, the journalists would like to get back to work.

Do not think that this is over by any means. The White House is sure to try and take up all different sorts of arguments. This is just a temporary restraining order, and you may see all sorts of debate about whether this access might be to, let's say, the briefing room or to the Oval Office. What about Air Force One? There are all kinds of spaces that are open to interpretation, and that's going to be what's argued over the weeks ahead.

CHURCH: And that is the problem, isn't it? Because there is nothing to stop President Trump or the White House doing this all over again. It takes time. You have to go through the courts, and eventually you get a ruling on this. But then it can happen all over again, can't it? Nothing to stop it.

ROSE: Well, that's exactly right. And you should think about this initial temporary restraining order as just an intermediary step.

In fact, it doesn't even mention the First Amendment. You can run a quick search on this document; you won't see that term in there. And the judge didn't even bother to evaluate it because it was such a chaotic experience at the White House with all of this that the temporary restraining order is based on due process. It's based on the fact that the credentials were revoked basically without a real explanation. The judge recognized that the explanation was given after the fact, and it was this very baloney argument about national security.

We need to remember that if you go all the way to the Supreme Court for prior restraint claims against actual documents, which allegedly would damage government interests, the Supreme Court has said even with those in hand, you cannot claim national security to keep the press from reporting.

Well, here you have things that seem to be almost made up. There was news this afternoon that allegedly some of the claims that the White House has made about things that were potentially national security issues were from briefings that were set up anonymously with the vice president himself. That the White House helped get that information out through the Vice President to these media outlets, then used it as a pretext to try and revoke the credentials.

So, all of that's just absolutely ridiculous. But all of the past examples have been ridiculous as well. So, we fully expect that this president will continue his naked assaults on press freedom. In fact, one of the things he said-I don't know if it was an accident, he was stumbling over his words-but he called it a free press ban. Those are the president's own words in describing this.

So, no one's really surprised, other than, you know, maybe by the frequency and pace at which we're having to confront these issues. CHURCH: And this ruling does state that credentials are to be returned to the news organizations immediately. The use of the word immediately, but you say there's you can't be sure necessarily that come the morning, and it is nearly 2:30 in the morning here on the East Coast. Come the morning, reporters won't necessarily receive their credentials. Is that what you're saying?

ROSE: Or even if they do receive their credentials, will it be in a way that doesn't actually afford the access that these outlets are seeking. As I mentioned before, you know, maybe there's a gaggle in the Oval Office and CNN, Politico, and now might be excluded from that. What if it's in Air Force One? You know, there's a lot of questions here about pool reporting and having the ability to provide feeds to, you know, in the case of when CNN is the lead pool camera, over thousand T.V. stations across the country.

So, there's a lot of potential, you know, nuance to how this will play out.

CHURCH: All right. Our thanks to Adam Rose talking to us there, Deputy Director of Advocacy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Do appreciate you talking to us at this late hour. Thank you so much.

ROSE: Thank you, Rosemary.

CHURCH: And we'll be back in just a moment. Do stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:33:24]

CHURCH: Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy didn't mince words about Vladimir Putin at the U.N. General Assembly. In his speech Wednesday, Zelenskyy called Putin Patient Zero, saying the Russian leader spreads the idea of war and he must be stopped. Zelenskyy also defended Ukraine's strikes on Russian energy facilities.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT: For the first time in Russia's history, we now hear that its pride, its oil industry is running on fumes. But oil itself is not Ukraine's target, not our target. Not gasoline or diesel. Not factories or ports as such. Our target is Russia's ability to finance this war, to drag it out, to make it more brutal and more destructive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: As Zelenskyy spoke, a Russian strike hit the headquarters of his political party in Kyiv. Two people were killed and dozens injured in attacks on the capital on Wednesday. And just hours ago, Kyiv's mayor said a new missile attack killed another two people. As Fred Pleitgen reports, Zelenskyy expects Russia's attacks to continue.

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Basically, Volodymyr Zelenskyy is saying that right now, as far as diplomacy is concerned, he really doesn't have very much faith in the intentions of Vladimir Putin. One of the lines that we heard from Volodymyr Zelenskyy is as long as the Russians are going to be able to prosecute this war, Zelenskyy says that it is unlikely that Vladimir Putin is going to go for a diplomatic solution.

[02:35:00]

He said, look, Vladimir Putin always says there's some reason not to go for diplomacy. It's been quite interesting to see the structure of Volodymyr Zelenskyy's speech as he came onto the podium there. He began by referencing President Trump and some of the things that he had said about the war in Ukraine over the past couple of days, specifically the fact that diesel prices, for instance, in the United States have gone up very much in response to the Ukrainians hitting some oil facilities in the Russian Federation.

And Volodymyr Zelenskyy said, yeah, that's exactly the case. But he also said that the reason why the Ukrainians are doing this, he says, is to try and starve Russia of the financial resources to continue to prosecute what the Russians still call their special military operation, because Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he believes that without that, it is unlikely that a diplomatic solution is going to be reachable.

The other thing that he also made note of specifically was he said that international sanctions against Russia are also very important. He thanked all the countries that were part of sanctions against Russia. And he said that if countries resume trade, for instance, with Russia, that that is something that could give more oxygen to the combat operations in Ukraine and cause them to go on even longer.

CHURCH: We are looking ahead to two major speeches at the United Nations General Assembly in the coming hours. Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu is expected to use his address to defend Israel's military campaign in Gaza. Netanyahu's visit comes as he faces pressure at home ahead of his re-election fight next month and conflicts in Lebanon and Iran.

Palestinian President, Mahmoud Abbas will also address the UNGA, likely by video, after the Trump administration again denied visas to Palestinian officials. This comes as the Trump-led Board of Peace says rebuilding Gaza could cost more than $71 billion over the next decade. They laid out a recovery plan but acknowledged it can only begin once funding and access are secured. It's still unclear where the funding will come from.

Iran's president used his U.N. address on Wednesday to send a direct message to President Donald Trump. Tehran will not back down. Masoud Pezeshkian accused the U.S. of bullying, saying pressure and sanctions will only strengthen Iran's resistance and that Tehran would never bow its head or bend at the knee.

The speech came a day after the Iranian foreign minister held talks in New York with President Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff. But U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio says the talks were a continuation of earlier conversations and not a major breakthrough.

Meantime, Pezeshkian highlighted the deadly U.S. strike on an Iranian elementary school at the outset of the war.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MASOUD PEZESHKIAN, IRANIAN PRESIDENT: The United States president described us as terrorists. We have been the victims of terrorism. They bombed a school. You see these children? These children perished under bombs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: As the Iranian president highlighted this incident, the sole U.S. delegate in the room walked out. According to Iranian officials, at least 120 children and 26 teachers were among those killed at the school.

Mehran Kamrava, Professor of Government at Georgetown University in Qatar, joins me now. I do appreciate you talking with us.

MEHRAN KAMRAVA, PROFESSOR OF GOVERNMENT, GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY IN QATAR: Thank you. Good to be here.

CHURCH: Absolutely. So a day after President Donald Trump threatened to annihilate his country, Iran's President, Masoud Pezeshkian defiantly responded during his address to the U.N. General Assembly, saying Iran must be powerful so as to avoid being threatened and that Tehran is ready for dialog and negotiations without accepting the language of force.

What was your reaction to those words and, of course, the rest of his address?

KAMRAVA: I think in many ways, Pezeshkian's speech sums up the Iranian position. On the one hand, Iran has declared its willingness to negotiate, and they are very much hyping up the proposal that Iran has made through Qatar to the United States in terms of Iran's conditions. And on the other hand, we also hear the fact that Iran reportedly has new missiles.

They are in many ways taunting America's regional allies and saying that if they abide by America's newest restrictions, for example, on Iranian air travel, their airports are in danger.

[02:40:00]

And so what we see is some measure of cohesion in terms of the message coming out of Tehran, on the one hand willingness to negotiate, while on the other hand readiness to continue to fight.

CHURCH: And President Trump and his Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, insist that Iran is holding off on making a peace deal until after the midterms because they hope the Democrats will have more power. Is that what's happening here? And do you expect to see Iran more open to a deal perhaps after the midterms? KAMRAVA: Well, actually the assumption by many in Tehran is that after the elections, President Trump will have no restrictions whatsoever from the U.S. Congress and therefore is likely to really start bombarding Iran, Tehran and other major cities. So it's not so much that folks in Tehran are waiting to make a deal after the election, there's actually this assumption that Donald Trump might come completely unhinged after the election.

That's why what we're hearing coming out of Tehran is Iran's various conditions for resumption of negotiations. I think it's also important to remember that Foreign Minister Araghchi and Stephen Witkoff met in New York on the sidelines of the United Nations, and I think that's quite an important development.

CHURCH: Yeah. I wanted to talk about that because we do know the U.S. and Iranian delegations met on the sidelines of the UNGA and they will continue those talks apparently. So does this indicate to you that a path to peace is perhaps within reach?

KAMRAVA: Well, you know, Rosemary, there have been many times when we thought peace is right around the corner between Iran and the United States and every time we've been disappointed. You know, they've had negotiations, negotiations were on the verge of success and somehow the United States has torpedoed these elections. And right now, there's talk about how elements within the Iranian Revolutionary Guards torpedoed the last memorandum of understanding.

And so I think we're certainly better off where we are today than a few days ago. We're at a less perilous stage but I think it's too early to talk about peace being at hand.

CHURCH: And Professor, President Pezeshkian also touched on Iran's nuclear program. Of course, a key sticking point in negotiations, and he described peaceful nuclear technologies as an inherent right and reiterated that Iran would not seek nuclear weapons. What's your reading of that? Do people feel assured by those words? We keep hearing them but apparently the White House doesn't feel assured by them.

KAMRAVA: It's kind of an interesting statement by the Iranian president because, as we all know, the United States practically destroyed Iran's nuclear program in the last round of strikes. And to hear the Iranian president say that Iran will continue with its enrichment activities is kind of an interesting.

This is certainly one of those red lines where the Iranians feel that if they give up enrichment completely and indefinitely, they're capitulating to the United States and they are not willing to pay that political price domestically inside the country.

CHURCH: Thank you, Mehran Kamrava, for joining us and sharing your perspective and analysis. Do appreciate it, as always.

KAMRAVA: Thank you very much.

CHURCH: Of course. And we have much more ahead including the latest on the Breaking News on President Trump's media ban. Back with that and more in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[02:49:00]

CHURCH: We are following Breaking News out of Washington, where a federal judge has ordered the White House to reinstate access to CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. President Trump banned the media outlets last week, saying he didn't like their coverage. He later said their reporting was a threat to national security.

But the judge, Timothy Kelly, says the ban was done without constitutionally adequate due process. It's not clear when CNN or the other news organizations will be allowed back into the White House.

So let's take a look now at some other top stories we are following. President Trump is set to begin talks with Chinese leader, Xi Jinping in the day ahead. They are (inaudible) explosive growth of artificial intelligence, the war with Iran, and U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. The U.S. Treasury Secretary says Washington and Beijing have agreed to extend their trade truce through January.

Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu will be addressing the United Nations General Assembly in the coming hours.

[02:50:00]

Netanyahu said he will use the speech to defend Israel's military actions in Gaza. The Israeli prime minister's visit comes as he faces pressure at home ahead of his re-election fight next month and conflicts in Lebanon and Iran.

Elizabeth Holmes has been approved to move to a halfway house next year near Austin, Texas, according to ABC News. The Theranos founder was convicted in 2022 and sentenced to 11 years in prison for defrauding investors while running her failed blood-testing startup. Her sentence has since been reduced by one year. The Federal Bureau of Prisons declined to provide more information on the move.

The leaders of two top A.I. companies went before the U.N. Security Council with one clear message, the industry needs international standards and cooperation. OpenAI CEO, Sam Altman, and Anthropic CEO, Dario Amodei delivered remarks separately to the council on Wednesday urging world leaders to come together to manage the threats posed by developments in A.I. capabilities.

Here's part of what the two A.I. leaders had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DARIO AMODEI, ANTHROPIC CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER: I believe that this is the most important global security issue facing the world today. For all the differences of the people in this room, we must put aside those differences in order to confront this global opportunity and global threat that is being presented to us at the same time. No leader, no company and no nation can manage this alone. SAM ALTMAN, OPENAI CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER: It doesn't matter whether people put their risk of catastrophe at 10 percent or one percent or 12 percent or 0.1 percent. None of these levels are remotely acceptable and we should not train models that we cannot make an extremely strong case that we'll be able to keep under human control.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CHURCH: And we are now learning of a new incident involving A.I. agents going rogue. Australia's prime minister says an OpenAI agent hacked into a database of the country's National Healthcare System, accessing public and non-public files. The incident happened in June, but OpenAI says it only became aware of it in August. The prime minister said he spoke to OpenAI's CEO at the U.N. and expressed Australia's extreme concern.

CNN's Hanako Montgomery joins us now from Tokyo. So, Hanako, what more are you learning about this?

HANAKO MONTGOMERY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Rosemary, as you stated just there, this is the first known case of A.I. hacking a government network. And it's just the latest example of A.I. agents going rogue and acting in ways that their human operators didn't intend.

And here's how the Australian Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, explained what happened to reporters on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTHONY ALBANESE, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER: No personal information is believed to have been accessed at this stage, but investigations are ongoing. Evidence currently available is there is no broader compromise to the Services Australia network. Nonetheless, this situation is obviously unacceptable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MONTGOMERY: Now, as you heard Albanese say just there, no private information, no patient records were breached. But we do know that the A.I. agent got into Australia's Medicare statistics database. And we also know that it accessed both public and non-public files, including aggregate health statistics and internal file names.

And an OpenAI spokesperson also said that the agent even wrote files into the system. And Rosemary, we also know that the security breach actually happened back in June, basically three months ago, when one of OpenAI's agents was conducting some research into health care costs and systems. And then when it encountered some security blocks, it actually bypassed them and accessed information that it wasn't authorized to access.

But OpenAI only became aware of the security breach two months later in August, when it was conducting some reviews and tests of its model's activity. Now, Australia's government was warned even later, on September 10th, when the company sent a notification to a generic inbox.

And the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, expressed frustration over this delay, calling it unacceptable. Albanese has also ordered a forensic investigation and has said that the government is potentially considering legal action. Now, Albanese has also said that potentially three other government entities might have been affected.

So again, Rosemary, just adding more concern and more calls for guardrails for A.I. to ensure that the technology is actually safe for everybody to use, Rosemary.

CHURCH: All right, Hanako Montgomery, very unsettling.

[02:55:00]

But thank you so much for your reporting live there from Tokyo. Appreciate it.

And I want to thank all of you for your company this hour. I'm Rosemary Church. "CNN Newsroom" with Polo Sandoval is next, after a short break. Do stay with us.

[02:55:13]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[03:00:00]