Return to Transcripts main page

CNN This Morning

Jimmy Kimmel Live Crew To Be Paid Next Week; Vaccine Advisory Panel Makes Decision On COVID-19 Shot; Cyberattack Disrupts European Airports Including Heathrow, Brussels; Abnormally Warm Ocean Water Causing Heat Wave; Russia Hits Ukraine With Barrage Of Drones, Missiles, Kills 3. Aired 6-7a ET

Aired September 20, 2025 - 06:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:00:30]

DANNY FREEMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Welcome to CNN This Morning. It is Saturday, September 20th. I'm Danny Freeman in for Victor Blackwell. Here's what we are working on for you this morning.

There's new CNN reporting on Disney and ABC's move to pull Jimmy Kimmel's show off the air. We'll tell you what we know about a meeting between Kimmel, his lawyers and bosses, and what's going to happen to his team while the show is off the air.

And there could soon be changes to how you can get a COVID vaccine. We'll tell you about the new recommendations just handed down by the CDC's vaccine panel and what they might mean for you.

Plus, new this morning, Poland once again scrambling jets in response to Russian planes near its border. It all happened as Russia carried out fresh strikes on Ukraine. We have the latest coming up in a live report.

Plus, take a look right now. Here's a live look at London's Heathrow Airport. Flights there and across Europe are being hit with delays because of a cyberattack. We have details on that just ahead.

ALLISON CHINCHAR, CNN METEOROLOGIST: And on Monday, it's the official start to fall, but it feels a lot more like July temperatures as we head into the weekend. We'll take a closer look coming up.

FREEMAN: But first, we begin with new details about the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel live. Sources tell CNN that the show's crew will be paid through the next, but the future of the show remains in limbo. The show staffs roughly 200 to 250 people.

Kimmel is said to be incredibly mindful of his staff as he weighs his options during ongoing discussions with ABC. Now, Kimmel's show was pulled from the air Wednesday after comments he made about Charlie Kirk's suspected killer. The decision came hours after the FCC chair appointed by Trump publicly pressured ABC to punish Kimmel. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister has more from Los Angeles. Elizabeth?

ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Danny. So the latest that I am hearing is that Jimmy Kimmel had a meeting at his lawyer's office here in Century City, California, with top Disney executives. I am told that Jimmy was present with his attorney and his manager and that there was no resolution to the meeting with Disney, which means that we have no indication of a path forward for Jimmy or his show.

But I am told by sources familiar with ongoing conversations that Disney and ABC are hopeful that they can get Jimmy Kimmel show back. Everybody at ABC, I hear, loves Jimmy. They have a great longstanding relationship with him over the past two decades and they would love for him to come back. But what sources tell me is that the temperature has to come down.

This, of course, amid threats from the chair of the FCC, which then also caused different station groups to pull Kimmel show. With station groups refusing to air Jimmy Kimmel Live, Disney boss Bob Iger ultimately decided that it was best to temporarily or indefinitely pull the show.

Now everyone in Hollywood is backing Kimmel. They really want answers from ABC. They want him to come back. This includes comedians like Oscars host. The Oscars are on ABC Conan O'Brien. Here's what Conan had to say, Danny. Quote, the suspension of Jimmy Kimmel and the promise to silence other late night hosts for criticizing the administration should disturb everyone on the right, left and center. It's wrong and anyone with the conscience knows it's wrong.

Now the late night host on competing networks from Kimmel also back Kimmel on their shows this week. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY FALON, HOST, "THE TONIGHT SHOW STARRING JIMMY FALON": A lot of people are worried that we won't keep saying what we want to say or that we'll be censored. But I'm going to cover the president's trip to the U.K. just like I normally would. Well, guys, President Trump just wrapped up his three day trip to the U.K. and he looked incredibly handsome.

STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT": This is going to satisfy the regime. They are woefully naive and clearly they've never read the children's book if you give a mouse a Kimmel.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: From Comedy Central, it's the all new government approved Daily Show with your patriotically obedient host Jon Stewart.

JON STEWART, HOST, THE DAILY SHOW": Are the naysayers and the critics right? Is Donald Trump stifling free speech?

CROWD: Of course not, John.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[06:05:00] WAGMEISTER: Now, as Hollywood is backing Kimmel, there have been protests outside of Disney's offices, both in Los Angeles and in New York, with the major Hollywood union, SAG-AFTRA and WGA backing Kimmel. Danny.

FREEMAN: Elizabeth Wegmeister, thank you very much for that. All right, a different topic now. A CDC vaccine advisory panel decided Friday to recommend that people who want a COVID vaccine will have to talk to their doctor first.

However, you won't need a prescription necessarily to get it. The decision capped off a two-day meeting with the new members of that panel. Back in June you might remember Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. dismissed previous members, claiming conflicts of interest. Then he handpicked a new panel.

At this meeting, members also made a new decision on a combined vaccine for kids, but they opted to delay a key vote on the hepatitis B shot for newborns. All the recommendations must now go to the interim CDC director for his sign off.

All right, joining me now is Dr. Jodie Guest, an epidemiologist and professor with Emory University. She's here to break all this down. Thank you for joining us early this morning.

DR. JODIE GUEST, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, EMORY UNIVERSITY: Absolutely.

FREEMAN: OK, let's start with this kind of big question that I feel like continues with vaccines, this question of availability based on these decisions that have been made. What is the status when it comes to how available some of these shots may be?

GUEST: So I think many of the decisions that were made are actually going to make vaccines harder to get for our average people across the United States and particularly for our kids. And that is super concerning.

FREEMAN: Why specifically does this make it harder? Is it cost? Is it just in general having to go to a doctor?

GUEST: Potentially, yes. So the COVID-19 recommendations that were changed yesterday are now, you need to talk to a provider. That means you have to have access to one. You have to be able to get into one. Not everyone in the United States has access to a provider. And so I think we'll see a real divide in equity and access. And that's just one of the examples.

FREEMAN: Is cost an example as well? Because I know that there's this question of if it's not recommended or if the recommendation changes that may affect insurance.

GUEST: Yes, absolutely. So most of the vaccines that they discussed were not taken off the recommendation guidelines, but there were some changes that were pretty significant. And all of those will affect our access to insurance. We do not know how insurance companies will respond to this. And we need to be really concerned about Medicaid, Medicare, and all the other ways that people do have access to vaccines.

FREEMAN: I want to talk about the MMRV vaccine. So that's, as I understand, that's the combined measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox vaccine.

GUEST: That's right.

FREEMAN: But now I understand that the guideline is to separate the MMR and the chickenpox vaccine. So I guess, what's the difference between the two of them? And can you help explain that scrutiny?

GUEST: Sure. So that is a combined vaccination that was put together, and what they did was say that you cannot have that combination under the age of four. And the reason for that is there was some data that suggests that you have an increased risk of having a seizure due to high fever based on the combination if you're under the age of four.

But we want to be really clear this is a super safe combination vaccine. And the changes are a 0.03 percent difference compared to a 0.07 percent difference. So these are really small. And when you separate these vaccines, you now have to have people come more often to get vaccines. They're less likely to finish their vaccine series. So the risks are actually much worse than the benefits of separating these.

FREEMAN: Because, again, the idea is if you separate these two shots, that's more shots a newborn has to have, right?

GUEST: That's right. And less likely for parents to actually complete the entire series for a child.

FREEMAN: Right. Because then you have to, again, go make the effort to go back potentially to a doctor, something along those lines.

To that point, though, I mean, how long has the combined shot been around? Is that something, you know, that I may have gotten if I'm, you know, a millennial. Is this a newer shot?

GUEST: It is. It's a newer one because the chickenpox vaccine has not been around forever, but it's made tremendous changes in how many people get sick with chickenpox. It's decreased the number by 97 percent by the year 2019. So it's really had a huge impact. And, you know, this is another step in limiting access.

FREEMAN: I want to talk about then, this hepatitis B shot, because the hepatitis B shot, as I understand it, was first recommended in '91. Can you make clear how effective that has been since it's been basically introduced?

GUEST: yes, absolutely. It's really a tremendously effective vaccine. We've seen the cases of children who have chronic hepatitis b drop by 95 percent since this became a vaccine that was recommended in 1991. That is a really successful vaccine prevention strategy. FREEMAN: Yes, we have it on the screen right here. There were 18,000

cases per year. Now, in the realm of about 20 cases. That's incredible.

[06:10:04]

GUEST: Yes.

FREEMAN: And that's again direct link to this vaccine that we've had for the past 30 plus years.

GUEST: That's correct.

FEEMAN: Does it seem like, doctor, does it seem like at this point this new panel are making vaccine decisions, considerations, recommendations, using good established science?

GUEST: They are not following all the science that we've been watching. They are bringing in new places to look for signals of safety concerns. And that data, particularly VAERS, which is one of the systems they're using, is a self-reported system. And it is a fantastic system to look for early warning signals, but it is not a system we can use for causality. And so the translation of that data to causality is problematic.

FREEMAN: Dr. Jodie Guest, I think we're going to be talking to you more because this is not over yet. But, but I appreciate you sharing your expertise this morning.

GUEST: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

FREEMAN: You bet. All right. We're following some breaking news out of Europe. Right now we're seeing delays at several major airports, including London's Heathrow, Brussels and Berlin due to a cyberattack. Now the attack is targeting the company that provides check in and boarding systems for several airlines, causing flight delays and cancellations.

In Brussels, the attack has left automated systems inoperable, allowing only manual check in and boarding procedures. Keep an eye on that.

Meanwhile, this morning, flights have resumed in Dallas after radar and communication outages hit their air traffic controllers. According to FlightAware, there were more than 430 cancellations and 580 delays at the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, along with more than 190 delays at Love Field as of Friday evening. This is what one airline traveler told CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MARION ANSON-PERCHAL, PASSENGER DELAYED BY ATC OUTAGE: We got a notice that there was a delay. We were supposed to leave at 7 this morning. We got the advice at 3:20 and then just now we got to delay that -- it's not only delayed to 5:20 and then now it's canceled. So now we're in a line to try to rebook to try to get to a cruise in Miami tomorrow morning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: Earlier this year, a similar problem caused air traffic controllers to repeatedly lose contact with flights approaching or departing Newark Living Liberty International Airport.

And to this now, Erik Siebert, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, is resigning. He made the announcement to staff yesterday, although it's not clear when that might take effect. Now, Siebert was under intense pressure from President Trump to charge New York Attorney General Letitia James with mortgage fraud. Siebert had recently told senior Justice Department officials that investigators found insufficient evidence to bring charges against James.

Siebert was nominated to the position by Trump back in May. He had been serving as the interim U.S. attorney since January. In a post on Truth Social early this morning, Trump claimed Siebert did not quit, but that he pulled his nomination after he received strong support from Democrats.

To this now, in a closed door meeting with House investigators on Friday, Alex Acosta, the former U.S. attorney who negotiated a controversial 2008 plea deal with Jeffrey Epstein, defended that agreement to lawmakers. According to lawmakers who were at the meeting, Acosta told investigators he did not see sufficient evidence to move forward with the case, even though approximately 40 women had come forward to share their accounts of sexual assault.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. JASMINE CROCKETT (D) TEXAS: Seemed as if were going back to a little bit of victim shaming and believing that, well, nobody's going to believe these girls or these women, so we're not going to necessarily have a good case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: Acosta also told the committee he never met Epstein nor Ghislaine Maxwell and testified that he never saw President Donald Trump's name on any documents related to the late financier.

All right, to weather now. Parts of the U.S. are seeing summer like temperatures as we head into fall. That was hot here in Atlanta. With me now is CNN meteorologist Allison Chinchar. Allison, I mean, in Philly, too. I mean, I think it almost hit 90 yesterday. It's wild.

CHINCHAR: Right. So it's funny when you look at the map, like some of these temperatures actually resemble more like what you would see in mid-July rather than mid-September. Yes, technically fall begins. The astronomical start to fall is on Monday. But we are holding on tight to summer in a lot of places, especially the southeast portions of the Ohio Valley.

It's also triggering some showers and thunderstorms across areas of the Midwest and even into the central portion of the country. So again, it's going to be one of those things we have to kind of keep an eye out, especially because some of these temperatures are going to stick around for several days. Here, look at this, 93 in Nashville, 91 in Atlanta.

Both of those more where we would see the temperatures typically in early to mid-July rather than into September, but also 90s for Oakland, Oklahoma City, Dallas, Jackson. Again, you've got a lot of these areas that are 10 to 15 degrees above where they normally would be this time of year. And that lump of orange you can see there really kind of sticks around for the next several days. We really don't get much of a break until the very end of the upcoming week.

[06:15:04]

And even then you still have some of that orange kind of lingering across portions of the Southeast. So take a look at this. Atlanta, 91 for the high today, 88 for tomorrow. Again that normal right around that 83 degree mark. But Little Rock, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Louisville, all of these places are going to see those temperatures well above where they normally would be.

Here's a look at Nashville too. The average this time of year is 83 degrees. We will be in the 90s the next two days. Still above average on Monday. And then we finally start to get back a little bit closer to normal once we get later on into the upcoming week.

Atlanta, similar scenario here except it just lingers a little bit longer where those temperatures are above average by at least five degrees for the next five days.

FREEMAN: I mean, I was not expecting to sit by the pool while I'm in Atlanta this week, but I guess no time like now. Allison Chinchar, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

All right. Coming up next on CNN This Morning, Poland scrambling fighter jets as Russia takes aim at Ukraine. Once again, we're live with new information.

Plus, thousands gather to remember conservative activist Charlie Kirk on the college campus he was gunned down at more than a week earlier.

Plus, deal or no deal, a major step in the TikTok showdown as the U.S. and China make progress on negotiations. We'll tell you what happened during that much touted phone call between Presidents Trump and Xi.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:21:09]

FREEMAN: New this morning we're getting our first look at damage after Russian attacks in Ukraine overnight. Ukraine says Russia launched almost 600 drones plus 40 missiles. Poland says it scrambled jets as the attacks got close to its border. And it says its ground based air defense systems are ready.

Russian drones violated Polish airspace earlier this month, too, prompting NATO allies to pledge to beef up defenses in the region. CNN's Barbie Latza Nadeau joins me now from Rome. Barbie, tell us what's the significance of this latest attack?

BARBIE LATZA NADEAU, CNN REPORTER: Yes, you know, the significance probably more than anything is, you know, hopes for a cease fire or a meaningful negotiation are slowly slipping away. And what we're also seeing here, when we look at these incursions and Russia denies them of European airspace. First in Estonia on Friday, those were Italian fighter jets that had to intercept that.

And this morning over Poland, we're seeing that this is spreading quickly into these European countries. And it's also worrying for the NATO countries, of course, because NATO will have to respond if there's a more serious incursion. Now let's listen to what President Trump had to say about it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Russian jets entered Estonia's airspace today for 12 minutes. Do you see that as a threat to NATO?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Well, I'm going to have to look at it. They're going to be briefing me in a short while. Well, I don't love it. I don't love it. I don't love it when that happens. Could be big trouble.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

NADEAU: And you know, Danny, when you listen to that concern, when you get NATO involved and you think about how close this is to these European countries, this is something that really has been on the minds of European leaders since Russia invaded Ukraine back in February 2022. And it's really worrying them now that it looks like that this could be spreading into Europe a little bit more closely than anybody was hoping for, Danny.

FREEMAN: And somebody noted yesterday that 12 minutes is a long time when you actually stop and think about it. All right, Barbie Latza Nadeau. Thank you so much for your reporting, as always.

Coming up next on CNN This Morning, we have new reporting on Jimmy Kimmel's suspension, whether his crew will still get paid.

Plus, workers fired over comments about Charlie Kirk. But they're fighting back now. Our legal expert weighs in. Coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:27:51]

FREEMAN: Thousands of people are expected to gather tomorrow to honor the life of assassinated conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The service in Glendale, Arizona, is expected to event as top U.S. leaders, including President Trump, will be speaking.

Meanwhile, on Friday, students from Utah Valley University, where Kirk was killed, gathered for a vigil honoring his life. Students held candles in a darkened auditorium as speakers called for peace and unity.

The university's president urged students to come together and continue to care for one another.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ASTRID S. TUMINEZ, PRESIDENT, UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY: In the coming days, weeks and months, let us pause and slow down when anger rises in our hearts towards those we think might be our enemy.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: Now, you may have heard about some people who made comments online about Charlie Kirk's killing being fired from their jobs. We're learning that some of those people are now suing their former employers. Joining me now is Stanford University law professor Fred Smith.

Good morning, Fred. We wanted to talk about this just because, again, I think a lot of people have questions about this. They're seeing it on social media. Let's start here.

A teacher in Iowa, we understand, is suing the school district, claiming it violated his constitutional right to free speech when the school board voted to fire him over a post he made in the aftermath of the Charlie Kirk shooting.

So, Fred, let's start here. Does this person, this teacher have a legitimate free speech claim here?

FRED SMITH, PROFESSOR OF LAW, STANFORD UNIVERSITY: Sure. So the first question that any court will ask, is this a public employee. The answer is yes, in this particular instance, it is a public school employee. If it is a public employee, the next question we look to is whether or not it was constitutionally protected speech and whether or not the person was speaking as a citizen, as opposed to speaking, for example, on behalf of the government.

That said, what counts as constitutionally protected speech is narrower for public employees than private individuals more broadly.

[06:30:00]

That is to say if someone is a public employee, there's some possibility that even if someone were speaking on their own behalf, they might somehow interfere with important government functions, in this case, the educational environment. So, a court is going to balance how much of an interruption was there to the learning and classroom environment in that particular community.

And they're going to balance that against the speech itself. And so, it's going to be a fact question. So, in this particular case, the argument from the government is, they got 1,200 calls from parents, and which speaks to some to disruption, but that doesn't really tell us yet on its own what this meant for the classroom environment.

DANNY FREEMAN, ANCHOR, CNN THIS MORNING WEEKEND: That's fascinating, and thank you for breaking that down. I want to play for you a little bit of what Vice President J.D. Vance said though on "Fox News" earlier this week. Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES DAVID VANCE, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Look, we have First Amendment in this country. The First Amendment protects a lot of very ugly speech. But if you celebrate Charlie's Kirk -- Charlie Kirk's death, you should not be protected from being fired for being a disgusting person.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: So, I mean, Fred, let's talk about that a little more. I mean, what rights do employers have when it comes to firing someone for, say, comments made online?

SMITH: Sure, right. So, that was an overstatement, what the Vice President said, right? So, that is to say that if the government wanted to prosecute a teacher for their speech criminally, that would not be permissible.

FREEMAN: Right.

SMITH: If someone on social media who doesn't work for the government were to be punished by the government for their speech, simply because the speech was disgusting. That is not sufficient. So, in this case, though, it is an employee, right? And so, the employer does have more power than they would to someone who is not -- toward someone who is not their employee.

So, the -- again, the question really is going to be how much of a disruption was this speech? And in each of these cases, there -- the answer may be different.

FREEMAN: I want to talk to something that also got a lot of headlines this week. Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested that the government would or might prosecute people for hate speech. Now, she later tried to clarify those comments. But we know this. The Supreme Court has affirmed over-and-over again, hate speech is protected speech. What's your perspective on what the administration's next move might be, if they can make any moves in trying to fight this?

SMITH: Yes, so, the reality is that, in the United States, there's a very broad view of what constitutes free speech. So, there's speech that might not be protected in other countries, that is protected in the United States. And among that -- among those categories, certainly would be what's often called hate speech. The line is crossed if someone is promoting immediate violence against someone, right?

So, if someone is threatening someone, that crosses the line. But vaguer statements, statements about revolution. There were a lot of cases about that in the late 1960s and early 1970s. That is permissible. People -- Nazis were in the early 1970s allowed to go through Skokie, Illinois, where there were a lot of Jewish residents. It was disgusting behavior. But it was constitutionally protected. And I'm confident that the attorney general is aware of those cases.

FREEMAN: Fred, I want to slightly switch gears for a moment, because there was another big media story that happened this week. A judge rejected President Trump's defamation lawsuit against the "New York Times" for being, quote, "decidedly improper and impermissible". The judge also said that a complaint is not supposed to be a, quote, "megaphone" for public relations.

You know, I read some of this complaint earlier, our court documents when they first came out, a lot of boosting the President and just -- it was very interesting to read. At its core, though, is there any substance to the Trump case here?

SMITH: And to that particular one, no. But one thing to sort of, kind of keep in mind is that sometimes a government official might be doing something not because they think that they can actually win, but because they are trying to chill other people from speaking, right? So, it could be that some people might.

There's words that some people might not say at all because they don't even want to bother, that even if they're going to ultimately win the case, they just don't want to deal with it.

[06:35:00]

And so -- and so sometimes, you might see people attempting to chill speech. The government is not the only entity that uses lawsuits that way. There's private individuals who use lawsuits that way, and there's a lot of case law -- there's -- sorry, there's a lot of laws or statutes across the country that try to prevent that kind of strategic use of litigation.

FREEMAN: Yes, and again, that one was -- that one was fascinating because you know, the first ten pages were talking about "The Apprentice", and, you know, different -- I mean, yes, it's interesting. And then I'm curious to see, I think a lot of people are curious to see if the President ultimately re-files some sort of version of it. Fred Smith, thank you so much for joining us early this morning to break down all these important topics. Appreciate it.

SMITH: My pleasure.

FREEMAN: Since the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, baseless conspiracy theories about the shooting have exploded on social media. And even though investigators say they believe the suspect, Tyler Robinson, acted alone, Trump allies like Steve Bannon have pushed the idea that Kirk was killed as part of a broad national conspiracy. CNN's Marshall Cohen has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MARSHALL COHEN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER (on camera): It is getting really ugly on social media. In the week after Charlie Kirk was killed, there were more than 2 million distinct posts on X, formerly Twitter, referencing conspiracy theories. That's according to the data analytics firm PeakMetrics. They found that this was actually twice as many conspiratorial posts as there were last year after the assassination attempt against Donald Trump.

Think about that for a second. One expert who tracks disinformation told me that this is the worst he's ever seen. And there are a few reasons for that. First, there was the extremely graphic close-up footage of Kirk's death that instantly went viral, creating a visceral reaction. Also, this tragedy came at a time when 71 percent of Americans think that our society itself is broken, according to a "Reuters" poll.

This creates the opening for crazy conspiracy theories to flourish. So, some left-wing figures promoted the unhinged idea that Donald Trump himself orchestrated the murder to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal and the Jeffrey Epstein files, other liberal activists tried to connect the suspect to far-right white supremacist groups that had previously clashed with Kirk.

Even though there is mounting evidence that the suspect disliked Kirk's conservative views. And then on the right, Trump allies like Steve Bannon and Laura Loomer have claimed that the suspect was part of a terror cell, and that he was just a bit player in a national conspiracy that is being covered up.

They're peddling this even as the authorities say that the suspect acted alone. Other right-wing influencers are leaning heavily into anti-Semitic tropes to blame Israel. They've claimed that Israeli spies took out Kirk because he was starting to waver from his longstanding support for the Jewish state.

These ideas are uncorroborated, totally debunked, and some of them are just flat-out crazy. But as one disinformation expert told me, they don't actually need to make any sense because the incentives on the internet are totally backwards. The influencers and podcasters and grifters promoting these theories need to churn out inflammatory hot takes just like these to gain more followers, build their subscriber lists, and keep the money flowing. Marshall Cohen, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FREEMAN: Marshall Cohen, thank you so much for that. Coming up next, progress is made on TikTok negotiations between the U.S. and China. We'll tell you what came out of that much-touted call between Presidents Trump and Xi, that and much more coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:40:00]

FREEMAN: After delaying a TikTok ban multiple times from going into effect, President Trump says a deal is nearly across the finish line. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The TikTok deal is well

on its way, as you know, and the investors are getting ready. And I think China wanted to see it stay open, too. They wanted to see it. And I can tell you, the young people in our country wanted to see it stay open very badly.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FREEMAN: President Trump made the announcement after a phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping. She did signal his blessing for the plan, but as long as it aligns with Beijing's interests. Joining me now to discuss is Brett Bruen, he's the President of the Global Situation Room, and a former National Security Council official.

Good morning Brett, thank you so much for joining us on this fascinating subject. Let's start here. President Trump appears confident about a TikTok deal getting across the finish line, but China's leader seems to be saying, well, we want some concessions. From your perspective, what's on the table here? What could be negotiated in exchange for a TikTok agreement?

BRETT BRUEN, PRESIDENT, GLOBAL SITUATION ROOM: Well, part of it Is just the question of ownership. And Beijing saying, well, we want to retain some ownership. But Danny, more importantly, let's remember why Congress actually outlawed TikTok, and that was because of very real concerns around the data of Americans.

And you know, Trump has not been great on details in these deals. So, I'm going to be watching for what are the protections? Where is that data stored to ensure that this generation of young Americans is not just handing over, really, you know, personal, private information to Beijing.

[06:45:00]

So, that is a key part of this, not just the ownership question.

FREEMAN: Well, so, let's talk a little bit about -- a little bit more about that data aspect. Because listen, like you said, data, national security, those have been -- you know, the initial as you noted, concerns right about this Chinese ownership of this app. Do you think, though -- and it's hard because we're reading the tea leaves here, do you think that national security is taking center stage when it comes to these negotiations, or is it just the priority to get a deal done?

BRUEN: Well, that's my fear, is we've seen example after example, whether it was with Intel, whether it's quite frankly on some of these humanitarian crises like in Gaza, Trump seems to see the world through the lens of money. Money that the U.S. government money that U.S. companies can make off of it.

And yet, at the same time, the cost to U.S. national security to Americans is quite high if we allow Beijing to retain access to that data, retain this very powerful tool that obviously has outsized influence on Americans. FREEMAN: You know, the other thing that I believe -- and correct me

if I'm wrong, that may be part of this is right. This is not happening in a vacuum, OK? Trump imposed stiff tariffs on imported Chinese goods, clawed them back from 145 percent to 30 percent. But I guess, it seems that trade is probably very strongly linked potentially to this deal. What can you tell us about that?

BRUEN: Absolutely, look, this is three-dimensional diplomacy. So, you are going to have on the one hand, this very prominent TikTok deal. But on the other, both the trade question and Beijing has avoided some of the worst-case scenarios. And Trump seems to be more flexible when it comes to negotiating with Xi Jinping than he is, even some of our allies.

And then, there's the whole other issue about Chinese military Intelligence operations, we don't seem to have been addressing those during these negotiations, and that obviously, just over the last few years, whether it was with spy balloons or even when I was in the Obama White House, I remember the Chinese hackers broke into our systems, got access to lots of data from government employees and contractors. So, those concerns, those risks remain very real.

FREEMAN: Specifically on the -- on those ongoing trade talks, though, I'm curious. Do we have a sense at this point as to how average consumers have been or will continue to be affected by this back-and- forth when it comes to tariffs in China?

BRUEN: Well, let's start with, Americans are paying those tariffs. Now, you know, the Trump administration likes to tout how much money they have taken in. But at the end of the day, look Danny, I think Trump has proven he can defy political gravity. He can even defy legal gravity. The question now, I think for a lot of us observing this is, can he defy economic gravity?

History would say, no, Americans are going to go to the stores, and they're going to find higher prices for those products. And certainly, a lot of them come from China. And for the moment, you're paying 50 percent more in a lot of cases for those goods. And in the short term, companies will try to find workarounds. But over the long term, the only workaround is increasing prices.

FREEMAN: So much on the China front, and again, very curious to see how this TikTok deal, if it does come to fruition, unfolds. Brett Bruen, thank you so much for joining us this morning, really appreciate it.

BRUEN: You bet.

FREEMAN: Coming up next on CNN THIS MORNING, the WNBA is booming. But are players seeing the payoff? We'll explore the growing gap between revenue and reality. Plus, tune in tomorrow for "HAVE I GOT NEWS FOR YOU", I love the show. Former Congressman Adam Kinzinger and comedian and writer Negin Farsad join Roy, Amber and Michael at 9:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [06:50:00]

FREEMAN: The WNBA is breaking records with its 180 percent surge in franchise values and soaring attendance. But as stars like Caitlin Clark shine, players say their share of the revenue falls short of other pro sports. CNN's Boris Sanchez takes us on the court to get a closer look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR (on camera): In the past year, the WNBA's 13 franchises have seen record-breaking growth increasing in value by over 180 percent, according to Sportico. You can chart the league's growing popularity, not only in financial gain, but in name- recognition too. Stars like Caitlin Clark and Angel Reese becoming household names, as well as a spike in celebrity endorsements and attendance.

In 2024, Caitlin Clark's team, the Indiana Fever averaged more than 17,000 fans a game. That's more than six NBA teams and three MLB teams in the same span. The uptick in popularity corresponds with a $2.2 billion TV rights deal with WNBA signed for 2026. That covers the next 11 years, which "ESPN" reports will increase the league's annual revenue by about $200 million a season.

Yet, WNBA players say they're not being paid what they're owed. Right now, they get less than 10 percent of the league's total revenue.

[06:55:00]

A strikingly slim margin when compared to other pro-sports leagues, in which athletes typically split revenues about 50-50. That's almost 40 percent greater than WNBA players, and why some of the league's stars say they're due a higher percentage of revenue, though they're not looking for dollar-for-dollar parity.

Keep in mind, despite historic gains since it was founded in 1996, the league has always operated at a loss, annually, losing tens of millions of dollars, even with large cash boosts coming from the NBA, which is the majority stakeholder. But as the league is poised to keep growing, adding two more teams next season, expanding to 18 total by 2030, the question remains what will the league do with the new revenue? Are we headed for a lockout, or can the owners and players agree to new terms that align with what they feel they're owed?

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FREEMAN: Boris, thank you for that. All right, there is much more ahead on the next hour of CNN THIS MORNING WEEKEND, including hundreds arrested so far in ICE raids in Chicago, and those protesting their enforcement operations.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)