Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Disney Under Pressure From Hollywood, Affiliates; Three NATO States Claim Russia Violated Airspaces In 10 Days; Trump Says Progress Made With Xi on TikTok Deal; Donald Trump To Impose $100k Fee On H-1B International Worker Visa; Cerebras Opening A.I.. Data Center In Oklahoma City; IPO Market Heats Up After Multi-Year Lull. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired September 19, 2025 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:18]

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell, there it is, ringing on Wall Street. IBM ringing the closing bell. We

are at records, by the way, on all the three major indices as with strong performance on the Dow, the S&P, and the NASDAQ.

There you have good gains. One and two -- good strong gavels for three records. Trading is over. Those are the market and these are the main

events we are talking about.

ABC's abrupt sidelining of Jimmy Kimmel is causing a major mess for the parent company, Disney.

President trump says progress was made in finalizing a deal with China over the fate of TikTok after he spoke to President Xi.

And the president of the New York Stock Exchange tells me after a string of successful listings, IPOs are back full throttle.

Tonight, live from New York. It is Friday, September the 19th. I am Richard Quest. Yes, Friday, QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

Good evening.

The Walt Disney Company, Disney for short under pressure from all sides after it suspended the late night host, Jimmy Kimmel. Demonstrators

gathered today outside its offices in New York. There were signs accusing the company of capitulating to pressure from Washington.

You'll remember, Disney's broadcast network, ABC took Kimmel off the air indefinitely over his comments about Charlie Kirk's shooting. Sinclair, the

ABC's largest affiliate group plans to air a tribute to Kirk on tonight during the Kimmel timeslot. It has called on ABC and the U.S. regulators to

take further action, and a source tells CNN that Disney is hopeful there is a path to bringing Kimmel back, provided he takes down the temperature.

Our chief media correspondent, Brian Stelter is with me.

Everything I read Brian, in my morning reading says that actually when Disney sort of suspended him, they knew there would be trouble, but they

actually hoped it was going to be a way of defusing. In other words, they saw what he was planning to say on the Wednesday and decided this was the

lesser of two evils.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: And maybe it actually was. You know, imagine what would have happened if Kimmel's show continued on

Wednesday and into Thursday, but some stations across the United States refused to air it. You know, imagine if some of them had replaced Kimmel's

show with a tribute to Charlie Kirk, which is actually what some of those Sinclair stations are doing later today.

This would have become a political firestorm no matter what. It would have become a big scandal for ABC and parent company, Disney, and instead of

having protesters outside decrying Disney, maybe they would be outside condemning Kimmel. You know, there would be right-wing protesters instead

of left-wing protesters.

I actually have a little bit of sympathy for Disney's CEO, Bob Iger. I think he is in a nearly impossible situation right now.

QUEST: Bearing in mind that when you look at what Kimmel said, I mean, it was certainly not in the most extreme of words. I've seen a lot worse from

a lot -- from politicians and beyond ever since. So I don't know what they could have done. And related to that, what interests do these affiliates

have? I mean, they are in bed with ABC. Why? Where is their motive? Except for Nexstar trying to do its deal? What's Sinclair's motive?

STELTER: They are both in with ABC, but they also sometimes do feud. I mean, affiliates, you know, are local stations, they are much closer to the

viewers at home and in a red versus blue America, some of the affiliates are not as happy with ABC's New York and L.A. programming as others are.

There are also all sorts of financial back and forth kind of battles between affiliates and the network over who pays for what and how much

money is being spent and all of that.

So some of those tensions that are kind of the typical business tensions have now bubbled over and turned into political tensions as well, and I

think we are seeing a mixture of the two playing out right now, and I do not see a path forward for Disney.

I am not sure how this is resolvable other than with Kimmel saying goodbye not on the air, but off the air and going and getting a job somewhere else.

I think this bridge has been burned. I don't see a way to rebuild it.

QUEST: All right, now, if that is the case, then where does that leave both sides? Let us assume you know Kimmel does "the decent thing." Where does

that leave -- that does not diffuse the argument, does it?

[16:05:06]

STELTER: No. None of this diffuses the argument because ultimately we are dealing with something we've never seen in the United States before. You

know, this federal government trying to use its political pressure and its bully pulpit to change media company content and coverage.

If we had seen this with any past president, it would have sparked First Amendment lawsuits. It would have sparked, you know, so much hand-wringing.

Maybe we will still see lawsuits. Maybe we will see some of that action, but with Trump, some of this is expected and baked in.

QUEST: Right.

STELTER: And Disney has accepted, I think, that they are playing by new rules. That's what you cover every day, right? Companies are realizing they

are playing by new Trumpian rules.

QUEST: The fact -- let's do double duty with you, squeeze the acid, as we say, a federal judge has rejected President Trump's defamation lawsuit

against "The Times" -- "The New York Times" $15 billion lawsuit. Trump had said it was a virtual mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.

Numerous legal experts said the suit was meritless. The judge, though, dismissed it on procedural grounds saying it is not -- the complaint is not

meant to be a megaphone for public relations. So this is going to come back in a different form.

STELTER: Yes, this is right out of high school or college. You know, President Trump's legal team might think that they, you know, they are

really powerful, high and mighty. They are representing the most powerful man in the world, and yet, on a day like today, they are just stuck in the

back of the law professor's class, getting lectured by the professor.

So this federal judge today, he said basically to his students, he said, this paper is not acceptable. It is way too long. It is way too flowery.

Your lawsuit, it reads like a pro-Trump op-ed and not a serious lawsuit. Go back and refile it. Go back and start over.

This must have been a little bit humiliating for these Trump lawyers, but they have indicated they will refile. They don't want this to be the end of

it. So far, though, this is only a P.R. victory for Trump. It will be very, very hard to win a legal victory against "The New York Times."

If I know one thing about my old employer, "The New York Times," they're not going to settle the way Paramount and Disney did. They are going to

fight this as long as they have to. And so far, they're winning just by default because this original lawsuit did not meet the basic norms and

standards for what federal judges expect from complaints.

QUEST: Brian, I am grateful. Thank you, sir. We have suitably got our money's worth out of you tonight on QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

Now, many in Hollywood, let's go back to Kimmel are rushing to Kimmel's defense. The former DISNEY CEO, the man who built the company pretty much

in recent times, Michael Eisner, quoted a post on X. He said, "Where has all the leadership gone?" And that the FCC Chair's comments were out-of-

control intimidation. Labor unions are supporting Kimmel. They issued a statement saying the suspension is part of a disturbing trend of increasing

interference in creative expression, which brings me to Russell Hollander, the National Executive Director of the Directors Guild of America. Russell

joins me now.

Sir, I am grateful for you, busy days, and thank you for taking time.

I guess, we start our discussion. Everybody knows where, you know the arguments here, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Brendan Carr is

determined. The President is pouring fuel on the flames. So what happens next? What can you do?

RUSSELL HOLLANDER, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA: Well, we start with -- let's start with what's going on.

What we are seeing is a fundamental attack on artistic freedom and free speech in our nation right now. The Directors Guild was founded 90 years

ago precisely to protect the rights of directors, their creative freedom and their artistic rights. We are now seeing in result to government

interference, that major studios are making decisions over what television programs and can air in the United States, based upon concerns about how

the government is going to react to that. That is very frightening for a free society.

QUEST: Now, who do you blame? Because on the one hand, government, arguably, yes, look, they should do what they're -- they are doing

something they arguably should not do. But if they're going to do it, surely companies should stand up to them. Where does the blame lie?

HOLLANDER: I think the blame lies everywhere. The government shouldn't be doing what it is doing. The government should be supporting free speech. It

is a fundamental principle written into our Constitution and the media companies have to stand up and support the rights of its artists. It has

tremendous implications for them if they don't.

We are receiving calls from numerous directors who are making decisions. Where should they bring their projects? And they are concerned that if they

bring projects to companies that are going to bend the knee to Trump, that those projects won't go forward and they will put in years of work in

making a feature film that no one may see because there is a line or a scene in the movie that the government objects to.

Same thing with respect to television. It is an extremely frightening and chilling experience that we are going through right now.

QUEST: But Russell, you know well, this doesn't happen in one big bang move.

[16:10:10]

For instance, you've got ABC paying on their defamation suit. Youve got CBS paying on their suit. You've got various journals or whoever is being sued

paying on their suits. Then you get this person and that person, and it is almost like one of those things -- it is classic sort of George Orwell.

Suddenly you turn around and you find the landscape has changed.

HOLLANDER: That was extremely well stated. I think that we've been hearing it sort of in a very short phrase, enough is enough. It is time to -- it is

time to fight for free speech and for artistic freedom.

QUEST: So yesterday, I was talking to a union leader in France about railway workers strikes and they are on strike in France and he was making

the point that all you've really got is your ability to go on strike, to have any form of industrial action to go slow or whatever. Can you see a

scenario where your members and other union members, whether it be strike, whether it be official protest? And I mean more than just go on the streets

with a placard. I mean, actually take some form of industrial action.

Do you think that's a realistic possibility?

HOLLANDER: I think it is really premature to have that discussion. This is a couple of days old. It is not something that historically has taken

place, in this country. We are in an unprecedented time, and we have to look at unprecedented measures. But there are, I believe, softer things

that will be explored first.

The media companies are reliant upon talent. It is an industry that is built upon creative talent making feature films and television shows that

they put out to market. People are going to make decisions where to pitch their projects and where to work based upon whether they think their

company is going to fight for them so they can put their vision on screen, and I think we are already seeing that. We are seeing a lot of people and a

lot of grumblings about people being concerned about where they should pitch projects and where they are willing to work.

QUEST: I am grateful for you tonight, sir. Thank you very much for joining us. We will talk more as this progresses. Thank you. Thank you.

HOLLANDER: Thank you.

QUEST: As you and I continue our discussion, President Trump discussed the future of TikTok with China's president Xi Jinping.

In a moment, where we stand, after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:15:09]

QUEST: In another provocative move by the Kremlin, three Russian fighter jets entered Estonia's airspace. NATO intercepted the aircraft over the

Gulf of Finland, according to officials. Estonia's Foreign Minister has called the Russian incursion brazen, and NATO says it is an example of

reckless behavior. It follows Russian drones going into Polish airspace and Romanian airspace earlier this month.

Nic Robertson is with me.

Nic, I am reminded of, you know, from the importance of being earnest to have one set of drones goes over, it looks like an accident, to have two

looks like carelessness. And by the time you get to today, it looks like it is deliberate and they are testing NATO.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Well, the European Union believes or at least the European Commission President believes that

those drones that flew into Polish airspace a week or so ago, that was intentional by Russia, even though European Intelligence officials at NATO

are still trying to figure that one out.

Absolutely. When you get three MIG fighter jets, they fly at about 1,900 miles an hour, they are really fast fighter jets for 12 minutes in Estonian

airspace, it is hard to imagine that that was an accident of some description.

NATO is already, you know, well placed inside of Estonia and that was actually Italian F-35 fighter jets that helped intercept those Russian

MIGs. There were Swedish and Finnish fighter jets up there as well, and in the words of the Prime Minister, the Russian fighter jets were chased away,

but no accident.

And you know what? Just a couple of hours later, over a Polish oil platform in the Baltic Sea, spotted by Polish border guards a couple of Russian

fighter jets did a low fly past there as well. So two incidents, roughly the same sort of area as you say, quoting the importance of being earnest.

QUEST: Right. But, Nic, we know that they're testing NATO. What are they looking for NATO to do? What is NATO expected to do? I mean, where does

this -- you know, you find that they are sort of pushing and prodding to see how NATO responds. But what's the right response from NATO?

ROBERTSON: You know, right now, NATO believes that Russia can be sort of economically run into the ground as it tries to fight the war in Ukraine,

but it appears that Russia also thinks it can divide NATO. Look at the division that there was yesterday between Keir Starmer and President Trump.

President Trump saying, well, Putin has disappointed me. Keir Starmer saying, well, Putin only responds when you, President Trump put pressure on

him. It wasn't a blow up between the pair, but the gap was there, and that's the sort of thing Putin thinks he can exploit. Plus, as we saw in

Poland, they invoked Article IV. There are now more NATO fighter jets flying over the skies of Poland to protect Poland.

Estonia has called for an Article IV meeting of NATO to discuss probably a similar response, additional NATO fighter jets to be flying over the skies

of Estonia. That's going to cost more money and there will be perhaps some NATO members that are a little more reluctant than others, and that's

precisely what Russia would like to see, what Putin would see to peal the United States away from NATO, take money out of NATO nations pockets to pay

for this, and divide and weaken NATO.

But in the words of the Romanian Foreign Minister, who was talking to Isa Soares a little earlier on CNN, she said what it has done to NATO is

actually made us more united. We've put more money up front to pay for defense and we are quicker to respond, the precise opposite of what Putin

is hoping to achieve.

QUEST: Nic, I am grateful, Friday night and you're doing duty for us. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

President Trump said he had a productive call with the Chinese leader, President Xi Jinping about the future of TikTok. Mr. Trump posted

afterwards that he appreciates the TikTok approval. The two were expected to finalize a deal that would sell the app's U.S. assets to American

investors. So CNN has asked The White House whether a TikTok deal has been approved.

TikTok posted the following from its Chinese owner, ByteDance: That it will work in accordance with applicable laws to ensure TikTok remains available

to American users through TikTok U.S.

Clare Duffy is in New York.

I am none the wiser as to what that statement means. Has the deal been done?

CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS WRITER: Yes, Richard, it feels like every new piece of information that we get about this deal, there are more questions

that come up about what exactly is happening here. There is frankly a lot that we still don't know about the specifics of this deal and where things

stand in terms of these negotiations.

Now, President Trump did say that he had a productive call with Chinese President Xi earlier today, as you said, they were expected to finalize

this deal on the call, but let me read to you what President Trump said after that meeting on Truth Social. He said: We made progress on many very

important issues, including trade, fentanyl, the need to bring the war between Russia and Ukraine to an end, and the approval of the TikTok deal.

The call was a very good one. We will be speaking again by phone and appreciate the TikTok approval.

But it is not clear if that is progress towards a TikTok approval or if Xi has indeed approved of this TikTok deal in a way that the two sides can now

move forward on, kind of formalizing bringing control of TikTok's U.S. assets to American investors. That's the thing that we are still waiting on

The White House to give us more clarification on.

QUEST: And I mean, let me just -- is it worth it? I mean, is TikTok that good? That big? That important?

DUFFY: I mean, President Trump seems to think it is. That's the reason why he now has delayed the enforcement of this law that went into effect in

January and should, in theory, be banning TikTok right now because it has not yet been sold off by its Chinese ownership. But Trump has delayed that

four times now because he believes that TikTok and the young people that are on that platform had a significant impact on his reelection in 2024,

and this is a platform that more than half of the country uses.

People use it to get news, to get entertainment. Lots of people use this platform to make a living. So I think certainly the people that are on this

platform and, and to some extent President Trump as well, wanting to represent those folks, think that it is important to make this deal happen,

but it is just not sure at this point. It is not clear at this point where things stand.

QUEST: I am grateful. Thank you, Clare Duffy.

Kevin O'Leary has been one of the investors interested in owning TikTok. Mr. Wonderful joins me from Toronto.

Kevin, good to see you, sir. Same question to you. I mean, do you understand where we are tonight with TikTok? Who is likely to be the next

owners of the American assets?

KEVIN O'LEARY, CHAIRMAN, O'LEARY VENTURES: Yes. Well, first of all, it is a very, very valuable network. It is a huge prize. It generates somewhere

between $12 billion and $15 billion a year in revenue, over seven million businesses are on it profitably, using it for customer acquisition. It is

one of the fastest growing media networks, and so congratulations to Oracle who is leading the deal with Andreessen and Silverlake. They seem to be the

winner.

There are many, many willing buyers. Obviously, I am one of them. But there is a huge challenge ahead. And when this thing was back in November and

December, it was not thought that the executive orders would extend the law. Remember the law was passed to turn it dark as it was going to be

spyware, and it would finally, the Supreme Court designated as that.

Now we have a situation where there a huge problem in closing this. The China hawks that wrote the code, the Congress and the Supreme Court, they

need to understand what the deal is about the algorithm. I think the deal itself can happen, but the algorithm has been deemed spyware. So what we

are hearing and we don't know with certainty, but what Xi wants is he would like to lease the code. He'd like to get a royalty for it on a monthly

basis. That's probably not going to stand muster with the China hawks.

Senator Cotton, Rubio, you know, and others, many, many others, Scott, I mean, they are just -- they are not going to go for that, and so you're in

a negotiation to try and figure out how you can make them complacent with that code.

So there are two options and I know this because back in November, December, January, I sat in front of them negotiating myself in terms of

what do we have to do to make you happy, that this is not spyware. And they said, well, why don't you bring a deal and tell me what it is going to look

like? And here is this deal coming now.

But what I learned, and this is tough, the staffers of those lawmakers are really good. It is going to be -- they are really, really good and you

can't pull the wool over their eyes. And so --

QUEST: But Kevin, let me just interrupt you on that. But, let me throw something back at you. If the big boss wants the deal done, do those China

hawks at least muzzle their beaks for a while and not go as aggressively? Because you're right that it is the algorithm and the software as spyware

that has to be amended. I mean, never mind the ownership. You don't want everything being sent back to Beijing.

But if Trump wants this deal done, what then, Kevin?

[16:25:00]

O'LEARY: Not going to happen that way because there is a huge hammer you haven't taken into consideration, $870 billion fine if you're not compliant

with the law. It is the most unique deal in history 172 million times $5,000.00 every day you are not compliant. So there is a huge compromise

here.

The Speaker of the House will be involved. A lot of the lawmakers, J.D. Vance's office, which has been negotiating this deal. There is a lot of

people that have to come together because the buyers won't close if they are exposed to the 800-plus billion dollar fine.

And so the China hawks have the leverage, but of course, there is a compromise. Let me explain in just layman terms the two options. Number one

is the concept calling Fork the Code. It is called Fork the Code. What happens is, Xi hands over a copy of the code and then the U.S. code

designers strip out the spyware and go in front of the DoD or whatever the oversight committee is, and prove to them that the spyware has been

removed. That's the better option, because you're not messing with the algorithm that much. The other option is you rewrite it using AI from

scratch. That's a little riskier, but that may be what you have to do. Either way, the deal is going to get done.

If i were sitting there, I'd try and sell to the China hawks the idea that you can put what is called a dashboard over the servers that are sitting in

Texas and Virginia that looks at every I.P. address that a packet goes to and as long as you can prove to them that not a single packet goes to

Beijing, I think you can make peace with them. But again, having done this myself, these staffers are sharp as hell. They are going to be a tough

sell.

QUEST: I am fascinated by your obvious admiration, bordering on wonderment at these people because this is what these staffers do, isn't it? They know

every nook and cranny. They live, breathe and sleep this stuff, don't they?

O'LEARY: Well, everybody thinks you can just walk in at these senators are neophytes on tech. Wrong! You're very wrong. Because they bolster into

their staff some incredibly talented people in their late 20s, early 30s. I couldn't believe the talent. I mean, it was -- and I've got to tell you,

there is -- it is going to be a really interesting narrative, a very interesting narrative.

I would guess that there are five leads on the China hawks, certainly Senator Cotton, certainly Rubio. I mean, you know, definitely they're going

to be there. Rick Scott in Florida. These guys are smart.

QUEST: I am grateful to you, sir. Have a good weekend. And thank you for taking time to talk to me tonight. Thank you.

O'LEARY: Take care.

QUEST: Thank you. As we continue, President Trump is about to make it very expensive to bring international workers to the U.S. It is another effort

by The White House to crack down on immigration. I will explain why the H- 1B could become very, very expensive.

QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:31:27]

QUEST: Hello, I'm Richard Quest. Together, we'll go through a lot more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

Visa, the H-1B popular with tech workers, is going to become considerably more expensive now, President Trump is to raise the application fee. You

ready? $100,000.

And the head of the New York Stock Exchange tells me why she thinks IPOs have such a lasting comeback. It's all after the headlines, because here,

this is CNN and on this network, the news always comes first.

President Donald Trump and the Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke by phone on Friday with the U.S. president saying they discussed a range of issues,

including trade, fentanyl and Ukraine. The two Presidents also agreed to earn several in person meetings, including at next month's APEC summit in

South Korea. President Trump says they made progress on finalizing a TikTok deal.

Crowds gathered outside ABC television's New York headquarters in protest against the network's decision to take Jimmy Kimmel off the air. Some

demonstrators are accusing ABC of censorship for pulling the show over comments that the host made about Charlie Kirk's murder suspect. The FCC

chairman says Kimmel's program is not the last shoe to drop.

Estonia says three Russian jet fighters invaded its airspace over the Gulf of Finland. NATO says its fighters responded and forced the Russian jets to

retreat. A few hours later, Poland said Russian jets passed over an oil platform in the Black Sea, the Russian drones crossed into Polish and

Romanian air spaces earlier this month in a catalog events that are causing concern for NATO.

Any moment now, Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order that would raise the application fee for the popular H-1B visa to $100,000 at

the moment, it's about a thousand.

A White House official tells CNN it's part of the president's efforts to curb the hiring of international workers by U.S. based companies.

The visas are used in a broad range of occupations, engineering, biological science, mathematics and the like. Immigration officials say petitions to

reach 65,000 H-1Bs plus 20,000 for advanced degrees, already capped for next year.

The tech billionaire Elon Musk who has led president DOGE -- President Trump's DOGE agency, is a major supporter of H-1Bs, and has said American

companies need to recruit top talent wherever they may be.

With me is the lawyer Charles Kuck, the founding partner at Kuck Baxter Immigration. Right now, sir, you are well familiar with the H-1B and I am

expecting that you have done more than a few applications in your long career. So, what does $100,000 fee actually mean?

CHARLES KUCK, FOUNDING PARTNER, KUCK BAXTER IMMIGRATION LLC: It means it will never happen. It must be Friday afternoon, so it must be time for some

immigration news.

The president is the head of the executive branch of the government. That means he can enforce the laws created by Congress. Congress did not

authorize a $100,000 fee. Congress has authorized immigration. The USCIS was in charge of adjudicating these cases, the ability to recuperate the

cost of the case. They can't put an extra fee on top of that.

[16:35:05]

So, while they may try this and they may even publish a regulation that requires it, I can guarantee you a federal court will stop this before it

is in effect. Oh, I never see the light of day.

QUEST: Hang on. Are you saying this is just grandstanding and window dressing, and that actually it's illegal?

KUCK: It is illegal. It is grandstanding. It's meant to send a message to companies to stop using the H-1B which, of course, is at the end of the

day, it would be damaging to the U.S. economy to not be able to hire the best people in the world is kind of insane.

And one other point, I don't know if you know this, but 25 percent of all the doctors in America are foreign nationals on H-1B. So, this would be

literally off our nose to spite our face. I think he's getting some really bad information from the folks surrounding him on immigration.

QUEST: But the H-1B India is the number one. China's the second. It's always over subscribed. Never used to be, but now it is always over

subscribed. So, if you, let's just say, had a realistic fee to get rid of the bulk number, so that if a company wants to bring an engineer or a bio

science or a doctor so over here, and they're not going to use extraordinary talent, then let's say $5,000 because that does get rid of

the rubbish.

KUCK: Well, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter whether it's five or a hundred, the president doesn't have a right to charge this fee unless

Congress authorizes it.

But I will tell you, this visa has been over subscribed since 1996 this is not a new thing. We have 175 million people working in the United States.

65,000 jobs a year to foreign nationals with advanced degrees doing stuff that requires this type of education. That's a nothing burger in our

economy. This is a red herring. This is designed to gin up the masses so we don't look at what's really going on.

QUEST: Can I ask you one final question on the South Korean -- the Koreans who went back, you had, of course, two clients -- a few clients who did

that. Has anything been proven against any of your clients that they did breach immigration law? Or are you expecting them all to come back because

the U.S. realizes we actually need them do?

KUCK: Well, since the -- since the deputy secretary -- deputy secretary state has already apologized for it, I can tell you that none of my

clients, nor any others that I'm aware of, violated their status in any way, and I have confirmed that ICE has entered into their database

information that says each of these individuals can return because they did not violate their status. I'm not sure they will, but they're allowed to.

QUEST: I'm grateful, sir, and thank you for putting us right on the H1-B, send the bill to the usual place, and we'll take a look at it. Thank you,

sir.

KUCK: Thank you.

QUEST: Have a good one. Thank you.

Now, it's been a very big week for the A.I. industry, all the major players doing deals. Nvidia, Microsoft Intel. Coming up next, the chief executive

of Cerebral Arts will tell where his A.I. company stands in all of this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:41:21]

QUEST: It has been a very busy week in the world of A.I. Nvidia is taking a $5 billion stake in Intel. It's also one of the companies taking part in

the tech prosperity deal reached this week between the U.K. and the United States.

Microsoft says it will spend $4 billion to build a new data center in the state of Wisconsin, and this says the site will eventually house the

world's most powerful supercomputer.

Another new data center is opening in Oklahoma City on Monday. This one belongs to the A.I. firm Cerebras. Its facility will house more than 300

supercomputers powered by the company's wafer scale systems. Cerebras has signed deals in recent months with the like of matter IBM and Mistral of

France, and closely works with the Pentagon and other U.S. government agencies.

I'm delighted to have the chief executive, Andrew Feldman, who's with me now. Andrew, it's good to see you, sir.

But I have to confess, I am confused at the end of a very busy week for A.I., and it's difficult to know what was important and what was not.

So, when I look at your compute, your data center that you're starting up, or your new data center, give me a feel for where we are in A.I. at the end

of this week.

ANDREW FELDMAN, CEO, CEREBRAS: This is the -- first, thank you for having me. It's a pleasure to be here.

I think A.I. is having week after week of extraordinary progress and deals were announced that are surprising. I think deals were announced that were

expected. I think Nvidia and Microsoft's announcements in the U.K. were long expected. Nvidia's investment in Intel was a surprise to many.

But I think what is happening is that more and more people are using A.I. on a day to day basis. They're using it more often and for more things, and

what that has done is it's created an enormous sucking sound for those of us who build the foundation for A.I.

And that's why we've put a put up a new data center in Oklahoma City. This is sort of cost on the order of billions of dollars to build and to fill

with equipment, and we have the distinction of making A.I. faster than anyone else on Earth.

(CROSSTALK)

QUEST: Right. So, what will -- this is going to sound so ignorant to you, sSo forgive the innocence of the question. But what does your -- those

computers that are so fast, what are they going to be doing?

Look, they're not surely answering my ChatGPT question about, how do I make Yorkshire puddings? Or what's the best way to do this, that or the other.

What do they use them for?

FELDMAN: First, my guess is you should ask your wife how to make Yorkshire pudding, right? The ChatGPT might underperform your family on Yorkshire

pudding.

But yes, we do support models from OpenAI and from Mistral and from Meta. We absolutely do. And in the open source community, you can go to our

website and run programs that are exactly GPT programs and ask them exactly those questions.

QUEST: How concerned should we be at the huge amount of data, the energy required, the you know, it's sort of a double edged sword. We're getting

the benefits, but the requirement of energy to run these data centers is so vast that if we continue at this speed, I know the current administration

wants more fossil fuels. So, is there the potential that we are shooting ourselves in the foot on this?

[16:45:23]

FELDMAN: Well, you frame that in a very thoughtful way. I think when you use an extraordinary amount of power, as we are doing right now in the A.I.

industry, you have to deliver an extraordinary amount of benefit.

And I think that is something that all of us in the industry are responsible for delivering. We have to make significant improvements

through A.I. in the design and development of drugs, in the making of your life in a day to day manner better. And if we -- if we fail to do that and

all we do is consume huge amounts of power, we've been a failure.

On the other hand, if we use this power and our tools and our techniques and our compute is used to better society, I think that's a trade well

made.

QUEST: You and I, sir, will talk more on this and other issues, including the best recipe for a Yorkshire pudding. I'll send you mine when I finally

get it. Grateful, sir. Thank you for joining us tonight. I'm very grateful. Thank you.

Now, Africa is continent full of rich stories, but its book industry goes largely untapped. A rich UNESCO report found that Africa's only accounts

for 4.5 -- 5.5 percent of the global publishing industry.

CNN's Victoria Rubadiri visited one of the oldest libraries in Kenya to see what the publishing sector can do to reach its full potential.

(CONNECTING AFRICA)

QUEST: A string of high profile IPOs have reignited the IPO market. The president of the New York Stock Exchange says this is all to the good. And

whats more, the companies coming to the exchange are better prepared for life in the public markets. After the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:52:19]

QUEST: The rising tide is lifting all boats. IPOs fuelling investor optimism after a lull of several years, crypto and tech are leading the

bounce back.

So, think about it. You've had Klarna, Bullish, Firefly Aerospace, Circle, Chime and most recently, StubHub, all went public. The president of the New

York Stock Exchange, Lynn Martin, joined me, and she thinks that this IPO rebound is here to stay for good reason.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

LYNN MARTIN, PRESIDENT, NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE: It feels like this has been a cautious reopening. Now, if you think about the last couple of

years, there have been times when the IPO market felt open.

If I look at Q2 of 2024 for example, when Reddit went public, when Rubric went public, when UL solutions went public, it felt like that was going to

be the reopening of the market.

So, this year, it has felt like a very cautious and deliberate reopening. But importantly, as opposed to 2024 this year, it has sustained. It hasn't

just been one quarter of activity. It has been multiple quarters of activity, culminating with, you know, most recently, Klarna's IPO.

QUEST: What is it that's drawing -- I mean, drawing to IPOs, because we've been through the V.C. and the private equity, and that's still very much a

part of the early financing, but there is now a seasoning, if you will, to come to market.

MARTIN: Yes, I think that's right. And again, a really good way to describe what we have seen as a prolonged amount of time that a company stays

private. I actually think that's a really good thing to be honest.

Companies staying private for longer means that the company has the opportunity to codify its strategy, to be very deliberate about the TAM

they are seeking to attract, about the customers they're seeking to attract, much more deliberate on the execution of the strategy.

And what that means for mom and pop and global investors is that when a company finally comes to market, it's ready, it's ready to be a public

company.

I think what you saw in 2020 and 2021 is that companies were rushing to get to market to take advantage of incredibly high valuations, and what you've

seen in the aftermath of that is many of these companies weren't able to continue to sustain those valuations, whereas now you're seeing companies

that come to market. You look at Circle, you look at Figma, you look at companies that can sustain the valuation that they are achieving on their

IPO day for medium to long term, and continue to grow that valuation.

[16:55:23]

QUEST: If we look at your own, at the NYSE and the ICE and how -- I mean, you do the NYSE, Texas and the way in which also you're playing

internationally, you are shifting, the exchange is shifting focus is changing. It's exchanging the international perspective. How would you

describe it?

MARTIN: The U.S. capital markets are the envy of the world, and if I look at the depth, the breadth of the liquidity in the U.S. markets, the

transparency of the U.S. markets, the ability to raise capital in the U.S., it cannot be matched internationally. It's why we've been successful in

helping companies that were not previously primarily listed in the U.S. move to the U.S., a primary listing. And you've seen those valuations

significantly increase again because of the access to the liquidity that they're getting, which is really unparalleled.

QUEST: How difficult does that make it for you to cooperate or collaborate with other markets when they know that many of them own members either are

going to look to leave or add on the NYSE, in other words, you're in a very tricky position, Lynn.

MARTIN: Yes, but I think it's important for us to continue to be the stewards of the global economy. And the only way you can be the steward of

glow of the global economy is to collaborate, collaborate with domestic markets who clearly have a place.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

QUEST: That's the president of the NYSE, Donald Trump is speaking at the Oval Office.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I have a very strong person for free speech at the same time, when you have networks that where

I won an election, like in counties, I guess it's 2,600 and 525 it's called landslide -- a landslide times to when you have that kind of that level of

popularity or voter support, as I did in the last election.

And yet, 97 and 94 percent different numbers. You see different numbers with different stats, but 97, 94, 95, 96 percent of the people are against

me in the sense of the -- newscasts are against me. The stories are 90 they said, 97 percent bad.

So, they gave me 97, they'll take a great story and they'll make it bad. See, I think that's really illegal, personally. You can't take -- you can't

have a free airwaves. You're getting free airwaves from the United States government, and you can't have that and say, and somebody that just won an

election, and I had to go through this during the election, I think it's a miracle that I can win when 97 percent of the stories on the networks are

bad, or whatever it may be, whether it's 89 doesn't matter. It's a tremendous number. You know it, you reported all the time, and it changes.

But when you have that kind of a negative reporting, fake negative reporting, when they take a great story and they make it into a bad story

constantly, that's what they do.

Look, "60 Minutes," took Kamala's answer and they threw it out and they gave her a different answer so that she sounded competent.

When things like that happen, George Stephanopoulos from your network, right? George Stephanopoulos had to pay $16 million to me because of what

he said. And that's ABC, you had to pay more than that. Your network had to pay more than that.

So, I think it's very sad, but I think that reporting has to be at least accurate, at least accurate, to an extent.

Again, when somebody is given 97 percent of the stories are bad about a person, that's no longer free speech, it's no longer -- that's just

cheating, and they cheat and they become really members of the Democrat National Committee. That's what they are. The networks, in my opinion, they

just offshoots of the Democrat National Committee.

LIAM COSGROVE, ZERO HEDGE WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Liam Cosgrove from Zero Hedge, people are still anticipating who your pick for national

security adviser will be. There were -- Marco Rubio's a little overworked, and one of the reported front runners is Michael Anton from the State

Department. He's just authored the National Security Strategy. Also in the mix is Mike Flynn and Steve Witkoff. Can you give us an indication?

[17:00:09]

TRUMP: Well, they're all good. We'll make a decision soon, but we're doing very well. You know, I settle seven wars more than that, I think.

But actually, we settle seven wars I have. Well, we're working on Gaza, tough one, but we'll get it done somehow. And we're also working with

Russia and Ukraine, they hate each other so much you wouldn't believe it.

END