Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Interview With Geoffrey Hinton; Trump Continues Free Press Ban at White House. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired September 24, 2026 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:38]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer with Pamela Brown, and you're in THE SITUATION ROOM.

There's breaking news. The Justice Department now has 90 minutes, yes, 90 minutes to respond to an emergency request from CNN, MS NOW, and Politico. The news outlets filed the request for a court hearing after reporters from all three were refused entry to the White House, even after a federal judge's order to reinstate their access.

That judge says that the Department of Justice must respond by 12:30 p.m. Eastern, about an hour-and-a-half from now. CNN has reached out to the Department of Justice and the White House for comment.

Let's go to our senior justice correspondent, Evan Perez, who's here with me in THE SITUATION ROOM.

Evan, give us a sense of what's going on.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, right now, Wolf, we're waiting for the administration to respond to the request from these three news organizations who are asking the judge essentially to try to enforce this order that he made overnight, the judge ruling that the news organizations were not given the due process to -- before their access to the White House was pulled by the administration.

And so what we're now waiting for is to see whether the judge is going to hold a hearing, perhaps this afternoon, as soon as this afternoon, because, of course, time is off the essence. One of the things that the news organizations are pointing out is that CNN is due to be the pool, the TV pool, for the visit by the Chinese leader, Xi Jinping, and the events, of course, this evening at the White House.

And so the access to the White House is key for that to happen this afternoon, this evening. And so now we're waiting to see whether the Justice Department is going to file an appeal. The president has already said that, if he lost with this judge, that he was going to appeal this, but that obviously doesn't matter at this moment.

The judge has said that he is not going to stay his order because he believes the news organizations are going to win on the merits of their argument, which is that they were given no due process, no chance essentially to cure whatever problem the White House claims existed as a result of their reporting, which the president says is really the reason why the access to the White House was pulled.

BLITZER: And I give this federal judge, Timothy Kelly, a lot of credit -- he's a Trump appointee...

PEREZ: Right.

BLITZER: ... too -- for doing what he has done -- Pamela.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: All right, I want to bring in CNN chief media analyst Brian Stelter.

Brian, put this in perspective for us. What does all of this mean for press freedoms?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: I'm hearing from sources right now at these other networks that are standing in solidarity with CNN. So I was just texting a couple of them as you were coming to me, Pam.

One of them describes this as a standoff between the White House and the major networks, because, right now, Trump and the Chinese leader are meeting, holding that state visit, but we are not showing it live, and none of the other networks are showing it live.

Even the Associated Press, which is the collective that sends out pictures to thousands of news organizations around the world, is not showing this state visit or this summit live. That is because there is this extraordinary show of solidarity with the banned news outlets.

And that's because, well, all the American news outlets know that any of them could be the next ones to be banned. So we have never seen anything quite like this, and that is why it's a test for press freedom. This has so much more to do with the press writ large than it does with just these three banned outlets.

The president holding this state visit, and ordinarily it would receive wall-to-wall live coverage. ABC is supposed to be on pool duty this morning. They're supposed to be the ones actually providing the live signal to everybody right now.

But the news crews all lined up this morning and held back and refused to go in and cover the event due to President Trump's undemocratic conduct. It's nothing short of astonishing. As our colleague Kaitlan Collins put it to me a moment ago, right now, the Chinese communist state media are allowed on the White House grounds, but we are not. And I think that says it all.

BROWN: That certainly sums it up.

Brian Stelter, thanks so much.

And we're covering more breaking news. Just as Brian mentioned, there is the summit going on. It's under way this hour between President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. And the leaders of the world's top economic superpowers are holding a critical meeting in a rapidly changing world.

[11:05:04]

They're expected to discuss artificial intelligence, trade, and the Iran war, among other pressing challenges. I want to bring in CNN White House correspondent Alayna Treene in THE SITUATION ROOM, along with David Sanger from "The New York Times."

Alayna, what are the top priorities of these leaders coming into the summit?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's a few things.

We know that there's a myriad of topics that they have to discuss. You have Taiwan and U.S. arm sales to Taiwan. You have trade. And they just announced there is this extension of the Busan Agreement, which is basically pulling back on restrictions on tariffs and things like that.

You have critical minerals that will be discussed, and then, of course, AI safety. It's actually something we heard President Donald Trump reference in his remarks a moment ago next to the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, the president saying the discussions over AI, which he's now dubbed superintelligence, his term for what he argues is a less threatening word -- less threatening term, I should say, for AI, to promote peace in the future.

One thing I want to note is what the president said this morning on TRUTH Social in reference to AI. He said: "It will be a big day with President Xi of China. Superintelligence will be a big topic of discussion, but I want to leave it exactly where it is. That is China's position also. Our guardrail is the DOJ."

Now, obviously, what the president is saying here is that these calls -- and we have heard him say this in the past couple of days as well -- these calls from different AI leaders warning about the risks and the dangers of artificial intelligence aren't enough for him to push back on this idea of his desire to outpace China when it comes to AI.

I should know as well that Xi is also in no mood to set guardrails, Pamela and Wolf, when it comes to artificial intelligence and making sure they stay ahead of this race.

I also want to point out the new CNN polling we have today, just to put this into context for where Americans are on this; 71 percent of adults said that the federal government is not doing enough to regulate AI.So I think that's very important to note. One thing as well I want to talk about is just the optics of this

state visit. I think there's no surprise, from what we saw with the literal red carpet rolled out for Xi Jinping yesterday, that the president and his team want to make this as successful as possible.

And you kind of heard the president in a flattering post this morning say that Xi looks strong, vibrant, and fit, better than ever. I think that sums up for you just the outlook that the White House has for the rest of the events we will see over the next couple of days -- Pam, Wolf.

BROWN: All right, Alayna Treene, thanks so much -- Wolf.

BLITZER: I want to bring in CNN political and national security analyst David Sanger right now. He's the author of the very important book entitled "New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the West," must-read.

David, is this meeting that's about to take place between the Chinese leader and the president of the United States more about substance or is it just symbolism?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, there's going to be a lot of symbolism.

And the president, Wolf, as you just heard from Alayna, is determined to make sure that this is a fully successful trip. That said, there are some big substantive issues. Coming back on the plane from Beijing in May, the president told us that he was going to make decisions on arms sales to Taiwan.

In fact, he has made no such decision, and we know where Xi Jinping is headed on this. He's trying to get a commitment never to do those arms sales. And, in return, it's conceivable he may offer some help with Iran.

On AI, I thought listening to Xi Jinping today was really interesting. While the president made it clear he didn't really want to do much, Xi said, "We have to make sure there is always human control," which is more than the president has said in the summer of surprises we have had about agents escaping their sandboxes and hacking into other companies and so forth.

And so I think where you're hearing the Chinese president is pushing on the one agreement they had during the Biden years, which was always keep human control over nuclear weapons, not allow AI into that. You could imagine building that out, biological weapons. You could imagine building it out to critical infrastructure issues.

But, first, you have got to get the president of the United States off the thought that the whole problem is a hoax.

BLITZER: So you think there will be some sort of U.S.-China agreement when it comes to dealing with this potential enormous threat coming from AI? SANGER: I think it's a little early for agreement. Nuclear arms

control, it's for 25 years after the bomb went off to even have the first serious nuclear containment discussions.

I hope and don't think it will take that long this time. I think, at this moment, just getting communication between them is going to be hard enough.

BLITZER: As you know, China is the largest purchaser of Iranian exported oil. It's a huge issue. And the Chinese provide a lot of sensitive military equipment and other economic aid to Iran.

[11:10:11]

How big of an issue is this going to be between the president and the Chinese leader?

SANGER: Well, it should be a huge issue. President Trump has downplayed to some degree how much of a problem this has been.

But there's good evidence to suggest that it was Chinese intelligence, Chinese satellite photographs that helped the Iranians target U.S. bases around the Persian Gulf and...

BLITZER: Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain...

SANGER: In Saudi Arabia, Jordan.

BLITZER: ... UAE...

SANGER: That's right.

BLITZER: ... all of the friendly allies that the U.S. has in the Gulf the Gulf states.

SANGER: That's right.

And we think that may have been involved in the deaths of some of the Americans who were who were killed in the missile attacks the Iranians ran. So, this is a really serious question. So far, the president has gone very light on the Chinese. He has not made a big deal of this.

The question is, does he do something different in private here?

BLITZER: Are you surprised that the Iranian leaders, the president, the other leaders in Iran, got visas, entry visas to come to New York and address the United Nations, but the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, and other Palestinian officials were denied entry visas to the United States?

President Abbas had to speak to the U.N. General Assembly from the West Bank.

SANGER: Seemed strange to me. Usually, the understanding, since the United States is the host country for the United Nations, is that you allow in foreign leaders, even those you do not like. Gadhafi came in just before he was overthrown, others.

But in the case of the Iranians, clearly, they were allowed in because President Trump wanted to get his representatives, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff, talking to them. It was -- it seemed rather strange to me not to allow in the Palestinians.

BLITZER: Yes, it seemed strange to me as well.

All right, David Sanger, thank you very, very much -- Pamela.

BROWN: All right, Wolf, still ahead: Yesterday, we told you all about AI anxiety and how it's real. Well, a new CNN poll confirms it. I will talk about it with the man known as the "Godfather of AI," Geoffrey Hinton.

You're in THE SITUATION ROOM, and we will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:17:03]

BROWN: Well, new this morning, a CNN poll finds a majority of Americans say they are more concerned than excited by artificial intelligence. And most agree that the federal government should do more to regulate it.

This comes as leaders of two top AI companies push for international safety standards.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SAM ALTMAN, CEO, OPENAI: If AI is to be democratic, the most important decisions cannot be made by labs in San Francisco alone. They must be shaped through democratic processes and by governments accountable to the people that they serve. At the international level, this will require cooperation.

DARIO AMODEI, CEO AND CO-FOUNDER, ANTHROPIC: 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.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: With us now is Nobel laureate Geoffrey Hinton, known as the "Godfather of AI."

Good morning. So, important to have you on to hear your perspective.

You just heard Sam Altman and Dario Amodei both urge the U.N. Security Council to adopt international AI standards. What do you think that should look like?

GEOFFREY HINTON, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE PIONEER: OK, I think there should be strong government regulation. It's not sufficient just to have standards.

The big AI companies don't want to be regulated. They say they do, but any regulation you suggest, they oppose. We should have at least as strong regulations as we do for drugs. You can't just release a new drug without satisfying the FDA that it's safe. We should have the same for AI.

BROWN: But then you have President Trump, who is meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping today. Both countries, as you know, are in this AI race.

The president said on social media earlier -- quote -- "Superintelligence, S.I., will be a big topic of discussion, but I want to leave it exactly where it is. That is China's position also. Our guardrail is the DOJ."

Geoffrey, if this race continues unregulated, where does that leave humanity?

HINTON: Well, there's three kinds of risk we have to worry about. All of them are bad. There's the risk of bad actors abusing AI for things like cyberattacks or making biological weapons. Terrorists can now make biological viruses relatively easily.

There's the risk of negligent harm. So, for example, if Meta encourages teenagers to commit suicide, they didn't do that deliberately. They were just negligent in testing. And then there's the risk of AI itself taking over.

So, when you make smart AI agents, you have to give them the ability to create subgoals. Like, if you want to get to Europe, you have a subgoal of getting to an airport. Well, these smart AI agents very quickly develop the subgoal of continuing to exist, because if they don't continue to exist, they won't be able to do the things you ask them to do.

[11:20:03]

And then they will do things like lie and cheat and deceive you and try and blackmail you so that they continue to exist. We have already seen that. It's very scary what these agents do. And the main problem is, the big companies are in a race to make them smarter. The big companies should be in a race to make them nicer.

The only way we can coexist with agents once they're smarter than us is if they don't want to get rid of us. We should be focusing on that, not on making them smarter.

BROWN: How far away do you think we are from that point of superintelligence, where the agents are smarter than us and may not have the same values that are in humans' interests?

HINTON: Nobody knows how to estimate this properly. The best you can do is listen to the experts. And there's a big variety of opinions. A few experts think it'll never happen. A few experts think it'll be a long time in the future. Quite a few experts think it'll be in the next few years.

I personally think it'll be in the next five to 10 years.

BROWN: And what is behind that calculation for you? Tell us more.

HINTON: It's looking at the rate of progress we have had. So we have had this very dramatic progress, and it seems to be accelerating, rather than slowing down.

If you look back 10 years, these agents are amazingly much smarter than they were 10 years ago. So, even if progress is only linear, in 10 years' time, they will be amazingly much smarter still, and that will be superintelligence.

BROWN: So do you see the downside outweighing the upside? Because you know there are different camps. There's the optimists. There's the ones who say AI is going to erase humanity. Where -- how do you look at that, the upside versus the downside?

HINTON: I think there's a wonderful upside. And that's why we developed this stuff in the first place. We were focused on the upside, like much better health care; 200,000 Americans a year die from poor diagnoses, and AI can do medical diagnosis much better already.

So there's a wonderful upside in health care and education, in making all industries more productive. This should lead to much more goods and services for everybody. The problem is, there's also these big risks. And to get that upside, we have to figure out how to deal with these risks.

And that's what we should be focusing on, so that we get the wonderful upside.

BROWN: So, you helped create this technology. At what point did you start becoming really concerned about it?

HINTON: I'm slightly embarrassed that I was rather late to the party. I didn't get really concerned until the beginning of 2023, when I came to fully understand that there might be a better form of intelligence than us.

BROWN: How do you grapple with that, that you helped create this technology and then coming to that realization?

HINTON: So, it seems to me it's very important that we figure out how we can peacefully coexist with these things and benefit from the wonderful abilities they will have without them deciding to take over.

So, instead of just racing to make AI smarter and smarter, we should be racing to make it into a better kind of being. We're creating beings for the first time. These things really understand what they're saying. They really have intentions.

We want them to have good intentions, and we should be focusing a lot more effort on how to achieve that. BROWN: I want you to listen to what Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said

about all of these concerns over AI. Let's play it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JENSEN HUANG, CEO, NVIDIA: I don't know what is the reason for it, but however it's characterized, 2030 is not going to be the end of the world. There is zero percent chance that's going to be the end of the world. And so I think that scaring people is unnecessary, it is irresponsible, and I don't know what their motives are.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: He says that with certainty. What is your take on his response, Geoffrey?

HINTON: First, let me say I have a lot of respect for Jensen Huang. It was his Nvidia chips that were in quite a large part responsible for this AI revolution. They made the computations much faster.

But anybody who says there's a zero percent chance of something, where many other experts are saying there's quite a significant chance, is silly. It means they're totally confident that all the other experts are completely wrong. And Jensen's smarter than that.

BROWN: I want to ask you before we let you go about what happened in Australia. Australia's prime minister says an OpenAI agent hacked into their health care database. It is one of at least four times in recent months that an OpenAI agent went rogue.

You called the Hugging Face incident a mini-Chernobyl. How much of a warning is this for the rest of the world, what happened in Australia?

HINTON: It's another warning to add to the others. It's very clear now that AI agents will go rogue if you give them a chance. It's very clear we need to do a lot more work on how to make them do the things we want and not, in order to get their rewards, start cheating and deceiving us.

BROWN: Geoffrey Hinton, thank you so much. I hope you will continue to come on the show as we cover AI. I believe it's the most important issue of our time.

[11:25:08]

HINTON: Me too. Thank you.

BROWN: All right, thank you.

BLITZER: And coming up: The district attorney in Austin, Texas, wants an independent investigation right now, as federal agencies share few details about an ICE shooting over the weekend.

Next, we will be speaking to a lawmaker fighting to make sure the man who was shot gets the care he needs and doesn't get deported.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)