Return to Transcripts main page

The Source with Kaitlan Collins

Court Holds Emergency Hearing On Firing Of Fed Governor; Ukraine Blasts Bridges In Russia As Putin's Forces Bombard Kyiv; Trump Admin. Plans Immigration Crackdowns In Chicago, Boston. Aired 9-10p ET

Aired August 29, 2025 - 21:00   ET

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

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Laura and Serena were the only ones to survive.

For 20 years, this date, August 29th, has been marked by tragedy and grief for their family. This year, however, is mixed with hope. Serena's granddaughter was born early this morning. Her name is Jayla. She's nine pounds of joy and life and love. Congratulations to the entire Bane family.

The news continues. "THE SOURCE" starts right now.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: Tonight, tests on the limits of President Trump's power, from imposing those sweeping tariffs, to firing a Federal Reserve Governor.

I'm Pamela Brown, in for Kaitlan Collins. And this is THE SOURCE.

An emergency hearing in a legal fight that goes right to the heart of the limits on President Trump's power. The question on paper, Can the President of the United States fire someone citing a crime that they haven't even been charged with?

The person, Federal Reserve Governor, Lisa Cook. She is the first black woman to serve on the Board that helps set interest rates. Interest rates, President Trump believes should be lower. And she's also the first Fed Governor ever to be fired by a President.

That came after the Justice Department said it's investigating Cook for mortgage fraud, based on a criminal referral from inside the Trump administration. And just today, a Housing official sent a second criminal referral to the DOJ. Now, Cook's attorney denied there was any validity to the allegations.

And to be clear, a referral is not a charge, it's not an indictment, and it's certainly not a conviction. But to the Vice President, that distinction doesn't matter.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JD VANCE (R), U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: Whether it's criminal, whether it's intentional or not, we know that this is a person, I think, who doesn't meet the standard that we should expect for the Federal Reserve, which is why the President fired her, and he does have the legal right to fire her.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Well, Cook is suing to keep her job on the Board, and today's emergency hearing was over her request to stay while her legal challenge plays out. Now the judge in this case, a Biden appointee, held off making an initial ruling, and didn't seem fully swayed by either side.

Now, this is not the first high-profile firing by the President, whose television catch phrase was, You're fired. He is overseeing the firings of thousands of people, just in the last few months. The barrage of pink slips triggered so many lawsuits, we couldn't fit them all on the screen right here. Some have been dismissed. Others are still being argued. The Supreme Court already weighed in on one.

And out of all of those, this one job in particular stands out. Here's why. Lisa Cook works for the Federal Reserve. And the nation's central bank is supposed to operate independently. That's so people like her can make economic decisions without pressure to align with any political mission.

Well, this administration is clear, That's the problem.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VANCE: I don't think that we allow bureaucrats to sit from on high and make decisions about monetary policy and interest rates, without any input from the people that were elected to serve the American people. And I think that's fundamentally what this is about.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: My sources tonight are:

Legal Professor, Kim Wehle.

Former communications director of the DNC, Karen Finney.

And Republican strategist, Shermichael Singleton.

Great to see all three of you on this Friday night.

KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SENIOR ADVISER, HILLARY CLINTON 2016 CAMPAIGN, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR, DNC: Thanks.

PROF. KIM WEHLE, UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE LAW SCHOOL: Thanks.

BROWN: Welcome to the party here.

So I want to start with you, Kim, just to take a step back and look at the big picture here, so that we understand. Because I think some people might hear, Well, who's Lisa Cook, and what does the Federal Reserve Governor do? But what are the stakes here, in terms of how it could impact every American's life and the precedent it could set? WEHLE: Well, this is important because it affects monetary policy.

But just to be clear, the Supreme Court, in two other cases with other heads of agencies, has already in emergency proceedings, allowed Donald Trump to fire people even though there's a cause provision in the -- in the statute. So basically Congress said, With respect to these people, you have to have a good reason. The Supreme Court held 90 years ago that Congress can do that.

This is becoming a showdown as to whether this reason is a good enough reason. And I think that her argument is that it's pretextual. Her lawyers are saying, Listen, you manufactured a reason, so that the President can control monetary policy. That's a really novel question, Pam, it's really thorny. I don't know that she gets this trial, on that question of whether she can keep her job or not. And in the meantime, I think her reputation is being smeared, which is unfortunate.

[21:05:00]

As far as the legal implications at the end of the day, this Supreme Court is very clear on broad executive power, broad presidential power, particularly when it comes to employees within the chain of command to the President.

BROWN: I want to bring you in, Shermichael, because if the President can fire a Fed Governor, which, as we noted, has not been done before, where do you see the limits of the President's power being?

SHERMICHAEL SINGLETON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: I mean, look, I think you got to have some limitations. I mean, I understand the arguments from the Executive. I'm not necessarily fond of how this is happening with Dr. Cook, and I'm referring to her as Dr Cook, because she has a PhD in economics.

If the President disagrees with the monetary decisions of some of the Board -- Fed Board members, I understand, I get it. I've been calling for us to drop and -- lower interest rates for months now, for a number of reasons. So, I'm in agreement there.

I think you can do that without smearing her. I mean, I've heard folks calling her DEI hire. This is a woman who went to Spelman College. She went to Oxford. She has a PhD from UCLA, Berkeley. This is clearly someone who's qualified for the role.

And I'm all for intellectual disagreements and debates. That's the part of politics that I enjoy the most. But I think we can have those disagreements without smearing her. And the undertones really, really bothered me. You want to fire somebody? Fire them and move on. You should be able to do that without all of the baggage that comes along with it. I'm not a big fan of that.

BROWN: Let me just follow up on that. Why do you think that President Trump then targeted her specifically?

SINGLETON: Well, this is what I was told. I reached out to a couple of folks today, and what I was told was they looked into multiple people, and that apparently others may be coming soon at some point. So, it may not just stop with Dr. Cook. There may be another one or two individuals, appointed by President Biden, as she was, who may also find themselves in the crosshairs of the administration pretty soon.

FINNEY: But that goes to, I think, a very important underpinning of this, in terms of the why this is really happening. Because there's the legal case, which, who knows how that's going to shake out. But then there's the politics.

This is about controlling monetary policy. He tried to go after the Fed chair. That wasn't working. The markets didn't like it. Business leaders did not like it. And so now, he's trying to basically control the people who control decisions about monetary policy. Why? Because he does not have a plan, from my perspective -- our perspective, the Democrats, to deal with the economy.

I mean, he was elected, number one reason, get costs down. Costs are not down. Things are not affordable. And inflation is up. So instead of some kind of policy around how he's going to deal with that, over and over and over again, we hear about the tariffs, and we hear him blaming the Fed for not lowering rates. That seems to be it.

And so, this sort of strategy, and I think what Shermichael says sort of confirms it. So, it's not just going to be her. He wants to have--

BROWN: We think if -- yes, we--

(CROSSTALK)

FINNEY: Yes, potentially--

BROWN: --but -- right.

FINNEY: Potentially, could be an attempt to try to control all of the members, and to try to -- and the administration has talked about wanting to have that kind of control of lots of the different levers of government. Which, I think, again, at some point, there are Americans who say, I'm not comfortable with that. That is not the Constitution. That is not the country that I -- you know, that's not our values in this country.

And the way he's going about it, as with so many things, is just -- you know, what about due process? What about the fact that she has said this might have this -- you know, it was a clerical error? What about her opportunity to make her case, before you go ahead and smear her, this distinguished woman, this distinguished economist? So.

BROWN: Well, and you mentioned the tariffs. There is more sort of chaos surrounding that, or uncertainty. Because just late tonight, Kim, an appeals court ruled that the President unlawfully leaned on emergency powers to impose many of his sweeping tariffs, earlier this year. They're in place still for now.

But the question is, what happens next? The President posted in all- caps, ALL TARIFFS ARE STILL IN EFFECT. Where does this leave us? WEHLE: Well, yes, this court, this appellate court, found that they -- but that -- you know, Congress gets the taxing and the tariff power in the Constitution, gave away some of that power to the President in a statute. If there's an emergency, then the President can regulate imports.

And he used that emergency language, kind of like that cause language with respect to the Federal Reserve Board member, and said, OK, emergency with fentanyl, emergency with immigration, so I'm going to take the tariff power.

The appellate court said, No, that belongs to Congress, unless Congress specifies with more clarity that these are the circumstances that you can set this kind of policy.

So, it's going to go back to the lower court to decide how broad the injunction is, basically freezing these executive orders. And then I think this is one of those things that will ultimately also go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

[21:10:00]

Because Donald Trump and his lawyers are really good at finding this squishy, gray language that no President ever dared go, to kind of traverse with this notion that there's just certain things you don't do. Donald Trump plows through them, and then the courts are kind of left--

BROWN: Wanting to give it--

(CROSSTALK)

WEHLE: --I don't know what to do. Yes.

BROWN: Yes, yes, we saw that with birthright citizenship, for example. I mean, the strategy on some of these cases is to get it up to the Supreme Court. We'll have to see what happens in this case.

But Shermichael, how does the uncertainty over the legality and therefore the permanence of Trump's actions play in the minds of voters and just people trying to like, plan their lives--

SINGLETON: Sure.

BROWN: --small businesses trying to plan ahead. What do you think?

SINGLETON: Look, I think for a lot of Republicans, a lot of Republicans are in support of what the President is doing. They like these swift actions. The President has done a pretty good job of articulating why he believes interest rates should be lowered.

Again, I agree with the principal argument that you should lower interest rates, so people can buy homes. That's a big problem, right now. A lot of other countries that have also cut -- recovery from COVID have lowered rates. So there has been some legitimate discussions-- BROWN: Sure.

SINGLETON: --among Democrats and Republicans, Maybe we should actually lower rates now, what are we waiting for?

Now the Fed has argued, We need more predictable stability in the marketplace. That's the only thing they're waiting for, allegedly, to lower rates. I concede somewhat to that argument. But how long is that going to take? We've gone through what, two cycles or two quarters almost? And the markets, for the most part, has been pretty consistent. So, I think they should lower rates.

That aside, I think it's going to sort of be incumbent upon Democrats to make an argument to not only their base, but Independents, who are sort of the movable persuadables, that the President exerting too much power. I'm not necessarily certain, though, that if the economic conditions plays out fairly, for the President, that that's an argument that will be palatable in the minds of many swing voters.

FINNEY: Well, I think we've been hearing from voters at a number of town halls, just this week. They are tired of this.

They -- you know, it's actually not just incumbent on Democrats. It's incumbent upon Republicans in Congress to step up and do their job. I mean, they need to reassert their power and authority.

Because, again, this tension that we're talking about, where Trump kind of goes past the line and says, Dare me, dare me not to? Lawsuits get filed. Obviously, things move through the courts a little more slowly, and so then he sort of asserts the power while it's going through the courts.

At some point, though -- and look, I know Trump is afraid of having to be accountable to the voters. That's why we're doing gerrymandering -- he did gerrymandering in Texas. But at some point, Republican members are accountable to their voters.

BROWN: Well, let me just quickly ask you about gerrymandering. You bring that up, because the Missouri Governor is joining this push now, to redistrict there.

SINGLETON: Yes, I saw that.

BROWN: So, you have Texas and then California.

SINGLETON: California, yes.

BROWN: Now, this. What do you think?

SINGLETON: I mean, I just wonder, as I look at a number of these states, if it's a predominantly Republican state, or a predominantly Democratic state, how many more seats can you take away to have a super-majority? Because for the most part, many of these states are already hard to the right or already hard to the left.

I think you got to give voters, at least a modicum of some level of objectivity in the voting process. I'm a big believer in having sort of those purple districts, where Republicans and Democrats have to make their argument to the voters, and let the voters vote for one or the other based on the veracity of their claims. Is a good way for democracy to work.

But obviously, politics is politics, and Republicans want power, and so do Democrats. And both sides are going to do everything they can to maximize it and exert it.

FINNEY: But just remember--

BROWN: Made that -- clear.

FINNEY: Just remember, in Texas, though we're also talking -- in some -- a number of states, we're talking about the Voting Rights Act of 1965. So, when you talk about two -- generic purple districts, we have to remember, there is real history and record as to why certain -- you know, when we talk about opportunity districts--

BROWN: Right.

FINNEY: --why that matters, why that's important to the history and the future of this country.

BROWN: Right, and there's racial gerrymandering, which is unconstitutional.

FINNEY: Correct.

BROWN: And then there's political gerrymandering, which the courts have said they don't have judiciability--

SINGLETON: Yes.

WEHLE: Right, the Supreme Court--

BROWN: --on those issues. Right.

WEHLE: --is to blame for some of this, right?

BROWN: And the way that they--

WEHLE: And the Supreme Court's also pulling back on the ban on racial gerrymandering. But they basically said it, political gerrymandering, meaning picking your voters, carving up the districts, based on political party? The courts can't touch it.

BROWN: Yes.

WEHLE: You cannot go to court to challenge that. And this is--

(CROSSTALK)

BROWN: They say it's a political question--

FINNEY: Yes. BROWN: --which, learned that one in law school.

WEHLE: I love it.

FINNEY: I know you love it.

BROWN: Thanks to my professor there.

All right. Thank you all so much.

SINGLETON: Thanks, Pamela.

BROWN: Next, undeterred, exactly two weeks after meeting with President Trump, Vladimir Putin launches one of Russia's biggest assaults on Ukraine yet. My next source is a top Senate Democrat.

[21:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Exactly two weeks since President Trump met with Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, to push for peace in Ukraine, the war is only ramping up.

New video shows Ukrainian forces destroying two key bridges, right inside Russia, landing a strategic blow, after Russian gains in recent days. And this comes as Moscow launched its second largest aerial strike on Kyiv, since the 2022 invasion began. The death toll from the attacks has climbed to 25, including four children. Dozens more are wounded.

And some missiles even struck British and European diplomatic buildings, in the Ukrainian capital. It prompted outraged Western leaders to accuse Putin of sabotaging peace efforts.

And Ukrainian officials briefed U.S. Special Envoy, Steve Witkoff, today in New York, about that attack. Among them was President Zelenskyy's Chief of Staff, who posted this on X: Ukraine welcomes all peace initiatives put forward by the United States. But unfortunately, each of them is being stalled by Russia.

My source tonight is Democratic senator, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. He has been a leading proponent of more sanctions on Russia.

Nice to see you, Senator.

[21:20:00]

So tonight, officials say the President is particularly irritated with the pace of negotiations, and the lack of progress, in the two weeks since the Trump-Putin summit in Alaska. Trump, of course, before that meeting, promised severe consequences on Putin, if he didn't get to a ceasefire, or agree to one. Do you think Trump will ever make good on that threat? SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT): I think he has to make good on that threat, for the sake of our nation's credibility. He's been mocked and manipulated by Putin, made a world-class laughing stock, would be (ph) funny. But people are dying. The slaughter continues.

And he has said repeatedly, I have nice conversations with Putin. And then he bombs and kills Ukrainians. So, I think it's time for Donald Trump to bring down a sledgehammer, use the Graham-Blumenthal sanctions bill, which would impose the kind of torching sanctions that are appropriate right now, and increase the amount of arms that are being sold to the Europeans, so they can be transferred to Ukraine.

BROWN: And I should note that Trump did punish India for buying Russian oil, imposing that 50 percent tariff on nearly all goods arriving from there.

You say more needs to be done. You bring up the bill, your bipartisan bill. You say that it's gotten a high level of support. Why hasn't it been put up for a full vote since you introduced it months ago?

BLUMENTHAL: The answer to the inaction, so far, is very simply, President Trump has failed to give the greenlight to Majority Leader, John Thune, who has been waiting for Trump to give him the go-ahead. And it could be done, literally next week, on Tuesday, when we return. It has 85 co-sponsors, evenly divided, Republican and Democrat. It would get 90 votes.

And it would send a message to China, as he gathers the pariahs of the world, Putin and Kim will be on that platform for the great parade, celebrating the end of World War II that he's planned. And what better way to send a message than to adopt a sanctions bill that stops China, India and Brazil from fueling Putin's war machine, by buying his oil and gas.

That's the purpose of this bill. It's not necessarily to sanction Russia, although that's a good thing, but our trade with Russia is limited. It is really to stop the flow of revenue to Vladimir Putin, and cripple his economy.

BROWN: Right, because he is heading to China for that Eurasian summit, this weekend, along with the Prime Minister of India, who, as I just noted, is facing those tariffs as a penalty.

What are you watching out for, in that gathering?

BLUMENTHAL: I think the tableau of tyranny should shock America. Clearly, they sense weakness. And very bluntly, that sign of weakness is Trump's vacillation, his back and forth with Putin, his welcoming Putin to American soil for a one-on-one conversation, and then, in effect, yielding the high ground, by saying that a ceasefire is no longer a condition for peace talks.

I think that the addition of interceptors for the Patriot systems that Ukraine already has, and the sale of additional ones, I'm looking for strength on America's part, in military arms provisions, and the sanctions that are long overdue on China, India, Brazil, and others, who are buying Russian oil and gas. The majority of Russian oil and gas is going to those countries. And without it, Putin's war machine would falter and be crippled.

BROWN: In response to what we were just talking about earlier, in terms of these strikes. White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said that Trump wants the war to end, but that both Putin and Zelenskyy must want it to end as well.

What do you make of the fact that the Trump administration continues to put the onus on Ukraine to end a war it didn't start?

BLUMENTHAL: It's delusional. Obviously, it is untethered to fact. The war was started by Putin. In fact, it started in 2014, with the first invasion. The second invasion occurred in 2022.

And there is simply no denying the reality that Putin does not want peace, at least right now, because he's convinced he can outlast the West, and he can just take more territory, kill more Ukrainians, demoralize them, and seek a better peace agreement with the passage of time, by completely exhausting Ukraine. We cannot let it happen.

[21:25:00]

China and other nations that are going to be gathered, on that parade deck, watching a show of strength by China, at that gathering, are taking what Trump is doing, his vacillation, as a sign of weakness. And we said all along, China is watching.

BROWN: All right. Senator Richard Blumenthal, thank you so much. Hope you have a nice holiday weekend.

BLUMENTHAL: Same to you. Thanks.

BROWN: And up next on this Friday night. Our new reporting on the next city the Trump administration wants to flood with federal agents.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:30:00]

BROWN: First Chicago, then Boston. Tonight, we are learning both major cities could see a surge of federal agents on their streets soon.

Sources tell CNN, the Trump administration is preparing for Chicago's major immigration operation, as soon as next week, and plans are in the works, right now, to send these armored vehicles, ICE agents, and possibly even National Guard troops, if the administration feels they're needed.

Today, Illinois Governor, JB Pritzker, said those troops are not welcome.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. JB PRITZKER (D-IL): We'd love to have more FBI agents to help us to track down perpetrators of crime. But we don't welcome troops to the City of Chicago. We do not welcome troops to the State of Illinois.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: The administration is also discussing a similar operation in Boston, in the coming weeks. Top Trump official, Stephen Miller, would neither confirm nor deny those plans today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN MILLER, WH DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR POLICY: Without getting into specifics and revealing any operational details, the President has been clear, repeatedly, that we're going to be prioritizing enforcement in these sanctuary jurisdictions, as a matter of public safety and national security.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: My sources tonight are:

Former DOJ Special Counsel, Brendan Ballou.

Reuters' White House correspondent, Jeff Mason.

And Major General Randy Manner, who served as the Acting Vice Chief of the National Guard Bureau.

Nice to see all three of you.

Jeff, let's start with you. I want to just get the reporting landscape here. What are your sources telling you about these plans, for both Chicago and Boston?

JEFF MASON, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, REUTERS: Well, so far, there's not a lot of detail about their plans. And I'm glad you played a little bit of Stephen Miller's remarks earlier, because he is in the know, and did not share any sort of heads-up about when or what is going to happen next.

But it's clear, from what the President has said, and from what others around him have said, that, as you said in the intro, that they are zeroing in on these cities, and in particular Chicago.

I think it's also important for viewers to know, and for us to discuss the context, these are Democratic-led cities, and the President and the Republican Party in general did very well in the last election by focusing on crime.

So, there is a political aspect to this that is very big, and it's related to not only his interest in reducing crime, but showing his base, and showing others, that he's doing that, and doing it in a forceful way that leaders in these cities and states are not welcoming.

BROWN: Yes, and he's intertwining the crime, immigration, right, targeting these sanctuary cities that are led by Democrats.

And Major General, Border Czar Tom Homan said that they're considering using a naval base in Chicago as a staging area. Why is that significant?

MAJ. GEN. RANDY MANNER (RET.), FORMER ACTING VICE CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU: I think it's very important for everyone to understand that at best, this is going to be a law enforcement operation, not a military operation.

The Great Lake -- Great Lakes naval air -- I'm sorry, naval base that is not near Chicago, that is the closest federal installation that could perhaps house those individuals. But we have to keep in mind that, again, there's absolutely no conditions under which that have been--

BROWN: Oh, we just lost him.

All right. Well, Brendan, let's get to you. Tell us about -- help us understand, from a legal perspective, how this could play out. Because typically, a governor is in charge of the National Guard, right? There are laws on the books that prevent the military from being used for law enforcement purposes. How do you see this playing out?

BRENDAN BALLOU, FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL, DOJ ANTITRUST DIVISION: Well, you're exactly right. So, the National Guard is traditionally controlled by the governor.

There are three basic ways that the President can take over the National Guard. If there is a foreign invasion. If there's a rebellion. And if the President isn't able to enforce the laws of the United States. None of those things are happening in the -- in Chicago, or in Boston, right now.

So, if the President is actually going to federalize the National Guard, what I suspect may happen is that they will first deploy ICE agents and CBP agents to these cities. There will be protests. The President will then say that he's not able to enforce the law, and use that as the reason to federalize them.

BROWN: But just for, like, the Governor of Illinois, for example, what would his legal options be, if Trump goes ahead and these agents and National Guard end up in the city, as part of this enforcement, how do you pull that back?

BALLOU: Yes, so this is exactly what Governor Newsom tried, in California. When they -- when the President federalized the National Guard there, a district court judge enjoined the takeover of the National Guard, in California. That was overturned on appeal, at least preliminarily. So, the challenge, really, is going to come down to what the judges and which -- which gets drawn when this goes to court.

BROWN: And Jeff.

You mentioned California Governor Gavin Newsom.

He announced this week that he is sending more state police to major cities. The timing is certainly interesting here. What do you think?

[21:35:00]

MASON: Well, I think, again, to just kind of pull back and look at the politics. Governor Newsom has presented himself and has established himself, really, as a major counterpoint to President Trump on the Democrat -- in the Democratic Party.

At a time when there's not a clear leader of the party, after the devastating loss for the Democrats, last year, President -- of course, President Biden, of course, and Vice President Harris no longer seen as leaders -- the leaders of the party, so people are having to step up. And governors are among them, and Gavin Newsom has been one of them.

So, I think this action is just one more piece of that. It's a -- it's presenting a counternarrative, and it's presenting another option for voters to look at, in terms of how to deal with these issues, with crime and with -- and in general, with immigration, et cetera.

BROWN: Major General, good to see you back.

I want to ask you about the Joint Task Force, overseeing the National Guard troops in D.C. It says that someone tried to grab a soldier's firearm during what it called a disturbance on the metro train. The troops just started carrying weapons, as we know, this past week. What is your reaction to that?

MANNER: Again, the National Guardsmen really have no risk associated, that would justify carrying weapons in the District of Columbia.

Again, it's very important that all of your viewers understand that this is at best, a law enforcement operation. It is not a military operation. We must not accept the idea of military being on our streets as a norm. So, I think it's important that we get them off the streets. If anything, the President should reinstate the $800 million that he took from cities to be able to train--

BROWN: Oh, there he goes again. Well, we tried, right?

BALLOU: Yes.

BROWN: All right, everyone. Thank you so much.

And up next. You may know him as Coach Yeah. But now, he's opening up about his hidden battle with addiction, and what he learned on his road to recovery.

[21:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Well, as the College Football season kicks off, we know, Kaitlan Collins, our favorite Alabama alum, will be screaming Roll Tide, as the Crimson Tide takes on the Florida State Seminoles, tomorrow. And we wanted to take a moment to shine the spotlight on former Alabama Coach, Scott Cochran, the charismatic and beloved Coach Yeah, whom everyone knew for motivating his players, like this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT COCHRAN, AUTHOR, "SKULL SESSION," HEAD FOOTBALL COACH, UNIVERSITY OF WEST ALABAMA, 8-TIME COLLEGE FOOTBALL NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP WINNER: Give me that. Give me that. I can't get it. Yes, that's my ball, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: But behind that booming voice was a hidden battle with addiction. Painful headaches pushed the national champion to become addicted to painkillers and opioids, an addiction that pushed him away from the game he loved, and into a battle for his life. But now, the prolific coach is back and fighting against the dangers of addiction.

Kaitlan spoke to him about his new book, "Skull Session: Mastering the Mental Game in Sports, Work, and Life."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: I'm so excited to have you on here, Coach, because I think most people probably cannot name the strength and conditioning coach who was at their school.

Obviously, you stood out at Alabama. Certainly, when I was a student there, you were just known for investing so much time in the players, and your energy that you brought that was just this kind of magic inside the stadium.

Your book is fascinating, though, because it's telling a story that I think a lot of people did not see. And I wonder what made you want to write about it this way.

COCHRAN: Well, I mean, thank you for having me on. Very excited to be here.

But, at the end of the day, addiction touches everyone. Everybody's got a family member or a friend that has been touched by addiction. And it's time to eliminate the whisper. It's time to stop being so quiet about it, and start letting people know that recovery is real. And so, I thought it was really important to let people know that, recovery has its ups and downs, but if you tell the story, people can relate.

And yes, I was on a big stage. Yes, it was all awesome. But behind closed doors, I was battling for my life.

COLLINS: Well, I think that's the thing that some people may not recognize or realize, is publicly, you're just this energetic, charismatic football coach that's so beloved by the fans, by the players, by the other coaches, not knowing what's really going on behind-the-scenes with you.

COCHRAN: Right. And being in front of the players all the time, and them not knowing, I was able to hide it, you know? I even hid it from my wife, until in 2020 I overdosed, and my wife is the one that found me dead.

COLLINS: Wow.

COCHRAN: And I got back to life, and I feel like I'm here, I have a purpose, and I'm trying to do the best I can.

COLLINS: Yes, you write about that. I mean, raw is not even really the way to put it, but that moment with you and your wife. What was it like for you to write about such a dark moment in your life?

[21:45:00]

COCHRAN: Very emotional. To bring these things out, brings a lot of emotion out. Because, for so long, I felt like a fraud. I felt like the person you saw had this secret, because I never did it in front of every -- anyone. It was always hidden.

And the road to recovery, you know? My recovery hasn't been pretty. It hasn't been a straight line, you know? I've had my ups, my downs. And so, I think it's important for people to know that, that recovery isn't a straight line, and that you have to go through the ups and downs, and having family members, and having people and support around you, is a huge help.

COLLINS: Well, and the book you -- basically every chapter is centered on what is described as skull sessions, basically these mental development moments for players about their fears, their failures, their ambitions and their goals.

I wonder, though, how you see that that translates to people, who have never touched a football, and aren't on a team but can use that in their lives?

COCHRAN: Yes, and that's really why I wanted to write the book, is because Coach Saban came out, in 2010 -- 2009, and said, We need to have these mental conditioning sessions, and we called them Skull Sessions, where we sat down and we wrote our goals down. We learned how to talk to ourselves, you know?

Because our brain and our mind is always talking, right? But if you can learn how to use the vocabulary, in a positive way, it can help you perform better. But I found that it really helped me in addiction. It helps me in my recovery, learning how to be, have some gratitude, right? One of the chapters is all about gratitude. And if you wake up every morning with some gratitude? Wow, it's like a miracle, every single day, you know?

But those are just three of the steps. I go into very specific steps that you can take in recovery, but also as an organization or a team, the same steps we did at Alabama, the same steps we did at Georgia. So, it's been -- it was really cool to write. COLLINS: I think when you -- I remember when you left Alabama, and a lot of people were upset. You never want someone that you adore and people appreciate so much to leave. And you said publicly, in 2020, you're taking on a bigger coaching role. That's why you were leaving.

You write in the book, though, and this stood out, The real reason I left is that I thought a change of venue would help me stop taking oxy. I had all these people around me getting the pills I needed. You thought, Maybe if I left, I wouldn't have the access and I could stop. But you said, That's called running from your addiction, and it's about as effective as it sounds.

COCHRAN: Exactly right. I thought that a change that, you know, they didn't have drugs in Athens, right? That didn't exist there. That my only problem was in Tuscaloosa, which was completely wrong. And in the rooms, we call it, running from your disease, like my problem's in a location, not myself.

But once I realized, like I'm the one that needs fixing, I'm the one that has this problem? Because my solution were the drugs, for so long, that now I needed to figure out what is my real solution now? How can I become the person that everyone sees, right? The one that I've always portrayed, how can I really be that person again?

COLLINS: How did you do it?

COCHRAN: Man, that is a great question. Because I feel like my relationship with my higher power, who I choose to call God, really, I leaned in, right? I leaned in on him, and I leaned in on my family and friends.

And I found a way to just take one day, one step, one moment at a time, and to realize, having a purpose-driven life, just like I did in sports, having that towards recovery has been huge in my success. I'm about to have 19 months of sobriety, you know?

COLLINS: Wow.

COCHRAN: And a lot of people are like, Oh, maybe -- yes. Maybe you shouldn't be writing a book and stuff. And I was like, You know what? You only live once, you know? And it's time to let people know that there is a new solution, right? There are ways that you can get better.

COLLINS: I mean, the book is incredibly personal, and I think a lot of people would take a lot away from it.

I want to just say thank you for sharing that story. I think it was probably incredibly tough to do, and I'm really grateful for you for coming on and talking about it. Coach Scott Cochran, thank you.

COCHRAN: Thank you very much.

COLLINS: And Roll Tide, of course.

[21:50:00] COCHRAN: Roll Tide all day baby.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Thanks to Scott, and congratulations on his 19 months of sobriety.

Up next. Our behind-the-scenes look at the White House, this week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[21:55:00]

BROWN: An appeals court tonight says President Trump unlawfully leaned on emergency powers to impose tariffs.

What does history actually say about this economic sledgehammer Trump has been wielding? In his latest documentary special, Fareed Zakaria looks back at America's past experience with tariffs. And spoiler alert for you, there are some sobering lessons.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN HOST, FAREED ZAKARIA GPS (voice-over): April 2nd, 2025. America's so-called Liberation Day. As President Trump unveiled new tariffs on countries spanning the globe.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Jobs and factories will come roaring back into our country.

ZAKARIA (voice-over): He wanted to return America to its glory days.

TRUMP: We're going to produce the cars and ships, chips, airplanes that we need, right here in America.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We make steel. We make steel and talk steel.

ZAKARIA (voice-over): Trump was tapping into a powerful nostalgia for an economy that used to make things.

And for the bountiful middle-class manufacturing jobs that came with it.

TRUMP: This will be indeed the golden age of America.

ZAKARIA (voice-over): A century ago, America had a longing for another lost era. It led to massive tariffs designed to help one industry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Depression, fear and failure stopped (ph) the nation.

ZAKARIA (voice-over): Which then damaged the entire economy.

This is the story of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, a law that carries dire warnings for America today.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Be sure to tune in. "Big, Beautiful Tariffs: A Fareed Zakaria Special" airs Monday at 08:00 p.m. Eastern, right here on CNN.

And finally, it was a big week at the White House, and here on THE SOURCE. Here's a look behind the scenes.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TRUMP: He's a dictator. He's a dictator.

I don't like a dictator. I'm not a dictator.

ON SCREEN TEXT: Monday, August 25.

TRUMP: Next should be Chicago, because, as you all know, Chicago is a killing field, right now.

PRITZKER: Mr. President, do not come to Chicago. You are neither wanted here, nor needed here.

ON SCREEN TEXT: Tuesday, August 26.

TRUMP: I'm not walking in Baltimore right now. Baltimore is a hellhole.

COLLINS: What are you going to do if he sends in the National Guard to Baltimore, though? I mean, we've seen other governors try to fight it.

GOV. WES MOORE (D-MD): I'm the Commander-in-Chief of the Maryland National Guard. Not him.

COLLINS: You actually recently moved to deputize Customs and Border Protection officers to be able to patrol national park sites in Washington. Why was that necessary?

DOUG BURGUM, INTERIOR SECRETARY: We've been working in collaboration on law enforcement, both on the border and on enforcing laws inside our country, on federal lands.

COLLINS: He's only targeting Democratic-led cities, even though there is crime in Republican-led cities, as well.

BURGUM: I wouldn't say targeting. He's not targeting anything. He's basically just, he's putting out an offer to say, Hey, if you have an issue, give us a call.

COLLINS: Senator, what is your reaction to what we heard from President Trump today, basically sounding like he is moving ahead with ousting Lisa Cook from this role?

SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA): The economic problem he faces is not the Fed.

He promised that he would lower costs for American families, on day one. ON SCREEN TEXT: Wednesday, August 27.

COLLINS: 8-years-old and 10-years-old, two young lives that were stolen, after their school year began with gunfire.

I know that you've seen a lot today.

Can I just ask personally, how you're -- how you're doing tonight?

CHIEF BRIAN O'HARA, MINNEAPOLIS POLICE: I -- I'm a parent myself. I have children, as do many of the men and women, police officers and the first responders that came here this morning, and just walked into this unthinkable, unthinkable act of violence.

ON SCREEN TEXT: Thursday, August 28.

KAROLINE LEAVITT, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: I want to begin today's briefing by addressing the horrific shooting that took place yesterday, where a deranged shooter opened fire, during morning Mass.

President Trump and the first lady encouraged the entire nation to join all of us in praying for the victims.

COLLINS: The newly-installed White House flags that President Trump had put up are at half-staff still. This comes after that devastating shooting.

We haven't heard from President Trump saying anything in response to the calls from a lot of Democrats, when it comes to gun control.

As a father, as yourself, what's going through your mind tonight?

[22:00:00]

MAYOR JACOB FREY, (D) MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA: We all have our professional titles. But for me, it means far less than the titles that I have, of husband and dad.

Prayers are good, but they are not enough. They are a necessity, but they are not in and of themselves, adequate. It's only adequate if you can attach an action to the work.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Thank you so much for joining.

"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.