Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

CNN International: House Dems Post Image of Birthday Note to Epstein Bearing Trump's Name; House Committee Gets Birthday Book; Moscow Calls Western Sanctions "Absolutely Useless"; Supreme Court Upholds "Roving" ICE Patrols in L.A.; Japanese PM Set to Resign; Remembering Baseball Great Davey Johnson. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired September 08, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all over the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. And you're watching "The

Brief."

Just ahead this hour, House Democrats post a copy of a birthday note to Jeffrey Epstein bearing Donald Trump's name. The White House says it is not

the President's signature. The Kremlin says Western sanctions are, quote, "absolutely useless" after Russian forces launched the largest wave of

long-range airstrikes on Ukraine. And remembering baseball great Davey Johnson, the groundbreaking manager who led the Mets, my Mets, to a World

Series title.

We begin with the latest in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. The House Oversight Committee has received its first batch of documents from the

estate of the convicted sex offender, including a collection of letters offered to Epstein on his 50th birthday. This back in 2003.

Democrats on the committee posted an image from the book, there it is, which we heard about back in July but never saw until now. Now, an image of

a woman's torso bearing Donald Trump's name at the bottom and some poetry. The White House says Trump neither drew the picture nor signed it. He says

the President's legal team will pursue its defamation suit against the Wall Street Journal for first reporting the note's existence.

Taylor Budowich, the White House deputy chief of staff, said the signature on the note to Epstein is not Trump's, comparing it to other documents the

president has signed. Trump has repeatedly denied he had anything to do with the drawing as well.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I don't even know what they're talking about. Now, somebody could have written a letter and used my name, but

that's happened a lot.

I don't do drawings. I'm not a drawing person. I don't do drawings. Sometimes people say, well, you draw a building and I'll draw four lines

and a little roof, you know, for a charity. So -- but I'm not a drawing person.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Well, he did do some drawings. Kristen Holmes is at the White House. I wonder how the White House is handling this, as often they're

saying it's not the president's, they're attacking the Wall Street Journal. But one thing is clear is that this story and this investigation and

details about Epstein are not going away, and there even are some Republicans who are pushing for further transparency.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and one thing to note is that this was a result of a subpoena by the House Oversight

Committee to the Epstein estate. The committee itself is led by a Republican. Now, that Republican, James Comer, is in constant touch with

the White House. But, of course, the White House is likely not to be happy about the release of this document, particularly from the birthday book.

Now, we have seen a number of White House officials. You mentioned Taylor Budowich. The other person we saw responding to this was Karoline Leavitt,

the press secretary. She said almost the exact same thing, saying the latest piece published by the Wall Street Journal proves that this entire,

quote, "birthday card story is false. As I have said all along, it is very clear President Trump did not draw this picture, and he did not sign it."

They are continuing to double down on this idea that someone else apparently wrote this letter.

Now, interestingly, this picture of this letter was posted by the House Oversight Democrats. They posted this online. We still have not heard from

the Republicans on the committee. We do know there were a number of other high-profile associates of Epstein's inside this book. But it is

interesting to see how they are pushing back against this narrative after suing the Wall Street Journal, after suing News Corps, which, of course, is

the parent company of the Wall Street Journal, they are clearly not backing away from this now that this document is out there and exists.

Of course, before they were claiming the White House, along with Vice President J. D. Vance, among other officials, saying that the Wall Street

Journal never even had a letter, they didn't think there was a letter that existed, they didn't share the letter with them. Now, they're saying that

this was not written by President Trump.

And we were asking, as soon as this came out, for some kind of response. They are all now collectively gathering behind this Karoline Leavitt

statement, from the press secretary. that is denying that it is his signature.

[18:05:00]

But, of course, as you mentioned, I mean, this is something they want to go away. And certainly, the publication of this letter itself, as we likely

are going to receive more documents from this birthday book as well as from the Epstein estate, is in part going to show the White House as well as

everyone else that this story isn't going away. And as you noted, it's Republicans as well as Democrats, and even some of Donald Trump's most

staunch loyalist supporters who have been pushing for more information from this investigation to come out.

SCIUTTO: No question. And that hasn't died down, arguably gotten louder. Kristen Holmes at the White House, thanks so much.

Joining me now is Yassamin Ansari. She's a Democratic congresswoman from Arizona. Congresswoman, thanks so much for taking the time.

REP. YASSAMIN ANSARI (D-AZ): Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: You've met personally with Epstein survivors, emphasized the importance of hearing their voices. I wonder, as you see the estate

documents, some of them coming out, even this birthday book now in hand, do you believe that their voices will be ultimately heard?

ANSARI: I hope that the voices of Epstein survivors will ultimately be heard. They are feeling more hope than I think that they ever have before,

given the momentum around this issue. I think it is -- you know, it was a watershed moment for them to be outside of the U.S. Capitol, you know, as

part of a press conference, a bipartisan press conference, telling their story, some for the first time ever.

But I also think rightly so, you know, they are distrustful. They have gone through this for decades. And according to many of them, they have shared

their stories many, many, many times with the FBI, with the CIA. What they continue to tell us, both the survivors and the lawyers, was that the

information is out there. It exists. The government is aware of the information. And what we need now is the full unredacted files. That is

exactly what the subpoena from the Oversight Committee, that Oversight Democrats are the ones who forced and ultimately got bipartisan support

for. That is what we now need.

And I think today's reveal and today's disclosure in terms of the note that the White House and Donald Trump personally repeatedly lied about over and

over and over again with a variety of lies, as is the norm for this president. We now know that that did exist and that that letter, that

egregious, salacious letter from Donald Trump to Jeffrey Epstein did exist. So, my question now is, what else is Donald Trump lying about?

SCIUTTO: This is a rare case where Donald Trump appears to be out of step with his base, right, because many in his base have been pushing for

transparency here, release of more information, including to this day. And folks outside of government as well. You know, Joe Rogan's been covering

this very, very aggressively. Why is Trump pushing back, in your view, against his own base?

ANSARI: Because he's covering something up. I believe strongly that -- whether it's himself personally being implicated in some way, shape, or

form in the files, it is his friends, it is his supporters, it is powerful, powerful individuals who have helped him get to this point now, who he is

trying to protect and he's doing everything that he can and using the full power of the White House to cover it up. I think one of the most telling

signs is that the White House has referred to any Republican member of Congress signing the discharge petition that's on the House floor right now

on this issue, they have told them that if you sign this petition, we will consider this a, quote, "hostile act" towards the White House. That is a

massive tell in and of itself.

So, I think that Donald Trump has a lot to hide. And I am glad to see that his base and people he has been promising for years are standing up and

saying, you know, we want to know the truth. And as Democrats, quite frankly, we are saying we don't care who's implicated in the files, whether

they are a Democrat or a Republican, if you were involved in enabling or perpetrating crimes against girls, children over the course of decades,

then it is far past time for you to be held accountable and to pay the price and the consequences of your crimes.

SCIUTTO: Yes. You'd think that'd be a bipartisan issue. I want to ask you about two more topics, if I can, before we go. The first is the Supreme

Court has now just granted the Trump administration, ICE specifically, the ability to continue what some have called roving patrols in California. I

wonder, in your view, given how these patrols work, has the Supreme Court just endorsed ICE to racially profile when it does these raids that we've

covered frequently with unmarked cars, un-uniformed officers, masked officers, et cetera? Is that what the Supreme Court has granted them?

[18:10:00]

ANSARI: The Trump-appointed Supreme Court, unsurprisingly, has now made it so that we have second-class citizens in this country. ICE now has the

power to go after millions of Americans simply based on the language that they speak, the color of their skin. And it is not hyperbole to say that

even if you are an American citizen, you will now have to have your papers on you, have your passport on you, to prove that you are an American

citizen if you happen to be speaking Spanish with your family member, or if you look like I do, just, you know, a daughter of immigrants, you know, not

blonde hair, blue-eyed.

So, yes, absolutely. And ICE is a rogue agency with now so many agents and officers who feel extremely emboldened, are completely in lockstep with

Donald Trump and Stephen Miller's extremely racist mass deportation policy. And I was gutted by this news today.

This is now another step in complete approval and legalizing Donald Trump and Stephen Miller's racist agenda. And it starts in Los Angeles, and

they're going to feel emboldened to do this in many other places. And I'm concerned about a district like mine in Phoenix, Arizona, where we are, you

know, a district where more than 64 languages are spoken, a diverse community.

SCIUTTO: Looking ahead, you have another shutdown, government shutdown looming. As you know, Democrats went along with Republicans to fund the

government in the spring. Should they do so again now, or should they refuse, and, in effect, shut the government down to block policies, well,

like ICE, that you're talking about here?

ANSARI: There's -- my view on this is that we as -- first of all, this is not our responsibility in the sense that the Republicans have control of

all three branches. They have the presidency, the Senate, and Congress. So, if they have a budget that they want to pass, they can always do so.

SCIUTTO: They need your votes. They need some Democratic votes, yes.

ANSARI: Correct. And again, my view is unless they are going to roll back some of the egregious policies that they passed a couple of weeks ago,

unless they're going to make sure that Medicaid isn't cut, unless they're going to take away funding from ICE, which they quadrupled in the last

budget, then I do not intend to vote for this budget.

SCIUTTO: Yassamin Ansari, thanks so much for joining.

ANSARI: Thank you for having me.

SCIUTTO: Well, Moscow is brushing up President Trump's latest comments about potentially imposing new sanctions on Russia, calling such measures,

quote, "absolutely useless." The Kremlin spokesperson says, "no sanctions will be able to force Russia to change the consistent position that our

president has repeatedly spoken about," that's a quote.

Over the weekend, President Trump said he's ready to move to a second phase of sanctions after Russia launched the largest aerial attack on Ukraine

since its full-scale invasion in 2022. That attack killed at least four people, injured dozens of others, and unusually for these attacks, it

targeted a government building in Kyiv. Hit for the first time.

Back in July, the U.S. president threatened to impose 100 percent tariffs and secondary sanctions on countries purchasing Russian oil. In August,

just before a summit with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. In Alaska, he warned there would be, quote, "severe consequences" if Russia did not agree

to a ceasefire. However, in each instance, and there have been many more than those, he has yet to impose such new sanctions. Listen to what the

president has repeatedly said over the last several months.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I think in the next few days you'll find out. Not happy at all. We'll see what happens. I think over the next two weeks we're going to find

out which way it's going to go. I'm going to make a new deadline of about 10 or 12 days from today.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you still believe that Putin actually wants to end the war?

TRUMP: I can't tell you that, but I'll let you know in about two weeks, within two weeks. I could answer that question better in two weeks.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you trust President Putin?

TRUMP: I'll let you know in about two weeks.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Two weeks, two weeks, two weeks. For more, Oleksiy Goncharenko joins me. He's a member of the Ukrainian parliament. Oleksiy, good to have

you back on.

OLEKSIY GONCHARENKO, UKRAINIAN PARLIAMENT MEMBER: Hi.

SCIUTTO: So, I know that you have experienced many Russian barrages. I wonder, was this weekend's barrage different? How did it feel? Was it clear

it was the biggest of the war?

[18:15:00]

GONCHARENKO: It was a big one. And before the end of this, I couldn't tell you that it is the biggest one. But after it finished, and after we saw

that the building of the government of Ukraine, not just one of the administrative buildings, but the most important of them, the building of

the cabinet of ministers of Ukraine is heavily hit, it was clear that it is something new. And this is a new escalation from Russia.

Also, a week ago, Russia executed on the Ukrainian territory, a Ukrainian member of the parliament, a former speaker of the parliament, Andriy

Parubiy, who was brutally killed in Lviv, just on the street. And so, now we see these attempts to decapitate Ukraine, which is definitely a new

stage of escalation.

SCIUTTO: Do you believe Trump's latest vow to impose new sanctions on Russia? I mean, is this latest vow any more credible than previous ones

that Trump has not acted on yet?

GONCHARENKO: Yes, we heard it for a number of times. There is progress. It's the sanctions against India, secondary sanctions, because India

continues to buy Russian oil, and India, together with China, are the biggest buyers of Russian oil. The question is that we need to go further.

And I hope that President Trump realizes that the strategy of red carpeting Putin and warm welcoming him, like it was in Alaska, doesn't work.

Putin seems more emboldened, more than ever, after the summit in Alaska and continuous attacks against Ukraine. And as I told you, new escalation with

attacks against governmental buildings and the government and members of the parliament, the prominent Ukrainian political leaders, it's something

even for this world view.

So, the only language which Putin understands is the language of force. Unfortunately, we see that while sometimes, like with the sanctions with

India, Trump acts in this way, in other cases, he doesn't. And this inconsistency doesn't work.

So, I hope that President Trump will change his strategy and his attitude toward President -- no, Russian Dictator Putin, because he's not

legitimately elected president.

SCIUTTO: In Beijing recently, of course, you saw Putin standing next to Xi Jinping and the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un. From your perspective,

how significant was that show of unity? And do you believe that Putin feels he's got his friends, China and North Korea, and together they can all

stand up to the U.S.?

GONCHARENKO: Exactly, exactly. The whole show was for one country and for one viewer, for United States of America and for President Trump. And this

is a very bad show, because it shows that this axis of chaos, Russia, Iran, North Korea and China standing behind them, they are uniting, they feel

themselves emboldened, they are not afraid to show their plans. This is very bad.

And this is the threat not to Ukraine, this is the threat to the whole civilized world and to the United States of America, because these

countries are uniting not to hit Ukraine. It's ridiculous. They are uniting to hit the United States. And that's the moment to act. And also, it shows

us, let us imagine, if the big war will erupt, who will be in the trenches near Tehran or near Beijing? Who will be this infantry?

And I think that Ukrainian army today proved to be one of the most efficient in the world, 1 million battle-hardened people. That is something

absolutely unique and very much needed by the United States. Yes, we need United States support too, but United States needs us too.

SCIUTTO: Europe has been providing support to Ukraine, taking more of the burden to do so as U.S. support has shrunk. Do you believe Europe can give

you what you need, right? If the U.S. retreats further, gives up on the war, in effect, under President Trump, can Europe fill that gap?

GONCHARENKO: First of all, if this will happen, that will mean that the United States are alone against this axis of chaos. China, North Korea,

Iran, Russia, and all of them just against United States. And United States are without allies. The whole idea of the after Second World War American

strategy was to have strong allies and to lose all of them, I think it's the worst possible strategy. It will not make America great again. It will

make America very weak. So, that is, I think, very important.

[18:20:00]

And speaking about Europe, we are very thankful to European countries for all support Ukraine is receiving today. But I think European countries

should go further. Why Russian frozen assets are still not seized? Why? It is a question not to America, it's a question to European countries. Why

European countries are still buying Russian oil and gas and so on?

So, it's the time for Europe to show how important is what's going on in Ukraine. And by this to show to the United States there is -- that they are

ready to be shoulder to shoulder with them and with Ukraine in order to stop this full-scale invasion and in order to restore international law at

least as much as possible and in order to protect the civilized world.

SCIUTTO: Fair questions throughout. Oleksiy Goncharenko, we're glad you're safe. And thanks so much for joining.

GONCHARENKO: Thank you very much.

SCIUTTO: Straight ahead, the U.S. Supreme Court upholds what are known as roving patrols by ICE officers in Los Angeles. What the court said, what

the dissenters said, and what it could mean for other American cities.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: The U.S. Supreme Court says the Trump administration can go ahead with roving immigration patrols in Los Angeles. ICE agents came under fire

for pulling aside Latinos demanding their immigration status. Lower courts said ICE had not established reasonable suspicion for the stops. The

Supreme Court, with that 6-3 conservative majority, disagreed. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote that a person's ethnicity alone cannot furnish

reasonable suspicion, but it can be a, quote, "relevant factor."

In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote, we should not have to live in a country where the government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks

Spanish, and appears to work a low-wage job. Rather than stand idly by while our constitutional freedoms are lost, I dissent. Sotomayor, of

course, the first Latina to serve on the Supreme Court.

Joining me now, Chief Supreme Court Analyst Joan Biskupic. All right. So, I will always preface our conversations by saying you know far more about the

law than me. But I thought racial profiling was illegal. Here he's saying, it seems, if you quote Kavanaugh, "Apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish

reasonable suspicion, but it can be a relevant factor." Isn't that saying that racial profiling is OK?

[18:25:00]

JOAN BISKUPIC, CNN CHIEF SUPREME COURT ANALYST: No, that's not what he's saying, but -- that's not what he thinks he's saying, but Justice Sotomayor

certainly is saying, yes, you're saying that you can depend on race.

There are four factors that ICE was using to decide who to pick up, and I'll talk about the nature of these stops also. One was race or ethnicity,

the other was speaking Spanish or English with an accent, with a Spanish accent, where they were located, like, you know, places where day laborers

might congregate, and then also the kind of job that it appeared somebody was waiting to maybe go head toward, like agriculture or construction. So,

those were the four factors.

And what the lower court judge, the district court judge in this case, said was indeed that was so heavily racial profiling. And Justice Kavanaugh, who

interestingly was the only one of the conservative majority who wrote. Now, see, the majority controls these cases, but usually says nothing about why

they're ruling, why are they reversing where the lower court was.

So, Justice Kavanaugh takes a step to write, but what he writes then becomes really fuel for Justice Sotomayor's anger and disbelief at where

the majority is going. Not only did she say essentially that he was still endorsing a kind of racial profiling here, targeting of Latinos, but also

the way he cast it as just a brief stop, ask an individual for his or her papers, and if they have them, go about their business.

But Justice Sotomayor said no, these are masked, heavily armed agents who are throwing people to the ground, causing panic throughout the L.A. area.

This is not something benign or something that sort of modestly casts the way the one person in the majority who wrote cast it.

SCIUTTO: You know, we had a story about this on Friday, because someone I happen to know faced this, and you have this expression going around the

community saying, driving while Latino.

BISKUPIC: Oh, of course.

SCIUTTO: So, here was a guy driving a delivery van, and the officers claimed he had a blinker out. He was parked at the time. So, there's a

practical factor here. It just strikes me that it's another case of this court that is separating itself from the reality of how this law is being

applied.

BISKUPIC: Right. Two things on that, Jim. First of all, you and I live in the District of Columbia. We know what's going on in the District of

Columbia with people being picked up simply because they're brown-skinned. But it's the difference between the majority view here and the dissent is

one of the majority wants to give the administration the benefit of the doubt all the time. That this is --

Now, granted, immigration has traditionally been something that the executive has had lots of control over, but when it potentially violates

the Constitution, and here it was the Fourth Amendment for an unreasonable search and seizure, as the lower court said, then it's more than just

giving the executive broad leeway here.

And you have to remember, we're at a preliminary step in this case. This case has not been fully heard on the merits yet. It's still working its way

up eventually to the Supreme Court. And what the Supreme Court has said that even though the policy has been challenged as unconstitutional, we're

going to let it take effect. We're going to give the administration the benefit of the doubt. And Justice Sotomayor is saying, no, we need more

protections here.

SCIUTTO: Which they've done more than once, right? I mean, you also had that on the birthright citizenship case.

BISKUPIC: They've done it in several -- that one at least was heard on the merits in terms of the national injunctions there. But in several cases

where the Trump administration has gone up to the Supreme Court asking for a reprieve to let their policy take effect while it's being challenged on

the constitutionality or the unlawfulness under statute, and the administration has said yes in a series of immigration cases. Yes.

SCIUTTO: Joan, thanks for keeping on top of it.

BISKUPIC: Sure.

SCIUTTO: I appreciate it. Just ahead, the Kremlin mocks U.S. sanctions, right, as Trump threatens, once again, that he's going to impose them.

Plus, my conversation with an expert on Russian media and the role played by Russian President Vladimir Putin and crucially how they view the U.S.

president.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:30:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.

U.S. House Democrats have posted a copy of a lewd birthday note to Jeffrey Epstein from 2003 bearing Donald Trump's name and it appears signature. The

image taken from the so-called birthday book turned over to the House Oversight Committee by Epstein's estate. The Wall Street Journal was first

to report on the existence of the drawing back in July. President Trump denies writing the letter and has sued the Journal for defamation. The

White House today continued to insist that is not the president's signature.

Israel has carried out new military operations in the West Bank after a deadly terror attack on a Jerusalem bus stop. Israeli officials say at

least six people were killed when two shooters opened fired. It is the deadliest attack on Jerusalem in more than two years. The gunmen were shot

dead at the scene. Police identified them as Palestinians from the West Bank.

Nepal's government has lifted a ban on all social media platforms following demonstrations across the country which saw more than a dozen protesters

killed in the capital Kathmandu. Those protests came in response to government moves to block social media platforms including Facebook,

WhatsApp, YouTube claiming that move was in response to what it calls fake news. It has been criticized by rights groups and members of the public as

censorship.

Returning now to our top story, the Kremlin has called Western sanctions, quote, "absolutely useless" after President Trump threatened a second phase

of U.S. sanctions against Russia. He's of course threatened before. This follows Russia's largest aerial assault so far in its ongoing war in

Ukraine over the weekend. Russia launched more than 800 drones. Struck among the targets, a key government building. Those strikes killed at least

two people, including an infant.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has a key ally in his ongoing war and that is the Russian media. Organizations such as Reporters Without Borders and

the Committee to Protect Journalists have raised the alarm on censorship inside the country which means that most Russian journalists must toe the

party line.

Joining me now is Julia Davis, Daily Beast columnist and founder of the Russian Media Monitor. She's also author of "In Their Own Words: How

Russian Propagandists Reveal Putin's Intentions." Julia, good to have you on.

[18:35:00]

JULIA DAVIS, FOUNDER, RUSSIAN MEDIA MONITOR, AUTHOR, "IN THEIR OWN WORDS" AND DAILY BEAST COLUMNIST: Thank you so much for having me, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, first, how is the Russian media, and we should note to our viewers who may not know this given it's largely state controlled, tends to

be delivering some messages from on high, how are they reacting to President Trump's latest threat to impose new sanctions on Russia?

DAVIS: They are plainly scoffing at it, just the same way that the Kremlin itself is talking about it but even in more laughable terms. They have

already been pointing out how many times since January Trump has threatened to sanction them and he still didn't do anything meaningful and they

believe he never will.

SCIUTTO: I want to play a clip with translation of a Russian military analyst on Russian state TV describing his view of how Russia responds to

U.S. pressure. Have a listen. I want to get your thoughts on the other side.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): We will place our armed forces wherever we want to. We will do whatever we want based on our interests.

Why do we have to explain anything to anyone?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): As our famous satirist Zadornow said, they Americans are stupid, but we are clearly and openly telling

them, here guys, it's on the table, read it, it's clear.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: He said there, we will do whatever we want based on our interests. I wonder, is it reasonable to interpret that not just as that

analyst's view but as the Kremlin's view of Russia and its response to the U.S.?

DAVIS: It absolutely is. Russian state media operates as part of the government. In fact, just on Sunday, head of our team, Margarita Simonyan,

once again reiterated that she sees herself as part of the government, has many government medals. They receive instructions directly from their

Kremlin handlers as to what they're supposed to say, and what they do is they actually prime the Russian public for the actions that the Russian

government intends to take and for the positions that it intends to take. So, it is very revealing in that sense.

SCIUTTO: Speaking of revealing, and I'm going to quote from your book now here, because it's quite broad. It goes even beyond Ukraine. For instance,

one of your chapters is entitled "Give the Kremlin an Inch and It Will Take a Mile," and it talks about an appearance on a program in 2023 in which one

of the commentators said that Poland is the next candidate to be thrown under Russian tanks. There's great concern, as you know, in Eastern Europe

that Eastern European nations, even NATO allies, are Russia's next target. Should we look at those words on Russian state media as an indicator as to

what Putin is thinking?

DAVIS: We absolutely should. In fact, years before they had started the full-fledged invasion of Ukraine, Russian state television has been priming

their audiences that they will invade Ukraine. They've been talking about it for years and laying the groundwork for that, and the same is happening

now. And unfortunately, the policies of Trump, they say, are making the United States a regional state that will not have as much influence abroad,

and they will -- they hope that it will not live up to its NATO obligations. So, it's just a matter of time before Russia rearms and starts

something else, potentially involving a NATO member.

SCIUTTO: Yes, it's interesting, because that criticism as being a regional power is something U.S. officials at times in the past have described

Russia. You know, in reading the book, you explain just how far this can go, and you have a section here on how the Russian media followed the

October 7th attacks on Israel, and that you had some who went so far as to celebrate the attacks, which is just awful to hear, but also, that many on

Russian media saw it as a distraction for the U.S. from Ukraine.

Quoting here, one commentator said, "This mess is beneficial for Russia because the globalist toad" -- I assume they're talking about the U.S.

there -- "will be distracted from Ukraine." That to me was revealing. I mean, here's this awful terror attack, and you have Russian state media

effectively saying, it helps us.

DAVIS: Absolutely. And for the same reason, they're quite happy about the Epstein files, about President Trump dispatching National Guard. They're

hoping there will be civil war in the United States. Basically, any kind of a distraction that takes our eyes off of them is beneficial for them.

[18:40:00]

And they have described the Trump administration as a team that they're most pleased with and people that will dismantle the United States brick by

brick, and that's what they're hoping will happen with our intelligence agencies. With all this mess that is unfolding in different branches of our

government, and -- which they hope will lead to civil war or mass unrest or terrorist attacks, basically anything that could be a distraction from what

they're doing and intend to continue to do.

SCIUTTO: Julia Davis, the book is "In Their Own Words" How Russian Propagandists Reveal Putin's Intentions." Of course, you run the Russian

Media Monitor as well. Thanks so much for joining us.

DAVIS: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: And we'll be right back after a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Japan has entered a fresh period of political instability. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba announced over the weekend he is stepping down

after his party fell short in July's parliamentary elections. He says now is the right time for him to resign.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHIGERU ISHIBA, JAPANESE PRIME MINISTER: Now, that negotiations over U.S. tariff measures have reached a certain conclusion, I believe this is the

appropriate moment. And so, I have decided to step aside and make way for my successor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Ishiba's party was set to hold a leadership election, which might have led to his ouster anyway. He's been on the job for less than a year.

Political scandals, rising inflation, an ongoing rice shortage, and concern over the trade relationship with the U.S. all contributed to his party's

loss of popularity.

Joining me now is Seijiro Takeshita, professor of management and information at the University of Shizuoka. Good to have you back. Thanks so

much for joining.

SEIJIRO TAKESHITA, MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF SHIZUOKA: Thank you very much for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, a lot of inputs into this, into his loss. I wonder, was the deal -- the trade deal that Japan under him signed with the U.S., which has

quite favorable conditions for the U.S., more so than for Japan, was that at all a contributing factor?

[18:45:00]

TAKESHITA: Well, in fact, the -- I think that it's part of his positive legacy that at least we reached a deal. At least we have a milestone. And

again, the initial proposition from the Trump administration was 25 percent. So, many people think that he had a pretty good job, Ishiba did

pretty good job in reducing it to 15 percent. But I think we all know that there is no logical consistency in the number that was displayed in the

first place.

So, you know, I think there -- as you just reported, he's had a lot more of a negative, I would say, reputation, a lot more than what he did positively

for the Japanese economy as a whole.

SCIUTTO: So, what kind of leader is likely to follow?

TAKESHITA: Well, two names stand out. You know, Sanae Takaichi and also Koizumi, son of the former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi. And these two

really stand out as people who might be a little more decisive and more forward-looking into changing the problems that we have in inflation or

possible interest rate rise or also possible defense issues, especially with Trump administration likely to give further requests for Japan to

contribute more.

So, these are the issues that are agenda that is on the table. But I think the utmost importance here is to regain at least the trust from the

Japanese public, because that's what, you know, the LDP has lost by getting into politics rather than policies.

SCIUTTO: The last time we spoke, you touched on the fragile trade relationship with the U.S. and Japan. You said, one of the worries Japanese

corporations have is that, quote, "The U.S. is slipping into autocracy, away from democracy. And for that reason, country risk is rising

substantially." Is that a broadly held view in Japan? I mean, one of America's closest allies, a treaty ally.

TAKESHITA: Well, it's typical of the Japanese where they won't tell you this, but they're definitely feeling it. Obviously, we see what's going on

in the States, which is very similar to what we had in 2009 when LDP was overturned by Democratic Party of Japan. And they had a lot of amateurs

rewriting the show, which basically led to total distrust of the opposition. And this is a tragedy that we have, because we can't have

competition in the, you know, arena of politics. And therefore, LDP has basically continued to lean on to the vested interest.

So, at least the positive thing to come out of all this is, I think we're moving towards a multi-party system like that of in continental Europe. But

we're still, you know, far away from that situation. But at least we are seeing some changes on the positive side, if you look at it from that point

of view.

SCIUTTO: Seijiro Takeshita, thanks so much for joining again.

TAKESHITA: Thank you.

SCIUTTO: Coming up after the break, brains and brawn. The World of Baseball pays tribute to Davey Johnson, a World Series player and then

manager, known for his analytical baseball mind. We're going to look back at his remarkable impact on the game.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back. Now, to a remarkable figure in baseball. Davey Johnson, who won two World Series titles with the Baltimore Orioles as a

player, won as manager, most importantly for me, with the New York Mets back in 1986. He's died at the age of 82.

During his 13-season playing career, he also played with the Philadelphia Phillies, Chicago Cubs, four-time All-Star. He pioneered as manager the use

of computer data analysis for baseball statistics to help improve his team's performance. A man ahead of his time.

Joining me now, baseball historian Eric Sherman, who co-authored Davey Johnson's autobiography, "My Wild Ride in Baseball and Beyond." Eric, great

to have you on. Thanks so much for joining.

ERIC SHERMAN, BASEBALL HISTORIAN AND CO-AUTHOR, "DAVEY JOHNSON: MY WILD RIDE IN BASEBALL AND BEYOND": Yes, thanks so much for having me.

SCIUTTO: So, he was an innovator. I mean, but by some analyses, he was the first to inject data analysis into baseball, which is all the rage now,

sabermetrics, et cetera. I mean, he even studied computers at Johns Hopkins. I mean, how groundbreaking was it at the time to do what he was

doing then?

SHERMAN: Oh, incredibly. It had never really been done before at the Major League level. And imagine, you know, in 1969, he went into the cantankerous

Earl Weaver's office, the Hall of Fame manager of the Orioles, and he said, here, I have data here. We'll score 60 more runs with this lineup. And, you

know, Davey had -- you know, put the Orioles lineup from 1968 into a computer, and it spit out the best lineup. And of course, with Davey, the

lineup would move him from number six in the lineup to number two.

So, Earl Weaver took the data and threw it in the circular file, and that was the end of it. But when Davey became a manager in 1984 at the Major

League level with the Mets, he was the first one to literally bring computers into the manager's office, and he was the first one. So,

sabermetrics in baseball owes an awful lot to Davey Johnson.

SCIUTTO: Yes. I mean, listen, he had great success as a player and as a manager, which is not easy to do, right? There are a lot of great players

who didn't make it as a manager. You know, four-time All-Star, hit 40 home runs. But then he goes on to take -- and of course I'm biased here as a

Mets fan, but the '86 team was pretty damn good, pretty damn good. And it had some issues, too.

I mean, you know, it had some difficult personalities on that team. It had some bad actors on that team. I mean, you got to be a good manager to

handle that.

SHERMAN: Well, absolutely, you know, and there was an intellectual swagger, I think, to Davey, a gravitas about him that just fits so

perfectly with the New York Mets when he took over in 1984. They were in the wilderness the previous seven years. I mean, they were losers, you

know, last place, cellar dwellers, and he takes over the team. And, you know, the press conference announcing him as the new manager, he takes the

stand and he says, you know what? I like working for smart men, and Frank Cash, the general manager, is a smart man for hiring me.

So, it was his -- it was Davey's confidence that he had his entire life that really bode well for that Mets job and taking on some difficult

personalities, for sure. And, you know, it's no secret that, you know, there were drug issues on that Mets team, and -- but all six full seasons

that Davey was the manager of the Mets, you know, they were big winners, and had that team played today with the current playoff structure, they

would have made the playoffs every single season.

SCIUTTO: Yes. There's another line, first day of spring training in your book. We're not going to just win the championship. We're going to

dominate. He was right in 1986. I mean, a lot of folks who thought they should have won more championships with that team. It also sticks out to me

that he's got a little Forrest Gump quality to him as well. You know, here's a guy -- he got the last hit off the great Sandy Koufax as a player,

and he made the last out of the 1969 World Series against the Mets when the Mets won then. You know, that's a pretty interesting life in baseball.

SHERMAN: Well, and the other side of that is, you know, he makes the last out of the Mets' first world championship as a member of the Orioles, and

then he goes on to manage their only other world championship team in 1986. So, real bookends there.

[18:55:00]

SCIUTTO: Yes. Well, thank you, Eric, for reminding me of the Mets' long drought without a world championship, but I'll try to get over that. Eric

Sherman, thanks so much for joining.

SHERMAN: My pleasure.

SCIUTTO: Finally, tonight, a more serious story. Czech police say a six- year manhunt is over after they nabbed a driver known as the Phantom. You are looking at a Formula One-style race car speeding around normal roads

and in normal traffic. That's illegal because F1 cars don't have lights, turn signals, or other safety features, plus they go really fast.

The car is somewhat legendary, and police have been trying to catch it since 2019. But the Phantom, as it's known, always got away, wearing a

helmet, keeping their identity secret until now. On Sunday, police say they managed to follow the car back to its owner's house. They arrested a 51-

year-old driver who was shooting video for a YouTube channel. Officials say he could get a fine of about $500 and a ban on driving for up to a year. I

imagine that second penalty would be the more painful one.

Well, thanks so much for joining us today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END