Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Second Round of U.S.-Iran Nuclear Talks Wraps up in Geneva; Jesse Jackson Dies at Age 84; WBD Gives Paramount One Week to Make "Best and Final" Offer; Sheriff: No Match for DNA on Glove Found Near Guthrie Home; Concerns Over A.I. Video Generation; Lunar New Year Food Traditions. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired February 17, 2026 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
PAULA NEWTON, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, and a very warm welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Paula Newton in New York. Jim
Sciutto is off. You are watching "The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, Iran's foreign minister says talks with the U.S. were positive as Washington builds up its military presence in the region.
Barack and Michelle Obama lead tributes to U.S. civil rights leader Jesse Jackson after his death at the age of 84. And police say they have not yet
come up with a match for DNA taken from a glove found near the home of Nancy Guthrie.
We do begin, though, in Geneva, where the U.S. held two high-stakes negotiations back-to-back. Now, in the morning, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff
led the U.S. side in indirect talks with Iran. He was joined by President Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The Iranian foreign minister
described the session as positive, but warned there wouldn't be a quick resolution. U.S. officials said Iran would present new proposals in about
two weeks.
Here is the U.S. Vice President, J.D. Vance, who was saying that they would not rule out more drastic options. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: We would very much like, as the president has said, to resolve this through a conversation and a diplomatic
negotiation, but the president has all options on the table. And, you know, one thing about the negotiation I will say this morning is, you know, in
some ways it went well, they agreed to meet afterwards, but in other ways it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the
Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Later in Geneva, and just about a mile away, Witkoff and Kushner met directly with delegations from both Ukraine and Russia. Now, they're
looking for, of course, ways to end that war. Those talks are expected to reconvene in the morning.
Kevin Liptack joins me now from the White House, and he's been following all of this. Kevin, good to see you. This was extraordinary. You've got the
same negotiating team dealing with two issues that have been absolutely nagging at the entire world, literally, for quite a long time. I am
wondering how the Trump administration views this. I mean, it is a heavy lift for these two negotiators, and so far, it's not like we've seen any
breakthroughs.
KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: No, and I think it does give you a sense of how much, I guess, leeway the president has given Steve
Witkoff and Jared Kushner as they negotiate these dual conflicts. You know, very different scenarios, I think, very different sets of circumstances
that they're contending with, and I think very different consequences if these negotiations fall apart. You know, beginning with Iran, I think when
you listen to the Iranians compared to the Americans, you do hear somewhat different tones about how all of this is progressing.
You know, the Iranian foreign minister who is leading that delegation in Geneva said that they had come up with a set of guiding principles to
govern these discussions going forward and that they had agreed to go back to the capitals and begin working on the text.
You know, listening to J.D. Vance and listening to other American officials today, I think they were much more circumspect about what exactly was
achieved. You know, I don't even think it's really clear what precisely these talks are even about.
You know, the Iranians have said that they need to be very narrowly focused on the nuclear program and Iran's nuclear ambitions. American officials
have said in the past that they need to be expanded out to include Iran's ballistic missile program, its support for proxy groups in the region. At
this point, we don't really know what exactly the scope of these talks are. And I think the big question now is how long exactly Trump is willing to
allow these negotiations to go on.
You know, when you're talking about very technical issues, uranium enrichment, levels of uranium enrichment, these are very sort of specific
technical details that do take a long time to get hammered out. You know, the Obama-era Iran deal that Trump withdrew from took two years to
negotiate. And so, when the president and his officials are talking here about a two-week-long timeframe, I think, you know, that is ambitious, to
say the least, to get the Iranians to agree to everything that the president is demanding here.
And I would also note it was just back in June, I think it was June 5th, that the White House said that the president was giving the Iranians two
weeks to come back to the negotiating table, and it was just three days after that that he ordered that bombing run on the Iranian nuclear site.
[18:05:00]
So, I think it's still a lot of uncertainty here surrounding the Iran issue, but certainly I think both sides signaling progress, but a big
question about exactly how much progress has been made.
NEWTON: Yes, and you make such a good point about how that original deal, how complicated it was. It took two years, and to be factual here, it was
negotiated by an energy secretary who was a nuclear physicist. It's a completely different realm that we're dealing with here. Kevin Liptak at
the White House, grateful to you.
Joining me now is Jasmine El-Jamal. She is the former Pentagon Middle East adviser and host of the podcast, "The View from Here." And welcome to the
program.
And I just have to state the obvious here. This is not your first rodeo. This has been going on for a long time in terms of trying to parse what
these negotiations are all about. You know, Kevin just outlined the fact that Iran says the two sides agreed on these so-called guiding principles.
You know, this has been going on, we say it's been going on back and forth for weeks, but let's face it, it's been going back and forth for literally
decades. I mean, do you see anything in what you've heard that represents a positive step forward here?
JASMINE EL-GAMAL, FORMER PENTAGON MIDDLE EAST ADVISER AND HOST, THE VIEW FROM HERE PODCAST: Well, thank you so much for having me, Paula, and
you're right. I mean, this has been going on for a really long time. I'll tell you what I think is different about this round of talks. The fact that
Iran is right now probably the weakest it's ever been, not just vis-a-vis the U.S., vis-a-vis Israel, but just generally speaking, as a country, as a
government, a regime, it has been severely weakened in every single way over the last two years, economically, security-wise. You know, you've just
had these protests that were the largest protests we've seen, the most horrific crackdown.
So, the regime is really spent, and yet it is still negotiating as if it was in the same position as it was two years ago or more. And I think
that's just not going to fly with President Trump. The way he's looking at the Iranian regime right now is they're weak, they don't have the same
bargaining power that they did, and they can't afford the kind of military confrontation that is waiting for them if they don't come to the table and
negotiate in good faith, and not only negotiate in good faith, but actually make something happen. So, that's how likely the president is seeing it
right now.
NEWTON: And yet any kinetic action here, any military intervention, would be highly complicated for the U.S. as well. That's probably why President
Trump has said, let's give this a chance. Now, President Trump says the U.S. wants zero enrichment. Iran says, no, we're never going to agree to
that. Do you see any space in this deal between those two positions?
EL-GAMAL: You know what, Paula, I actually do see some space on the nuclear issue. But the fact is, and what makes this really complicated, is
that I think the real sticking points are going to be about issues beyond the nuclear issue.
So, Iran has already publicly stated that it's willing to talk about some sort of concessions, becoming more transparent, opening itself up to
inspections, potentially shipping its nuclear material elsewhere for safekeeping. So, there are conversations to be had on that file. It's the
other files that are more complicated and that Iran is unwilling to discuss, namely its ballistic missile program. That is what Iran sees right
now as sort of an existential red line for them.
If they have a degraded nuclear program, weakened proxies around the region, and now you want them to give up the one thing that they can
actually use to deter potential aggressors or to defend themselves, that's where it's going to be really tough. And that's where you see the military
buildup starting to happen around these conversations, because what the president is trying to do, and Iran is responding likewise, is trying to
show Iran that, yes, I understand that this is an existential issue for you, but if you don't cave on this, you'll be facing another existential
issue. Just look at your backyard and look at what's waiting for you if you don't make a deal.
NEWTON: You know, and given everything you're saying, President Trump does seem to have shifted his rationale for an attack, right? At first it was
about regime change. Now, he's saying that Iran's reluctance to stop its nuclear program, and that's why they may strike.
There is so much discussion, including from you, saying that, look, what is going to happen the day after? Do you believe that the Trump administration
is preparing, can prepare, will prepare, that if there is a military strike, that they know what will happen the day after a regime change?
EL-GAMAL: So, I'll tell you something, because that's a really good question. I mean, that's really what it comes down to, is given all this
military buildup in the region, is the U.S. actually prepared for might come next?
[18:10:00]
Now, I've been saying that no one knows what could come next, right? I mean, there are so many different scenarios that could happen. We're
talking about anything from inadvertent miscalculations to deliberate acts of war. But I can also tell you from my experience, I was at the Pentagon
when President Obama was deciding whether or not to respond to President Bashar al-Assad's use of chemical weapons when he had said that red line.
And that was a much less serious situation than we're talking about now.
But what I can tell you is that not one piece of military hardware is sent on deployment without scenario planning for what might happen and what the
U.S. is prepared to do in case that happens. So, there are two possible scenarios here that I think are most likely. One is that this military
buildup is so high on either side, so as to make the stakes so high that the talks cannot fail. Iran will cave, and the U.S. president will tout a
win, and a war is avoided.
The other scenario, of course, which many analysts are saying is the likely one, is that the talks are just a ruse to allow time for the U.S. military
deployment to be completed. And then based on that scenario planning I'm talking about, the U.S. strikes not a tiny pinpoint strike, but a strike
that would take out every potential avenue of action or reaction that the Iranians would have. So, we're looking at a pretty big military operation
in that scenario.
NEWTON: It really is stark to me understanding exactly the kind of military hardware that is now on Iran's doorstep, and you marry that with
what you just said. Again, many risks and a lot of U.S. allies in the region saying that articulating what those risks are. Jasmine, we will
leave it there for now, but you certainly distilled and articulated so much for us. I think we have a better understanding of where we're headed here.
Thanks again.
EL-GAMAL: Thanks, Paula.
NEWTON: Now, political leaders on both sides are remembering civil rights leader Reverend Jesse Jackson. He died at the age of 84, former President
Barack Obama calling him a true giant, and President Trump saying he was, quote, ""a good man."
Jackson was a titan of American political life for six decades, running twice for president. He's founder of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition. Jackson
shaped the Democratic Party by advocating for a diverse vision of America. CNN's Abby Phillip takes a closer look at Jackson's life and legacy.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Jesse Jackson's life was defined by a relentless fight for justice and equality.
REV. JESSE JACKSON, CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER: I was born in Greenville, South Carolina, in rampant, radical racial segregation. I had to be taught to go
to the back of the bus or be arrested.
PHILLIP (voice-over): Those early experiences drove Jackson to join the civil rights movement.
JACKSON: The fact is, against the odds, we knew there were great odds, we were winning.
PHILLIP (voice-over): In 1965, he began working for Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
JACKSON: I learned so much from him. Such a great source of inspiration.
PHILLIP (voice-over): King named Jackson to lead Operation Breadbasket in Chicago, an economic justice campaign for black people. However, some say
King was frustrated by Jackson's brashness and ambition.
JACKSON: I'm sure he thought I needed more time. I was 24 years old.
PHILLIP (voice-over): Both men were in Memphis in April 1968 to support striking sanitation workers. King and other civil rights leaders were
staying at the Lorraine Motel.
JACKSON: He said, Jesse, you know, you don't even have on a shirt and tie. You don't even have on a tie. We're going to dinner. I said, Doc, it does
not require a tie. Just an appetite. We laughed. And I said, Doc, and the bullet hit.
Everything changed at that moment. It was a defining moment in the history of our struggle.
PHILLIP (voice-over): With King gone, his movement was adrift. Years later, Jackson formed Operation Push, pressuring businesses to open up to
black workers and customers and adding more focus on black responsibility, championed in the 1972 concert Wattstax.
JACKSON: In Watts, we have shifted from burn, baby, burn to love.
PHILLIP (voice-over): And he expanded his own global reach, too, helping to free U.S. Lieutenant Robert Goodman, who was held by Syria after being
shot down and later other Americans held in Cuba and Serbia.
JACKSON: I learned how to negotiate as an African-American growing up among white people. You have to negotiate every day.
PHILLIP (voice-over): The reverend set his sights on the White House in 1984.
JACKSON: Milking cows in Iowa, they're coming back to the inner cities. So, I learned a lot during that period.
[18:15:00]
First in 1984.
PHILLIP (voice-over): First thought of as a marginal candidate, Jackson finished third in the primary race with 18 percent of the vote.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
PHILLIP (voice-over): That campaign almost went off the rails when Jackson used an ethnic slur to refer to New York Jews.
JACKSON: There's mistakes and they hurt.
PHILLIP (voice-over): He ran again in 1988, this time doubling his vote count and finishing in second in the Democratic race.
JACKSON: Keep hope alive.
PHILLIP (voice-over): At the time, it was the farthest any black candidate had gone in a presidential contest.
JACKSON: But 20 years later, when President Barack ran, we were laying the groundwork for that season.
PHILLIP (voice-over): In 2017, Jackson had a new battle to fight, Parkinson's disease. But that didn't stop him.
JACKSON: If you hold on, if your cause is right and your grip is tight, you'll make it.
PHILLIP (voice-over): Late in life, he was still fighting. He was arrested in Washington while demonstrating for voting rights. His silent presence at
the trial of Ahmaud Arbery's killers prompted defense lawyers to ask that he leave the courtroom. Jackson stayed.
JACKSON: I am --
CROWD: I am --
JACKSON: -- somebody.
CROWD: -- somebody.
JACKSON: I am --
CROWD: -- I am --
JACKSON: -- somebody.
PHILLIP (voice-over): From the Jim Crow South through the turbulent 60s and into the Black Lives Matter movement, Jesse Jackson was a constant,
unyielding voice for justice.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
NEWTON: And our next guest was a friend of Reverend Jackson. Joining me now is Bishop William Barber II. He's the founding director of Yale's
Center for Public Theology and Public Policy. And I want to welcome you to the program. And I do want to express our condolences. I know you lost a
dear friend and it's quite a void.
BISHOP WILLIM J. BARBER II, FRIEND OF REV. JESSE JACKSON AND FOUNDING DIRECTOR, YALE CENTER FOR PUBLIC THEOLOGY AND PUBLIC POLICY: Forty years
ago, I met Reverend Jackson as a student. He let me help run part of his youth campaign in North Carolina. He's been a mentor. I talked to his
children this morning, his son, just after he passed, and prayed. And his wife said something. She said, a mighty lion has fallen. And that is true.
NEWTON: I have a smile on my face when I'm saying is a mighty lion, because as you say it, I can actually picture him in so many ways, those of
us who grew up and understanding his advocacy and all of these issues. Can you share how he shaped you both personally and spiritually?
BARBER II: Well, watching his leadership, he taught several things. One, the name PUSH, People United to Save Humanity. He was always pushing us not
to just see things in terms of black and white, but how black and white and brown and indigenous and Asian could come together. He never forgot Dr.
King's lesson in 1965 at the Selma to Montgomery march when he preached, and he said the greatest fear of the greedy oligarchs is for white and
black, poor and low wage, poor people to come together and form a political bloc that could fundamentally shift the economic architecture of the
nation.
Jesse understood that while he was black, he also was an international leader. He was a moral leader. When he ran for president, you could find it
on the back of a tractor in Iowa. You could find him in the Delta, Mississippi. You could find him in Harlem. You could find him wherever
people were needed to be lifted up.
And you notice, we need this today because in his speaking, he didn't spend a lot of time tearing down his enemy. He offered a vision, a vision of
hope, a vision to work for. He said, if I get elected, this is what we will do. And he understood that if you lift from the bottom, everybody rises.
And we need that more than ever because he knew that that's how you challenge authoritarianism and racism. You have to offer a better vision
and be willing to be determined and stay with it.
NEWTON: You know, you talk about his leadership, and I do want to point out he had a connection to so many presidents, including the sitting
president today, Donald Trump. You have said that Jackson taught you, though, what real moral leadership looks like. Can you tell us a little bit
about what you mean by that?
BARBER II: Well, you know, today you have this thing called religious nationalism. Some people call it Christian. I don't. Religious nationalism
is arguing that they are presenting a religious point of view. But Reverend Jackson understood what, through bringing faith and morality, he took the
great moral frameworks of the Constitution, equal protection under the law, establishing justice, providing for the common defense, promoting the
general welfare, and applied that to public policy and said, does this piece of policy meet up with that?
He took the great principles of Jesus, love and justice and mercy, and raised that question from a moral perspective. In that way, he could talk
to Democrats. He could talk to Republicans. He could even talk to an adversary without destroying the adversary, but challenging that
adversary's policy and trying to move that person to a better or a deeper moral position.
[18:20:00]
That is something that is a real test of leadership. And so, I remember when Jesse Jackson, for instance, on CNN had a program called "Both Sides."
He brought both sides together because what he wanted to do was for people to do serious analysis. One of the things he said to us often, don't be a
bumper sticker leader. Don't be someone that just is phraseology but does not know the issues.
And sometimes the reason why Jesse Jackson could put things in such short, pithy ways is because he knew the depth of the issues. He knew both sides
of the issue. He knew his adversary's issues as well as they did. And he offered a vision. We call it a synthesis, thesis, antithesis, and
synthesis. It's Hegelian. He learned some of that from Dr. King and some of his studies in theological school.
NEWTON: And I am wondering, given everything that you've just explained to us, what do you think the most important lesson is, though, that the next
generation can learn? So many did not hear his speeches in real time that he is still right now someone in history for them. So, what do you want the
next generation to take from this?
BARBER II: I think right now, in the midst of what we're doing, everybody that's serious about public policy, about this crisis of civilization, not
just the crisis of democracy that we're in, ought to go listen to his two speeches in '84 and '88 and the way in which he framed public policy,
because we need that now.
Secondly, we need the kind of determination, you know, as he said, if your grip is strong and you hold on. He talked about hope, keep hope alive, that
hope is not just daydreaming. Hope is working. And hope grows the more you work at that, which you know is right.
And I think lastly, vigilance, vigilance and recognizing that we ought to be honest, we have less voting rights than we had August 6th when the
Voting Rights Act was signed in 1965. Jesse Jackson recognized when he ran for office, he sometimes spent more time registering voters than he did
speaking at a rally, because he knew that you have to expand the electorate.
He knew that you couldn't have a democracy where 90 million people, for instance, the last time stayed home and the Congress has decided by 7,000
votes. He understood and he understood that the people that can expand that electorate are those who are at the margins, poor and low wealth voters who
many times don't vote. And we talk about this a lot because nobody talks to them. Reverend Jackson would talk to them. He would go anywhere, anytime if
it was about lifting people up. And that's the great genius and skill of his leadership.
NEWTON: Bishop William Barber II, again, our condolences. And we do know it was a smile that his family called him the mighty lion. We appreciate
it.
BARBER II: The mighty lion. Thank you.
NEWTON: Still ahead for us, the fight for Warner Brothers Discovery might not be over yet. A surprising development in the battle for the parent
company of CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:25:00]
NEWTON: And welcome back in today's Business Breakout, the lackluster start to the holiday shortened trading week on Wall Street. U.S. stocks
finished, you can see there, the session little changed. Software stocks remained under pressure and investors still worried that A.I. will lessen
the need for software in the future.
Now, Warner Brothers Discovery, the parent company of CNN, is reopening talks with Paramount about a possible sale. WBD announcing today it will
give Paramount seven days to put forth its best and final offer for the entirety of the company. As it stands now, WBD still believes a deal with
Netflix for just parts of the company is the best offer on the table. And the co-CEO of Netflix says his company is confident of success.
Ted Serrano said a little while ago that new talks will determine that its bid is, in fact, superior. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TED SARANDOS, CO-CEO, NETFLIX: Paramount had been making a ton of noise, you know, flooding the zone with confusion for shareholders. So, they don't
really understand the deal, including floating all these hypothetical offers into, you know, and talking directly to the shareholders and
bypassing the Warner Brothers Discovery board.
So, we've given the opportunity to get those shareholders exactly what they deserve, which is complete clarity and certainty about what the value of
these deals are. And what we're certain is, is that the Netflix deal to acquire these assets is the best deal generates the best value for their
shareholders. And they think so, too. That's why they recommended the deal and why they reiterated recommending that deal post this. So, give them
seven days to put their money where their mouth is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: Now, sources suggest that Paramount is ready to increase its bid by one dollar a share. Serrano says he won't comment on how Netflix might
respond.
Sara Fischer joins us now. And yes, the plot thickens here. I mean, Netflix has this deal signed, right? So, in terms of reopening these talks, where
do you think this will put the negotiation? Because right now, this could still be a bidding war. We just heard that from the head of Netflix.
SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST AND MEDIA CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Yes, well, Paramount is going to have to increase its price in order for Warner
Brothers Discovery to take it seriously. Paramount has put forward so many offers solicited and unsolicited. And Warner Brothers Discovery has
continued for months to reject those offers. The only reason they would ever go to Netflix, in which it is already signed a merger agreement, and
ask for a waiver to open discussions with Paramount for seven days is if they genuinely believe that Paramount was going to up the offer.
Now, you mentioned that sources said that Paramount could increase this offer by one dollar. Essentially, what happened was this morning, Warner
Brothers Discovery set in an SEC filing. And in those cases, you have to tell the truth that they had a member from a senior representative from
Paramount's financial advisors approach a board member from Warner Brothers Discovery, saying that the last offer that Paramount gave last week was not
its best and final offer.
That's what motivated Warner Brothers Discovery to go to Netflix and say, give us this waiver so we could talk. If Paramount does increase the offer,
it will start a bidding war. Netflix is going to have to come back with something. But I do think ultimately, you hear this continuously from
Warner Brothers Discovery. They just feel much more confident about landing a deal with Netflix than they do with Paramount.
NEWTON: Yes, and it is interesting because, again, the door is open, as you said, to competing bids. Now, also today, though, Sara, we had this
other issue of Paramount Skydance, and it's caught up in a whole new controversy involving the Stephen Colbert show on CBS. Now, Colbert says
CBS canceled, canceled outright, canceled the airing of his interview with a Democratic U.S. candidate. I want you to listen now to how Stephen
Colbert says this went down. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, "THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT": You know who is not one of my guests tonight? That's Texas State Representative James
Talarico. He was supposed to be here, but we were told in no uncertain terms by our network's lawyers who called us directly that we could not
have him on the broadcast.
Then, then I was told in some uncertain terms that not only could I not have him on, I could not mention me not having him on.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[18:30:00]
NEWTON: Now CBS has a different take on this. It says it merely gave the show legal guidance and it didn't prohibit the interview from airing. Sara,
in terms of what you learned about this, is this meddling on the part of CBS or do they have a reason to really fear that they will be caught up in
a legal quagmire should the Trump administration really go through with this equal airtime policy that the FCC has.
FISCHER: Years ago, this wouldn't have been an issue, but Brendan Carr, the chair of the FCC under the second Trump administration, has said that
he plans to enforce this equal airtime provision to late night shows and talk shows.
Now, could CBS stand up to the FCC? Of course, they could, and many legal experts say they'd have a case just as they had a case when Donald Trump
sued them back in 2024 and they ultimately settled and capitulated. The problem here is that CBS does not want to get into a big legal fight with
the Trump administration. We saw this when Paramount tried to merge with Sky Dance. They did all sorts of things to capitulate to get regulatory
approval of that deal.
Now, fast forward, Paramount Sky Dance wants to acquire Warner Brothers Discovery. Of course, they're not going to get into a legal fight if they
want that deal approved. So, I think lawyers are being overly cautious given this political environment, and I understand why they're doing so. I
also understand for Steve Colbert, if your show's already been cancelled, what do you have to lose in calling out the network?
NEWTON: Yes, it is such a good point. And yet, the interview itself, right, Sara, got so much traction online. Again, you know, the candidate
himself said he'd gotten a lot of publicity from this, and it aired in a jurisdiction, whether it's streaming or online, however you want to put it,
where there are no rules that way for equal time.
FISCHER: Such a Barbra Streisand effect, right? You calling attention to this interview getting cancelled on broadcast, sent people flocking to
watch this interview on YouTube. And I think that this is going to be a broader trend. As the government tries to constrict broadcast voices more
and more, you're going to see those voices move to streaming, and viewership is going to follow.
You know, even if it's not just in response to government pressure, I think that a lot of programs and a lot of talent feel like they can be more
themselves on streaming. Look at all the award shows that are moving to streaming services. Look at all the comedians and big talent, late-night
talent moving to the big streaming services. That's where they feel like they can be the most themselves nowadays.
NEWTON: Yes, and it is interesting because this is an administration that touts freedom of speech, so there you go. They all believe they can get
another platform. Sara Fischer, again, for us, really appreciate it.
Now, checking some of today's other business headlines, European officials have launched what they call a, quote, "large-scale investigation" into
Elon Musk's social media site X. The E.U.'s data privacy watchdog says it's looking into the spate of unwanted sexualized images that have been
generated by X's A.I. chatbot Grok. X also faces probes in France and the U.K. over the image scandal.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify Wednesday in a landmark social media trial underway in California. Meta, along with Alphabet's
YouTube, are accused of intentionally creating social media platforms that harm children's mental health. Lawyers for both companies deny it. The
plaintiff's lawyer argued last week that social media apps like Meta's Instagram are, quote, "digital casinos," whose features lead to addiction.
Now, as Zuckerberg prepares to testify, Meta is announcing a massive new chip deal with NVIDIA. Meta, pardon me, says it will use millions of
NVIDIA's next generation chips to build out its network of A.I. data centers. It says the deal will, quote, "deliver personal super intelligence
to everyone in the world." Not sure I'm in for that. Meta said recently that it will spend as much as 135 billion dollars this year to remain
competitive in A.I.
OK. Coming up after the break, the results of DNA testing carried out on a glove near the home of Nancy Guthrie, the missing 84-year-old mother of
Savannah Guthrie. We look at the latest lines in the investigation. We'll have that next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:35:00]
NEWTON: And welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Paula Newton. And here are the international headlines we're watching today.
U.S. negotiators are tackling two international crises at once at separate rounds of talks in Geneva. Now, they met with Russian and Ukrainian
diplomats on the war in Ukraine and held indirect negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. Iran says they agreed on guiding principles that
could pave the way for a deal.
Reverend Jesse Jackson, a towering figure of the civil rights movement, has died at the age of 84. He had been hospitalized in recent months and was
under observation for a rare neurological condition. His family did not disclose the cause of death.
We go now to the disappearance of 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie. DNA tests on a glove found near her house did not match anyone in a national database
containing the profiles of more than 19 million offenders. That's according to the Pima County Sheriff who also said there was no match from DNA found
at the home either. Nancy Guthrie was reported missing on February 1st. She's the mother of NBC Today show anchor Savannah Guthrie.
Ed Lavandera has been following this search pretty much since it began in Tucson, Arizona. Ed, glad to have you back on the program. Can you bring us
right up to date? I mean, at first blush, it would seem like pretty discouraging news that there is not a match with this DNA.
ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I don't think there's any other way to take that at this moment given just how few leads
or real true leads there have been that bring investigators and the Guthrie family any closer to finding 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie. But this is what we
know.
Several days ago, the FBI said that they had found a set of gloves nearby within about two miles of the Guthrie home that seemed similar to the
gloves worn by the suspect in that video that was captured by the front door camera at Guthrie's home. There was DNA in those gloves and we also
were told several days before that by the sheriff that there is DNA that was recovered from Nancy Guthrie's home of an unknown person. So, the hope
was those two DNAs would match and then that would provide some new avenue of investigation for everyone on this case.
But that doesn't appear to be the case. What has happened is that the DNA from those gloves does not match the DNA found here at those homes. And the
DNA from those gloves also doesn't match anyone in that database that you talked about.
[18:40:00]
Now, the other possibility here is that we do know and we have confirmed today that investigators are doing genealogical tests on the DNA found here
at the Guthrie home, and that takes a bit slower, but they're working with private companies like 23andMe and others that are kind of in the
genealogical business, and that could provide an avenue of identifying whose DNA that is in the house. It doesn't actually mean it's the suspect,
but it would open up a new avenue of investigation for everyone on the case.
And that is not insignificant, Paula. This kind of work has helped solve other high-profile cases and is done quite routinely, so there could be
something that pops up there. We just don't know where that stands at this point.
NEWTON: And in terms of the kind of resources being applied to this, Ed, I mean, have you seen anybody backing off here at all? I mean, I heard at one
point there were literally hundreds of people. I'm talking law enforcement officials that are on this case.
LAVANDERA: Yes. I don't get the sense that that has happened. We're on day 17. In fact, just a little while ago, we saw investigators back out here in
the Guthrie neighborhood. Several of them were at the home. One of them was wearing plastic gloves and carrying a bag, and there were some other
investigators working on a property, appearing to work on a camera or a floodlight on the corner of a home nearby. So, all of that work continues.
In fact, authorities told us they were back in the neighborhood today following up on investigative leads as well. So, all of that work
continues. There is still a great deal of FBI and federal support on this case, as well as the sheriff has said, not only just Pima County sheriffs,
but also other local agencies around the area who have been pitching in to help as well.
NEWTON: Yes. And of course, we know that even the White House and President Trump is being briefed on exactly how this investigation is
going. I mean, obviously, so tough for the family as this continues. Ed Lavandera, good to have you on the ground there. Appreciate it.
Now, coming up on "The Brief," Hollywood worried about its future over a new A.I. model developed by China's ByteDance. Strong reaction from the
president of SAG-AFTRA, Sean Astin, when we come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEWTON: Hollywood on high alert after this clip made by ByteDance's A.I. tool C-Dance went viral.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[18:45:00]
NEWTON: Now, the A.I. generated video shows the likenesses, of course, of Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise. They were fighting it out. ByteDance tells CNN it
respects intellectual property rights and is taking steps to prevent the unauthorized use of intellectual property.
Now, earlier today, I spoke with Sean Astin, an actor and the president of SAG-AFTRA. Listen to what he had to say about this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN ASTIN, PRESIDENT, SAG-AFTRA: Artificial intelligence is providing lots of opportunities and lots of spaces that could be really exciting and
interesting for human beings. At the moment, I'm not so much focused on the ways in which it's an opportunity in our business, because what it
continues to do is present deeper and more specific threats to our intellectual property, to our IP, and to our name and likeness controls, if
you can believe that.
Actually, what we need is a federal name and likeness right, and that we have a bill that's working its way through the Senate right now, the No
Fakes Act, and it has support from industry stakeholders, even OpenAI and YouTube and Google support it. So, you know, it's -- we just need to
acknowledge that right now there is something that's happening in our country that's dangerous for people, and government's job is to step in and
provide realistic guardrails, not just, you know, a company like ByteDance or Seedance or whatever, saying, oh, they do support the rights, so now
that the public had a massive backlash, we're going to go ahead and implement a new, you know, completely revocable policy to be a little bit
more respectful.
It's like, no, we're actually going to need to make sure that, you know, you know from a legal perspective that it's prohibited and that we have
some mechanisms to take it down when you put it up there when you shouldn't.
NEWTON: You know the gridlock, though, in Congress right now. How optimistic are you that there will be bipartisan support for this?
ASTIN: There is bipartisan support. I think we've got Senators Coons and Blackburn, Tillis and Klobuchar are the four who are spearheading this. So,
it was introduced, I don't know, eight, nine, 10 months ago, something like that. I'm optimistic because the country needs it, and I don't think
there's really much pushback anywhere except that things take time. So, let's get it into the Judiciary Committee and let's get it on its way.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
NEWTON: And we will follow up on that. Coming up for us now as Lunar New Year celebrations get underway in many parts of the world, we'll take a
look at some of the symbolic meanings of foods in Chinese tradition. That's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
NEWTON: Ramadan is starting this evening in many parts of the world. The Islamic holy month begins with the sighting of the new moon. Saudi Arabia
says the crescent has been spotted, meaning the first day of fasting in the kingdom and many other countries is set for Wednesday. For its part, Iran
says Ramadan begins Thursday.
[18:50:00]
Now, Muslims around the world observe a fast from sunrise to sunset during Ramadan, followed by a large meal at night. Ramadan this year also has a
rare overlap with Lent on many of the Christian calendars. They start on roughly the same day.
Now, Lunar New Year celebrations in the meantime are underway right here in the United States. You can see people at a big festival in New York's
Chinatown. They're welcoming the Year of the Horse. Many countries in Asia, including China and Korea, continue to observe these holidays in Beijing.
Crowds watching lion dance performances and, of course, they were enjoying some amazing traditional foods.
Joining me now is Grace Young. She's the author of the cookbook, "Stir- Frying to the Sky's Edge." She's also the 2022 recipient of the James Beard Award for Humanitarian of the Year. And we welcome you to the program.
Thanks so much for being with us.
Please explain 2026, the Year of the Fire Horse. It's a combination of one of the 12 Chinese zodiac animals and, I'm told, the heavenly stem. Asking
for a friend here, for those who are not familiar, why is this year considered special?
GRACE YOUNG, AUTHOR, "STIR-FRYING TO THE SKY'S EDGE" AND WINNER, 2022 JAMES BEARD HUMANITARIAN OF THE YEAR AWARD: It's the Fire Horse, and the horse
represents strength, resilience, and it has -- it -- the Year of the Horse is about rapid transformation.
NEWTON: Rapid transformation.
YOUNG: So, we're coming up --
NEWTON: Go ahead.
YOUNG: we're coming out of the Year of the Snake, which is about shedding your skin in the old ways, and now we're galloping into the future.
NEWTON: Amazing. I'm going to take some of that advice. It's also said that in Chinese culture, you have told us that food is never just food.
It's -- I love this statement, by the way, it's luck you can eat. Can you explain how certain dishes carry that symbolic meaning through the Lunar
New Year?
YOUNG: So, the Chinese and Asians are very careful about what they eat during this two-week period. And there are certain foods that carry
symbolic meaning. You might be familiar with the fact that noodles represent longevity. For this two-week period, families get together,
oftentimes they're eating dumplings and spring rolls, because they represent, they resemble ancient money. The dumplings that are pan fried
are golden. And so, they look like gold, gold itself.
Shrimp in Cantonese sounds like the word for laughter. And so, that is said to represent happiness. Fish swim in pairs. So, they represent marital
bliss and your wishes coming true. There are so many different kinds of foods that are eaten during this period. People like to cook a whole
chicken and it represents a proper beginning and end to the year.
There are -- if you've ever had dim sum, if you've had turnip cake or sesame balls, they represent your fortunes rising, because the sesame ball
is like a little donut. It's a small bowl -- it's a small ball, and it's deep fat fried. And so, it expands. So, it represents your fortunes
expanding.
NEWTON: This makes me feel so good about overeating during Chinese New Year, because a lot of us really do try to get out and really try those
dishes that we haven't tried before. It's a special time of the year. And over all the years that you've celebrated this and how you get ready for
it, do you have a special memory from your family or a ritual that really, you know, means a lot to you?
YOUNG: So, the period leading up to New Year's is very exciting. And families gather together on New Year's Eve. The meal is the most important
meal of the entire year. It represents union and togetherness and Thanksgiving. And I think that it was always so special having this time
together with my family and eating these symbolic foods. And now, my parents have passed away, but it's still so meaningful for me to eat these
very symbolic dishes. And it's so wonderful to go to Chinatown and to experience the excitement.
Today, I was in Manhattan's Chinatown and there were firecrackers everywhere, warding off evil spirits. The restaurants are hopping. It's
just a wonderful time where you feel that sense of community and you can enjoy the cultural richness that communities like Chinatown bring this
country.
[18:55:00]
NEWTON: Grace, I was celebrating last night and I'm telling you, I'm going to do it again. Just listening to you, it certainly gives everyone just
such a lift at this time of year, especially. I have one more very quick question. Fortune cookies? Good idea?
YOUNG: Fortune cookies are not a traditional part of the Chinese New Year or Lunar New Year celebration, but I still love them. There's a restaurant
in Chinatown called Hop Lee and they have the best fortunes and I always want to see what my fortune is at the end of the meal.
NEWTON: Good thing too. I'm glad you saved the fortune cookie for me. I still like those as well. Grace Young, Happy Lunar New Year to you and
thanks so much. We learned a lot. Appreciate it.
YOUNG: Thank you.
NEWTON: And I want to thank all of you for your company. I'm Paula Newton in New York. You have been watching "The Brief." Stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
