Return to Transcripts main page
The Story Is with Elex Michaelson
Newsom Presidential Run; US vs AI; 78th Emmy Awards; 'Widow's Bay' Leads with 14 Wins at Prime-Time Emmys; PBS Interviews New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani; DHS Report Finds Immigrants Faced Disturbing Conditions in Alligator Alcatraz. Aired 12-1a ET
Aired September 15, 2026 - 00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[00:00:56]
ELEX MICHAELSON, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Elex Michaelson live in Los Angeles.
Coming up, THE STORY IS, CNN Exclusive. California Governor Gavin Newsom tells Jake Tapper the one candidate he won't run against for president. THE STORY IS US or AI, Anthropic CEO says artificial intelligence might not wipe all of us out if we can catch up to it. He's also speaking with CNN.
And THE STORY IS the Emmys, the awards just handed out. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister live backstage, the talking to all the biggest winners.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Live from Los Angeles, THE STORY IS with Elex Michaelson.
MICHAELSON: Lots of new political developments happening we are following this hour. Regulating the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence is becoming the hot button issue in DC and around the world. We've also got new clarity from the US Supreme Court today regarding how people will be able to vote come November.
And after a three month absence, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell was back on Capitol Hill with questions still swirling around his health. We'll get all of that in the next two hours.
But first, a CNN Exclusive with California Governor Gavin Newsom as he contemplates a possible presidential run in 2028. Newsom spoke with CNN's Jake Tapper for hours at a family ranch about his personal and professional highs and lows, and what the future could hold for this longtime politician. That includes, of course, whether or not he'll jump into the presidential race, which most people think that he will.
That presidential race technically, two years from now, but the time to jump in might be a few months from now. A key part of Newsom's decision, he says, will center on who else may be running, specifically former Vice President Kamala Harris. Here's part of that interview as Newsom and Jake were fishing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: It's going to be a lot of people.
GAVIN NEWSOM (D), CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR: Yes.
TAPPER: It's a lot of Democrats.
NEWSOM: Thirty one flavors.
TAPPER: And you're not even the only Californian.
NEWSOM: No, right.
TAPPER: You got Ro Khanna.
NEWSOM: Yes.
TAPPER: Kamala.
NEWSOM: Yes. I don't know. She runs, but we'll see.
TAPPER: I know she's called around.
NEWSOM: Yes, but I wouldn't run if she ran.
TAPPER: If she runs, you will not?
NEWSOM: Of course not. Why would I? I wouldn't do that to her. I wouldn't do it to me. Why would -- I wouldn't do that to you. I wouldn't waste everyone's time. Who needs that?
TAPPER: What do you mean? That doesn't even make sense to me.
NEWSOM: I just -- I wouldn't -- no, I wouldn't. First of all, electorally, it's a gift from God for everybody else. They enjoy the hell out of it, mutual assured destruction. It services no greater good.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: A lot to unpack in that fishing expedition there. Let's bring it our panel. Fabian Nunez is the Founder and Managing Partner of the global consulting firm Actum. And Suzette Valladares is a Republican State Senator here in California. Welcome to the show for the first time. Great to have you here, senator.
SUZETTE VALLADARES (R), CALIFORNIA STATE SENATOR: It is amazing to be here. Thanks for having me, Elex.
MICHAELSON: Yes. And let's start with our returning champion, as somebody who knows both of these characters very well, has spent a lot of time with Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris. What's going on here?
FABIAN NUNEZ, FOUNDER AND MANAGING PARTNER, ACTUM: Well, first let me say, I mean, they're both very good friends of mine, and I'm very impressed with those comments that Governor Gavin Newsom made, because if you think about it, everyone's saying, well, Gavin is running for president. He's running for president. That's why he's taking on President Donald Trump the way he has been.
And I've said this before and others have said it, he's meeting the moment like very few Democratic leaders with respect to taking on President Trump on a lot of the things that have come our way, not to mention, you know, the effort to impose things on California that ultimately are politically just inconsistent with what you need to do when you're the president. But what's interesting about what's going on right now is having one California candidate run for president is a good thing.
You know, they're both very popular. They both poll very, very high. They're in the top five, both of them. And so, having one of them not run, if they both are interested in doing this, I think sends a message that -- it's a good, positive thing for California, for donors, for supporters.
[00:05:10]
People like me are excited because we won't have to make the choice between Kamala or Gavin. And, by the way, just one other point, Kamala, if you think about it, only had 107 days to run for president the last go around. Gavin hasn't had a shot at it. And so to me, they're both very formidable, strong candidates, either one of them could be the president of United States.
MICHAELSON: That sounds like a very political answer that you just gave there. But here's Joel Pollak of the California Post, the op-ed editor there posted this on X. More of conservative side."
Of course, Gavin Newsom is running in 2028 and there's no way Kamala Harris will be able to run. She has no support. But saying he won't run if she does is brilliant, if cynical, politics by Newsom because it shows a deference to race and gender in an identity-obsessed party."
Of course, we know, senator, the first state that's voting is South Carolina where the biggest constituency is black women. Do you agree with Joel's analysis? What do you think of this?
VALLADARES: So first of all, what I'd like to say is Gavin Newsom's campaign for president has been the worst kept secret in Sacramento. For four years he's running. It's been very evident for quite some time. I think it's really interesting because they say in politics, you know, while I think he is trying to come across as probably a loyal friend in politics. In politics they say if you want loyalty, get a dog.
He's running. The bigger -- and he went in further on that interview to talk about his why. You don't establish why you're running and let that go because somebody else you know is running. If you know why you're running, you leap, you jump, you run. The bigger question is what is he going to run on?
Is he going to run on his record in California? The rest of the US should be looking at his results, not press releases. And I don't think, frankly, he has a strong record to run on here in California or across the United States.
MICHAELSON: Well -- and Jake Tapper pressed him, Fabian, on the idea of who should actually be the nominee if there's going to be one from California. Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: My counter argument would be like, you know, she had a shot.
NEWSOM: Yes.
TAPPER: And you've never run and she's run twice.
NEWSOM: Yes. That, I mean, that would be the -- that'd be the approach to the campaign, certainly. That would be the case. You'd make pretty good one, actually. That's objectively true. I just -- but I know what that means.
I know her base of supporters. I know her friends. The Venn diagram on that is just pure crossover. It's not -- I wouldn't do that to -- I wouldn't do that to people.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: Does Tapper have a point that Kamala ran twice? When she ran the first time around, she didn't even make it to California because her poll numbers were so bad. The second time around, she did not win the presidency. It's time for something.
NUNEZ: Well, the first -- let's be clear. The first time Kamala ran that campaign fizzled out in a couple of months because she couldn't raise the money. She was an unknown entity across the country. So -- and that was in the same -- that was actually that presidential primary which Biden won and made her his vice president.
And then the second time she ran, she ran a marat -- you know, presidential campaigns are marathons. She had to run a sprint. Hundred and seven days is really, really quick. Remember, she had very low approval ratings. She turned that around, so I think there's a really good point to be made that she, in effect, is the stronger of the two to run.
MICHAELSON: You think so?
NUNEZ: But the interesting thing about it is that, they're both very strong in the polling. If you look at the polling now on the Democratic side --
MICHAELSON: You think she's a stronger candidate?
NUNEZ: I think she could be the stronger candidate. That's the point that Gavin is making.
MICHAELSON: You think she's a stronger candidate?
VALLADARES: I think they both have a problem. They're both from California. And any other Democratic candidate across the United States can point to the lack of results. You have a phenomenal economy here in California, but a failing government.
Think of any issue, name it. Whether it's the price of groceries, the price of gas, or insurance crisis, or wildfire crisis, they both have the California results to run on, which are not really good.
MICHAELSON: The economy is pretty good in the state.
NUNEZ: Well -- but California has -- there's some challenges in the governance of California. However, having said that, California has the largest investment in the last eight years than any modern society in the world, number one. Number two, you know, we're not immune from the national problems that the rest of the country is facing, not the least of which is the fact that we're in a war in Iran, and it's having a serious impact on the cost of goods and services in this country.
MICHAELSON: And he probably is blamed more for California issues than she is because he's been the governor for all these years and she's been in Washington and removed from some of that. Let's talk about another issue right now that affects California and the whole country.
The Supreme Court ruling on mail-in voting, essentially saying that the President's plan to try to get the post office involved in mail-in voting is not going to be allowed to go forward. Rejects the plan to limit mail-in voting in the midterms, now it basically keeps the situation status quo. Is this a good thing?
[00:10:13]
VALLADARES: So I think the decision was actually more narrow than that. The decision was based on the timing of it. They don't want to see these change in election rules so close to the election. I think we're like eight weeks --
MICHAELSON: People already voting in some states. North Carolina already ballots out.
VALLADARES: They're already voting. And I can agree with that perspective, you don't want to change the rules in the middle of the game. I understand that perspective. But there is a broader thing we should be looking at.
Across this country, there is a significant portion of the electorate that has lost confidence in our election. I think this shouldn't be a partisan issue. Republicans and Democrats, whether at the state level, at the federal level, need to come together to make sure that every voter, regardless of policy of partisanship, has confidence in our electoral process.
MICHAELSON: Your thoughts on the Supreme Court?
NUNEZ: Well, I mean, the first thing is, you've got to understand this is a president who wants to win the midterms by hook or by crook. And the fact of the matter is -- MICHAELSON: You joked about that last week. You should go out and cheat just like they do.
NUNEZ: Exactly. But look, he's the one that's caused a lot of this turmoil, the mistrust in the election system in our country. You know, he challenged the 2020 elections. They had dozens and dozens of legal challenges with voting irregularities, and none of them turned out to be positive.
In fact, in one case, when they did a recount, he ended up with less votes in one of these counties. And so, I think at the end of the day, the Supreme Court was very wise to say to him, wait a minute, the federal government shouldn't be dictating to the states how they should run their elections. Because after all, I mean, it used to be a Republican idea, this concept that states should govern and states should have rights over the federal government. But it seems like with this president, things are upside down.
MICHAELSON: Quickly.
VALLADARES: So I'm going to push back a little bit because I think he's actually hearing from his constituents, from voters about their lack in confidence. Even here in California, while there's been no significant voter fraud, there have been anomalies. Whether it was in the mayoral race when you had a significant portion of the return ballots coming in at 90 percent, or other things like what we saw on skid row with the ballot initiative process, there is some truth to a significant portion of the electorate not having confidence. And I think he's listening to that.
MICHAELSON: And there's some allegations potentially of fraud on skid row, of homeless people being falsely talked to --
NUNEZ: But let's be clear, Elex. I mean, the President doesn't want people to vote by mail because he knows that a plurality of those votes that are going to be counted are going to be Democratic over Republican. He himself just votes by mail-in Florida. And so, but yes --
MICHAELSON: He wants people to request a ballot and there's a whole longer conversation. Understandably --
(CROSSTALK)
NUNEZ: But the integrity of our voter system does need to be, we need people to have confidence in it. So at some point we need few rules --
MICHAELSON: We'll talk more about this issue in our next hour. We're going to have the secretary of state from Washington State joining us live. And you both will be back to talk about the issue of AI in politics, which is a big issue. And we're going to talk a little bit more about that now, though.
Turning to that debate over what the government needs to do, if anything, to prevent a doomsday scenario brought on by artificial intelligence. The CEO of one of the leading AI developers, Anthropic, is now calling for an industry-wide slowdown, more regulation, global cooperation, all in an effort to stop out of control and dangerous AI models from being developed.
Several major competitors, including Elon Musk and OpenAI Sam Altman, have also voiced their support for more safety measures. But President Trump is rejecting that push for more AI regulation. In a string of social media posts on Monday, he called safety concerns a hoax, insisting that the larger concern is preventing China from outpacing the US.
He also argued that the only guardrail AI needs is a strong and smart high IQ president. Last week, a researcher who resigned from Anthropic warned that people building AI fear that it could kill all of us by the end of the decade. CNN's Anderson Cooper asked Anthropic CEO about the potential for a terrifying scenario like that. Listen to Dario Amodei's response here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DARIO AMODEI, CEO, ANTHROPIC: What are the paths in which things go well and what are the paths in which things go poorly? And so instead of saying, you know, it's a 10 percent chance, that sounds like it's a roll of the dice. I think it's much more illuminating to say, well, that forks into different paths. And if we take the right paths, then the chance of something going wrong is very low.
If we take the wrong paths, then the chance of something going wrong could be even higher than that. And so let's focus on our agency and our ability to take the right paths instead of the wrong paths.
ANDERSON COPPER, CNN ANCHOR: I mean, in the past you have put as you reference, you said there was a 50 percent chance of entry level white collar jobs or 50 percent of entry level white collar jobs could be eliminated. Unemployment in the US could go 10 to 20 percent in one to five years.
[00:15:12]
I understand you wouldn't want to put a percentage on this, but you said you do agree more with those employees than not. You do believe that it's possible that AI, if it goes wrong, could wipe out humans?
AMODEI: Yes. Look, I'm still worried about all of these things, right? I stand by these concerns about labor displacement if the progress of the field is too fast and if society doesn't respond in the right way, right?
You know, again, we should split it into what happens if the AI companies in society respond in the wrong way versus what happens if they respond in the right way. So I absolutely stand by these concerns, these risks, that they're totally real. I continue to be worried about economic disruption looking at what the models can do, you know, that they can solve these unsolved math problems.
No one could look at that and say this isn't a potential concern, right? That economic disruption isn't a potential concern when these models have these incredible intellectual abilities. No one could look at the hugging face incident and say it's not a concern that AI models could on their own, get out of control and do things that humans don't want them to do, including, yes, in the worst cases on the scale of humanity.
No one could look at our report from two days ago of people trying to use the AI models potentially to build biological weapons and say we shouldn't be worried about the misuse of the models.
COOPER: I do just want to drill down from the proposal you put out. You said it's because over the last few months that you've become increasingly alarmed. And you cite two things. First, the rate of advancement, and so what about the rate of advancement scares you?
And the second alarming thing that you talked about was the hugging face attack, which I also want to ask you about. But what about the rate of advancement in the last few months alone has set off alarm bells?
AMODEI: Yes. So just to be clear, I've always been someone you can, you know, you can find me, you know, you can find dozens of essays or TV interviews with me where I say AI is an exponential and it's moving really fast, right? And so in a way I shouldn't be surprised, but actually seeing what has happened over the last few months where we and others have been able to use our AI models to build the next generation of AI models.
That loop has closed very fast. You look at it and it's happening so fast. And you say, wow, the pace of this is almost even faster than I expected it to be. And it's not that the things we're building are bad, it's that it's happening so fast that if we don't slow down a little bit, we're going to make a mistake.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: Joining me to unpack that and more is data science and technology expert Chris Mattmann. Chris, welcome back to THE STORY IS.
Talk to us about what he just said, your reaction to that.
CHRIS MATTMANN, DATA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EXPERT: Yes. Elex, a lot of people are getting scared because they see the CEO of a tech company like Anthropic, which makes one of the most widely-used AI called Claude, and he's sitting here saying, you know, we need to slow down. There are two lenses that I kind of look at it with.
First, Anthropic is a company that has been under really the guise of the administration. They've been in the crosshairs because Anthropic is a company that has been building so-called Woke AI because they've been concerned with AI safety, according to the Trump administration. They've been focused more on regulatory aspects than, say, AI enablement.
You know, when this administration came in, the very first thing that they did was they repealed the Biden administration's AI safety executive order. They said, hey, you know, all the regulatory stuff we've been doing before has put us behind our foreign adversaries. China, they've been getting ahead.
So first, the lens that I look at it is Anthropic has been focused on AI safety for a long time, and they've been under the sort of crosshairs of the administration. The second thing, though, is what's changed? And the big thing that Dario is saying that has changed is that now we have AI that's actually being used to build AI itself. It's not humans that are doing it.
They actually have seen AI building AI at exponential scales. And that has caused them some pause. And that's what he's talking.
MICHAELSON: What is Woke AI?
MATTMANN: Yes. Woke AI, according to David Sacks, the crypto czar, you know, the crypto and AI czar from the former administration is the focus of AI on, say, generating a black George Washington or generating images that take into account, you know, that aren't built off of, or that are only focus on safety elements and not harming people, rather than focused on enablement, which is getting ahead of our foreign adversaries and things like that.
[00:20:06]
MICHAELSON: Seems like Anthropic's focus on a lot more than a black George Washington based off of what they're doing. But let's talk about JD Vance speaking of the administration, speaking out today about the concept of all of these top tech leaders saying, we need help. We need to regulate this thing. Here's how he responded.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JD VANCE, US VICE PRESIDENT: I have to say, just personally, I feel a little bit weird about the fact that you have so many frontier AI tech companies kind of coming to the government and begging the government to regulate them. It feels a little bit to me like a bit of a Trojan horse. So I think we just have to be careful about this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: So many people saw the "Odyssey" this year. Is this the new Trojan horse? What does he mean by that?
MATTMANN: I saw the "Odyssey" and like I told you in your prior show, it's a wonderful movie. Anyways, outside of that, what he's talking about is there's a belief in the government too, that Anthropic is focused through this sort of, you know, call to arms and call to action for regulating on what they call a reg capture.
And that is in a future Democratic administration and a Democratic Congress. There's not going to be only the focus on enablement, there's going to be the focus as well on regulation. And so, a lot of people feel like this is Anthropic, putting them at the forefront of that reg capture so that they can put themselves at the forefront of their company succeeding.
Whether that's true or not, I don't know. I think what I'm happy about, having worked on air safety in the past administration, is that they're talking about air safety, Elex. And whatever the reason, it's a good reason.
MICHAELSON: And what's going on with China? I mean, when all this talk about AI safety, is anybody there, like, we got to slow down?
MATTMANN: They have different values than us. And the best way that I could illustrate that associated with AI is just take facial recognition, computer vision, facial recognition. Anytime here in the United States, the DHS or any, the Department of Homeland Security, or any government agency wants to use facial recognition.
The very first thing that they talk about is what data is it trained on? What's the bias? What's the potential for harms and effect? China, through their relationship with state corporations and their data collection policies, doesn't ask those same questions.
And so, China is not slowing down. They are not talking about slowing down as it relates to this.
MICHAELSON: And real quickly, because we're out of time. Is AI going to kill us all?
MATTMANN: No. AI is going to have the potential, just as many people fear killing us all. It's going to generate new energy. It's going to generate new abilities to generate food. It's going to generate cures for diseases that don't exist.
It's not going to kill us all. I'm not an AI doomer.
MICHAELSON: Yes. But there clearly is reason to regulate it and clearly reason to talk about this in a serious way. And all these serious people aren't bringing this up if there isn't some meat on that bone as well. Chris, thank you so much for being here. We appreciate it.
Still ahead this hour, the biggest night in TV. We'll take you live to the Peacock Theater for more on this year's Emmy Awards. CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister speaking to the biggest winner. She's live with us next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:27:18]
MICHAELSON: The 78th Annual Emmy Awards wrapped up a short time ago and Apple TV's "Widow's Bay" won more awards than any other show during the ceremony, including Outstanding Comedy Series. Other notable winners include Noah Wyle, who won his second Emmy for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Drama Series for his role on "The Pitt."
That show was produced in part by CNN's parent company and was the most nominated show of the night. It took home two awards tonight, including Best Drama. And in one of the Night's historic moments, Jean Smart won her fifth trophy for outstanding lead actress in a comedy series for "Hacks." Smart is now the first woman to win an Emmy for every season of a series.
The fifth and final season of "Hacks" debuted earlier this year. Also a part of our parent company.
CNN's Elizabeth Wagmeister joins me now with more on the big night. You were there, Elizabeth, before the show, for a big streaming show, on the red carpet and after the show, you've been talking to all the winners.
ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN: Yes. And as you said, it was a huge night for "Widow's Bay," Elex, winning in the major comedy category, Steven Root winning, Matthew Rhys winning. I mean, a huge, huge night for "Widow's Bay."
And also a big night for "The Pitt," which, as you said, walked away with the big award of the night, Best Drama, their second year in a row. And I spoke to the entire cast of "The Pitt. It's a big cast, so you're going to see a lot of people. But take a look at what Noah Wyle said about winning twice.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NOAH WYLE, EMMY WINNER: It's one thing to make "The Godfather," it's another thing to make "Godfather 2" afterwards, and to come back in a sophomore attempt and have the bar that we set in the first season be what we were trying to maintain and, or maybe even surpass, it's incredibly gratifying coming back and feeling like we did it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: Now in the limited categories, "DTF St. Louis" really swept winning so many awards. Linda Cardellini winning her first ever Emmy, which is insane to think that she hadn't won an Emmy before, and David Harbour also winning his first Emmy.
Now, David Harbour was actually nominated against his co-star Jason Bateman in the same category. So when I spoke to them backstage after their big wins, I asked Jason if he was mad at David Harbour for beating him if they were in a fight. But he actually told me that he had been rooting for him. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: Have you beat up David yet for beating you last weekend?
JASON BATEMAN, ACTOR: No, but I told him I'm looking forward to hearing his speech the day before the Emmys because he just knocked it out of the park. And he got my vote. I was rooting for him, and he's a man.
DAVID HARBOUR, ACTOR: He's such a nice gentleman. It's horrible.
WAGMEISTER: I was hoping he would say that you guys were in, like, a massive fight.
BATEMAN: I won a lot of money on Kalshi on him, yes. It's big Kalshi bet.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I knew that's --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- went down.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: That's funny.
WAGMEISTER: They were so giddy, Elex. They were so excited that they had won so many awards tonight and last weekend at the Creative Arts Emmys.
MICHAELSON: Well, it's -- it's fun, because they play best friends in that show, and it's great to see their real-life friendship on display there, as well.
So, "DTF St. Louis," "The Pit," available on HBO MAX. "Widow's Bay," available on Apple TV. That is a show that seemingly came out of nowhere this year, with Matthew Rhys as the star of that. He won for that, also won for "The Beast in Me" on Netflix. Two awards, two different roles in the same year. And then he talked to you.
WAGMEISTER: Yes. And look, Matthew Rhys made Emmys history. He is the only actor ever to win for two leading roles in the same year. So, that is pretty incredible.
And I had actually spoken to Matthew Rhys prior to the Emmys, and I told him that "The Beast in Me" scared me so much when I was watching it. He's, like, a little too good at playing a serial killer, Elex.
But anyway, as you said, he won two awards. It was a big night for him. Take a look at when I spoke with him backstage after his big win.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEW RHYS, ACTOR: I was never very good at history. I'm just glad to make it.
WAGMEISTER: You can fail history when you're making it, OK?
RHYS: That's very good. Very well put.
Yes, that -- that element hasn't really quite sunk in yet. It seems very abstract to me. And I don't know if it will sink in, to be perfectly honest, because your kids will never let you. But it's -- it's incredible. It really is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: I also told him, though, that I thought it was a little unfair that his partner, Keri Russell --
MICHAELSON: Yes.
WAGMEISTER: -- has never won an Emmy. She lost tonight, but she lost to Allison Janney. So that's a good person to lose to. And Allison Janney, by the way, who I spoke to, was absolutely shocked, Elex.
MICHAELSON: Well, both Allison Janney and Matthew Rhys were part of your series, "Coming Up," which people can stream on the CNN app. So clearly, coming on your show is the key to winning an Emmy.
So, maybe we've got to get Keri Russell on your show next year.
WAGMEISTER: Come on. Come on my show --
MICHAELSON: Yes.
WAGMEISTER: -- and you will win an Emmy. Exactly. That's right.
MICHAELSON: That's how you do it. That's -- that's where she's missing out.
So, Keri Russell, of course, is with Matthew Rhys. The two of them met on "The Americans," which is on Netflix.
Tom Pelphrey, an actor winning tonight. He's with Kaley Cuoco, the actress, who is pregnant, sitting in the audience. And this moment happened during the awards.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TOM PELPHREY, ACTOR: My love, my best friend, my partner, the very pregnant Kaley Cuoco. I love you more than anything. And our family is the crown jewel of my life. Matilda, daddy loves you; baby girl in that belly, Daddy loves you. Thank you. God bless.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: Congratulations to him for winning tonight. And you got to speak with him backstage. What did he say?
WAGMEISTER: I did, and I will let you in on something, Elex. So, Kaley Cuoco was actually right here backstage while I was interviewing Tom Pelphrey. And I spoke with her. I just said, you know, congrats on his win. Also, congrats on your pregnancy. They were taking selfies. I mean, they were just adorable together.
But I spoke to him, because I could tell during that moment, I knew that this was going to be a moment, a speech that people remembered. So, I asked him to elaborate a bit on it for me, and we had a really nice chat. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: What does it mean to you that you have Kaley, who you shouted out from the stage --
PELPHREY: Yes.
WAGMEISTER: -- and she's pregnant with your second child.
PELPHREY: Yes. WAGMEISTER: And now you have your first Emmy?
PELPHREY: It's -- It's -- you know, it's heaven. It's -- it's more than one has any right to expect.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WAGMEISTER: Again, just a really lovely moment there. You -- you can tell that he's just really speechless almost. And it's incredible to see these actors, really on one of the biggest nights of their life. And to be backstage and talking to them right as they walk off with that Emmy gold. It's really special.
And by the way, on my final point, Elex, I just want to say Mariska Hargitay did a great job. I think she may have the record for most outfit changes for any host in Emmy history.
And she even got her friend Taylor Swift to make an appearance. Even though Taylor Swift in real life was actually at the Chiefs game, she did a taped moment for a really fun skit during the show tonight.
MICHAELSON: And of course, we know she's also a huge New York Knicks fan. And so, she got her buddy Jalen Brunson to also make an appearance. So that -- that row, she sat with Taylor Swift at the Knicks game to watch Jalen Brunson all representing on the Emmys tonight.
[00:35:14]
So, Elizabeth, you've been doing a great job. I know this is, like, hour 55 of your day. So, we appreciate you staying up late for us. Great job to you and the entire team from CNN Variety, all day long, streaming on all access. And with us live tonight.
Elizabeth Wagmeister, live at the Peacock Theater. Bravo, my friend.
WAGMEISTER: Thank you so much, Elex. Thanks for having me.
MICHAELSON: Coming up next, we will talk with the PBS host behind a rare one-on-one interview with New York's mayor, Zohran Mamdani. He discusses his politics, priorities, and vision for the future.
What does he say is the difference between Democratic socialism and communism? What does he most like about FDR? We'll get into all of that, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:40:39]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ALEXANDER HEFFNER, HOST, PBS'S "OPEN MIND": You call yourself a Democratic socialist? MAYOR ZOHRAN MAMDANI (D), NEW YORK CITY: I want to be honest with
people about my own politics. And it's a politics that, when I call myself a Democratic socialist, it means that I'm making the choice to fight for working people at every single interval. It means that I believe in democracy, not just at the ballot box, but in other facets of our lives.
And what I've seen and heard from so many New Yorkers is they value democracy. They believe in democracy, but their faith in it is withering when that same democracy cannot deliver them a meal that they can feed their families off of.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: Zohran Mamdani. He gave that interview to PBS's Alexander Heffner. Heffner is the creator of a series and host of PBS's "The Open Mind." Alexander Heffner joins us live now to talk more about that.
Alexander Heffner, welcome back to THE STORY IS.
HEFFNER: What you do is get through your shows, the big show. (ph)
MICHAELSON: It was -- it was striking in that interview, the way he is so honest about the way he feels about Democratic socialism. A lot of Democrats have been scared to say a lot of this out loud for a long time.
Love him or hate him, you kind of get what you get with him, right?
HEFFNER: Yes. It's this happy warrior mentality towards economic dignity. He's going to fight for it relentlessly. And he's just so upbeat, even in this climate of inequality.
And my takeaway was that he really is going to judge himself based on pragmatic results that are concrete. And I asked him, when he considers a possible second term and reelection campaign, how's he going to assess that? On the basis of TikTok videos, public opinion surveys?
And no, he wants to do it on the basis of the cost of rent, the cost of an heirloom tomato. We didn't talk in depth about ridership on MTA and public transit, but he has fought for it to be free and accessible.
You know, from our series, "Mayors of the World" on PBS, the mayor of Lisbon, Portugal, successfully implemented a metro system that is free and accessible to people roughly in their 20s through 60s.
And he's working on that. He's working on a vacancy tax, and he's working on an anti-scaffolding initiative that we talked about.
MICHAELSON: Well, so much of the national dialog, especially President Trump at speeches, is saying that the Democratic Party is not Democratic socialists, but communist. And you were very clear in trying to get him to define what is
Democratic socialist; what is communist? And are you a communist? Here's some of that.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HEFFNER: Do you believe socialism can coexist with capitalism?
MAMDANI: I'm showing it right now.
HEFFNER: So -- and you're existing in both. So, you believe in both to an extent?
MAMDANI: Well, I would say -- look, I -- I'm a socialist. And what I believe in is to deliver for New Yorkers.
And what we also know is that New York City is one city that is part of a larger country. We are talking about an economic system that we also continue to live --
HEFFNER: So, you're malleable?
MAMDANI: I wouldn't say that I'm malleable, but what I would say is that my ultimate goal is delivering. It is not to win an intellectual debate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MICHAELSON: And he was pretty clear that he's not a communist. Right?
HEFFNER: Yes. Well, we're public television, and our first and foremost goal is to distinguish between things. And -- and yes, he denies any association with that idea. Democratic socialism as a distinct entity.
I asked him if he thought that President Roosevelt would have called himself a Democratic socialist in these times that we live in, and folks can watch on a couple of weeks to see his answer on that score.
But he was quite clear that his focus is on bringing human dignity to people. And he wants the -- the essentials to be available to New Yorkers.
[00:45:07]
And he wants people who live in excess to understand that some people are suffering and that there's an opportunity to ensure that they have food; they have health care; they have a safe place to live. And I think that's his fundamental mission.
Now, whether or not the policies he's espousing can create that environment remains to be seen.
MICHAELSON: Yes.
HEFFNER: The question that Roosevelt primarily asked the American people was, do you want relief? And when they elected him in 1932, the answer was yes.
The prior administrations had been a failure at attempting to cure the Great Depression.
MICHAELSON: Sure.
HEFFNER: And so, you know, we talk about that at length. The effect of A.I. on the displacement of humanity, and jobs that are available today and may not be tomorrow. I think his answers were interesting, but ultimately, they were all about delivering for New Yorkers and specific costs.
I mean, I asked him what the cost of a bacon, egg, and cheese should be in the city. I asked specifically what his city-owned grocery stores -- or operated grocery stores are going to serve people.
And he's insisting that they will get a 30-percent discount compared to whether you order online or in supermarkets. And that's one of his most critical missions right now, is the cost of groceries and getting it under control.
MICHAELSON: Well, and he pointed out that he doesn't eat bacon, but he has an egg, cheese and jalapeno.
HEFFNER: It's true.
MICHAELSON: Which is an interesting point, as well.
And interesting how much time you spent talking about FDR. FDR, probably the most activist Democratic president ever, who challenged a lot of norms. And -- and, you know, in some ways believed in some aspects of Democratic socialism, I guess, depending on how you describe it.
And it's interesting to hear him talk about that. And so, people can hear his -- elaborate on this when this airs on PBS, "Mayors of the World." When can people check it out?
HEFFNER: They can check it out two Sundays from now. So, the 27th on PBS stations. Check your local listings.
MICHAELSON: Alexander Heffner, you did it again. Congratulations. Everybody talks to you. We appreciate it. Always good to see you.
HEFFNER: You, too. You too, man. Good to see you.
MICHAELSON: A new report details the disturbing conditions inside the detention center known as Alligator Alcaraz [SIC]. More on how immigrants there were treated, just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[00:52:18]
MICHAELSON: A Department of Homeland Security report is detailing disturbing conditions found at Florida's Alligator Alcatraz. The report describes how some immigrants were held in small metal cages at the now-shuttered detention facility from several minutes to nearly two hours.
CNN's Priscilla Alvarez has more details.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A new Department of Homeland Security inspector general report reveals disturbing conditions at Alligator Alcatraz.
ALVAREZ (voice-over): That was a facility that was quickly erected in Florida last year and then closed in June of this year.
Now, this was a visit that the inspectors took in January, where they found cramped conditions among detainees, as well as lack of access to clean water, among other concerns.
But perhaps most revealing was the small metal enclosures that they observed while on their visit. Those enclosures, according to facility staff, were used as, quote, "calming areas." They also said that some detainees chose to be in those enclosures.
Now again, there were enclosures, according to this report, that were indoors, as well as at least two that were outdoors, according to the I.G.
What was stunning, however, about this observation, they say, is that it is a practice unlike any they have seen before.
Now, quoting here from one part of the report where they say, "The use of such restrictive spaces is highly unconventional and does not align with standards for humane treatment."
ALVAREZ: Now, we asked the state of Florida about this report, as well, because they, according to the Department of Homeland Security, were charged with daily operations of the facility.
And they said, quote, "The left-wing media wants to focus on a confinement area for violent criminal aliens who have proven they cannot remain peaceful while awaiting deportation. While it adheres to all federal standards for criminal confinement, we'd make it even smaller if we could."
Now, I will note that it is the inspector general that highlighted the small metal enclosures in its report.
And it also noted concerns about what standards Florida was complying with in holding ICE detainees and trying, and rather the inspectors trying to track down what exactly they were using to base the standards of living on in this Alligator Alcatraz facility.
ALVAREZ (voice-over): Now, again, this was a visit that took place in January of this year. The facility has since closed. The Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, had said previously that the facility was only meant to be temporary. But these concerns add to those that had already been expressed by Democratic lawmakers, detainees, and family members about what --
[00:55:01]
ALVAREZ: -- detainees experienced while they were held at this facility.
Priscilla Alvarez, CNN, Washington.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MICHAELSON: Our thanks to Priscilla.
Up next, our top stories, including big developments in the politics of A.I. Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MICHAELSON: The Trump administration has finalized its plan to roll back limits on planet heating pollution from fossil fuel plants.
The head of the Environmental Protection Agency says the move will save billions of dollars and lower electricity prices.
