A new surprise in the 2024 race, right as it kicks into high gear, would have now barred Trump volunteers saying about the campaign's chances in a key battle around state. Plus, it was a controversial clemency when Trump granted it in his final hours of his presidency, when now the person who was was commuted could be headed back to prison. In soccer legend, Brandy Chastain looks for a new victory by tackling an old problem, talking about it with us tonight, about her fight to reduce the pay gap. Friday, the first 2024 balance gets sent out Friday. Now process that for a second, people. Forget 63 days to go and leaning in after Labor Day and waiting for the debate, even on Tuesday. Friday, the first 2024 balance gets sent out Friday in North Carolina, and if this wild race goes on like it has been, we all might need to do this. Hold on to your butts. Well, who knows what could happen next? Well, there's already a new twist tonight over what state the Trump campaign thinks it can actually win, or maybe not win. It's now barring a top volunteer from any further work after he emailed supporters apparently, the Trump was directly pulling out of his New Hampshire race, in a sense, to focus on other battle rounds. He's in the race still, of course, but not focusing the same way. The Trump campaign says that that is not true and that they still have resources on the ground in New Hampshire, but one thing is for sure, while one campus calling themselves the underdog, Trump is trying to juice electricity of his own campaign, putting on a memo tonight arguing that it has the momentum in this race, and while it's certainly close, the new poll suggests that he has some work to do. It shows Harris is more favorable and less unfavorable than Trump and not by small margins. Now, Trump will get several opportunities this week alone to try to change that perception with events in three battle ground states. Now, Harris, for her part, will be in New Hampshire tomorrow, laying out more of her economic policies and all of this in the lead up to the big event one week from today, the first Trump-Harris meeting, face-to-face, and debate, and maybe the only one. Learning just how seriously, by the way, Harris is taking it towards the tell CNN that she will travel to Pittsburgh Thursday to prepare and stay there until traveling to Philadelphia for the debate on Tuesday. During the now, National Politics reporter for the Wall Street Journal, Sabrina Sadiqi, also CNN political commentators from Michael Singleton and Ashley Allison, so glad to have all of you here. First of all, that Friday date is still in my mind. Forget it. Friday is the day of things starting to come into view for a lot of people, but, you Michael, there's this top Trump volunteer that's now barred from the campaign in New Hampshire. We're here and you're reporting. Feli emailed support, or they emailed supporters that New Hampshire is no longer a battle ground state for Trump, and he is pulling out effectively. What does that say about the state of mind you think for Trump campaign, if they're not going to focus resources there? I don't believe it. I mean, I've worked on three presidential campaigns, a host of other campaigns. I have never known in my history of electoral politics a volunteer, having that level of access to internal campaign strategy. That's something that's only reserved for the very highest levels of a campaign at this capacity. So I personally don't buy what this person is saying. Well, Sabrina, I'm asking you this point, because it's every state is going to be so important. Battle ground states, at least seven of them, right? We know this full well. The poll, and look at this polling. It's got Harris having some momentum in this. It's the newest national poll. It's showing her with a narrow lead seems to be outside the margin of error as well. And she'll actually be in New Hampshire tomorrow for an economic plan unveiling in more detail. The fact that this poll is this way, and this reporting coming out, where does your mind go in terms of the momentum and who has it? I think that there's no denying that the momentum has been with Vice President Harris since she stepped into the race. That's what our polling at the Wall Street Journal as well as these other polls that you point to have suggested. But at the same time, as you point out, this is ultimately going to come down to or could come down to tens of thousands of votes across a handful of key battleground states. And one thing, because you mentioned Vice President Harris unveiling her economic plan, that we've seen continue to be a trend, is that a majority of Americans are still ranking the economy, jobs, inflation as their top issues. Trump tends to perform better on those issues than Harris. But one thing that's been really interesting is she's been closing that gap compared with where President Biden was. So even as voters are complaining about the cost of living, about everything being much more expensive, price-wise at the grocery store, gas prices, you know, a lot of those day-to-day concerns, they're not necessarily blaming Harris in the same way that they were blaming Biden, even though the overall economic trajectory has actually been good under this administration's watch. So I think that's why Harris wants to stay focused on the economy and then, of course, on reproductive rights, which are a poll at the Wall Street Journal showed, is, you know, the third top issue, but also the issue that most voters see as the biggest potential deal breaker. Well, you know, I know sure, Michael, is doubting the veracity of this story. But we have multiple sources of reporting that is, in fact, true. This happened, that the person was barred for having emailed to things out, that it's actually accurate information. When you hear this, and think about New Hampshire as a key state, and the prospects that somebody would focus alternatively on other areas and think, "This is not where I'm going to devote my resources to," what is that indicating to you as a strategist? Well, just knowing that ballots are going out, I kind of, like, threw up in my mouth. Right? Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. This is happening. Okay, ready or not. But I do think there are instances in national polls where resources are pulled down in states when the margin, the point margin starts to spread. And that is not... I remember in 2016 with Hillary Clinton, and my beloved state of Ohio surrogates were coming less. Murch and swag was coming less. The amount of door, like, paid canvassers, that there are tells that people who have been in the game, paid or not, volunteer or staff member, can tell when a campaign is coming down in one state and surging in another. And what it tells me is that they don't think they can win New Hampshire. Donald Trump has not slated to travel to New Hampshire right now. But it also tells me that they're nervous about some other states and they're moving money from New Hampshire someplace else. So where is that going? Is it going to the blue wall? Is it going to North Carolina? Is it going to Florida where Kamala Harris right now is doing her reproductive healthcare? It's like, where does that money from North or from New Hampshire move to other battleground states? Which is also a tell that they are nervous about other places as well. Let's take Ashley's hypothesis. Let's say they are redirecting funds. That does happen on campaigns. It also could be that they're looking at other places where they can potentially close the gap. Maybe they're in terms of showcasing they're more competitive in a place like Pennsylvania or maybe they're looking at Georgia, Wisconsin or Nevada or Arizona and said, okay, wait a minute here, we're now only a point or two behind. So you could use those dollars not necessarily because of concern, but maybe the expectation that, hey, if we spend more here, we can change the dynamics. The only problem with that response to this hypothetical is that before Kamala Harris is in the race, Trump was hypothetically leading in all of those states. So he is seeing that his where he was positioned in the race against a Joe Biden is just not the same against. Well, here's a hypothetical that I think is offensive. Ready for it? It's what Senator JD Vans had to say today when he talked about what a potential commander in chief as in Vice President Kamala Harris could be and the prospect hypothetically of whether people would join the armed forces. Listen to this. We really are on the brink of serious readiness issues because nobody wants to put on a uniform and serve in Kamala Harris's military. This is a person who wants the United States Army to be about gender inclusion, ridiculous diversity politics instead of about serving your country. If you're a person thinking about joining the military, you're probably not going to want to sign up if Kamala Harris is the potential commander in chief. What do you make of it? And I remember hearing the DNC speech and Vice President Kamala is talking about the lethality of the American armed forces. What do you make of this comment and this tactic given how prevalent conversations around Walt's military service have been, obviously Senator JD Vanses as well. And now this. You know, one thing that we've seen is not just that you've had this boost in enthusiasm for Vice President Harris because of her replacing Biden at the top of the ticket. But what's also happened simultaneous to that is that President Trump and his campaign, which includes his running mate JD Vanses, have struggled to really figure out how to effectively go after Vice President Harris. So a lot of what they've been doing is resorting to some of these more personal attacks or making it more about competence or some of the, obviously a lot of the attacks have been, you know, there's been this underlying racial or, you know, gen misogynistic undertone to a lot of the attack lines they've used against her. And then now you also have these comments about the military that not really rooted any kind of fact and also tie into a lot of the general, you know, attacks that Trump has made against members of the military. So it's not entirely clear what the strategy is. I know Republicans that I've spoken to in my reporting with much rather, they just focus on making a policy argument. Keep talking about the economy. Keep talking about inflation, you know, talk about your actual proposals. Don't just make these, you know, statements that are not necessarily doing anything to win over any voters. And if anything, they risk turning off the types of moderates, suburban voters that they need, the independents, who are increasingly shifting toward Harris and a lot of the polls we were just talking about. This is more than just the fear of mongering, right? It's not just saying the America will be less safe under potentially Vice President Kamala Harris. That he weren't going to join the, the armed services. Think about all the references to patriotism at the DNC as well. And frankly, the RNC as well, I find it's pretty stunning as a tactic, but then there's, but then again, I'm stunned again today because there is this big race in Montana, as you know. And it's one of the places that Trump actually went to first. And now the New York Times is reporting at Tim Sheehee, who is a Republican candidate for its Senate in Montana. He used racial stereotypes when he was speaking about Native Americans during private fundraisers last year. It was caught on tape. And it's a one clip where he describes participating in roping and branding cattle on the crow reservation. Listen to this. And I wrote with ramwood on every year down there. So a great way to bond with all the Indians to be out there while they're drunk at 8 a.m. and you're roping together. Now, a spokesperson for Mr. Sheehee's campaign did not respond to the Times request for comment. This is a very hotly contested race for Michael. I can't imagine this would be and only not helpful, but obviously and objectively offensive to make a reference. Yeah. I mean, look, he's leading right now, I think according to 13 polls, by three and a half percent, Native Americans represent, I think, 6% of the entire state population. This isn't helpful. You certainly give tester and Democrats writ large the opportunity to use that audio clip in commercial ads, target it, add Native American voters, trying to turn them out and say, Hey, this is a guy that could potentially represent you in the US Senate using this type of offensive language, racist language. Do you want this person? If not, you need to turn out and vote. So strategically speaking, you need to apologize quickly, swiftly, make amends, maybe do something to showcase that you recognize how awful the comments were to move forward. But stuff like this and a tight race could potentially make a difference if the strategist on the other side can figure out how to utilize it to their advantage. Ooh, an apology tour with an epiphany added in 2024. Can you imagine? I'm likely. I mean, it is highly offensive, the remarks that the candidate said, and it is an extremely close race. I guess I'm just like, keep talking, people. Keep showing us who they are so that the voters really get to make an informed decision. If that is what you think Native Americans are, people who their community has suffered from alcoholism on reservations because of some of the plates that this country has inflicted on the folks who have been living on this land since day one. So go ahead, tell us what you think about them and then let a voter make an informed decision. I'll just also say in Montana, it's not just Native Americans who would be offended in that. It's the neighbors of Native Americans, the people who want us to go to some of our higher ideals. And so when you see someone, particularly like a she/he who already is a question mark real Montana, if there is such a thing against a John Tester, it could be a fault that he can't over. That's the strategy Democrats will use, which actually just laid out, and that's the problem for she. Oh. Are we telling you history? That's a strategy. All right. Thank you, everyone. So nice to have you all here. Look, the Harris campaign kicking off the fighting for reproductive freedom nationwide bus tour and none other than Donald Trump's Palm Beach County backyard, backed by harrowing miscarriage stories, like of my next guest, who just as she was getting ready for her daughter's fourth birthday party in nearly 11 weeks into her pregnancy, she knew something did not feel right. Two emergency rooms sent me away. Because of Louisiana's abortion ban, no one would confirm that I was miscarrying. I was in pain, bleeding so much my husband feared for my life. No woman should experience what I endured. Caitlin Joshua joins me now. Caitlin, thank you so much for joining us. I was so moved by the statements that you made. I think so many people were. And just thinking about that experience, Caitlin, I mean, you were turned away from not one, but two emergency rooms. I mean, what happened next? How did you even manage to overcome? What happened? Yes. And thank you again for having me tonight. All I can say was I was adamant about trying to get at least some type of confirmation as to whether or not I was miscarrying. So, it's the fall of 2022 when my husband and I found ourselves in a health care crisis. As you stated at 11 weeks pregnant, I knew that something was wrong. I went to one hospital where I was told, I can't confirm at this moment whether or not you're miscarrying, but I'm sending you home with prayers. The second hospital stated or questioned me, rather, are you even pregnant? It's just like it's this to me. And sent me home basically saying that I had to take Tylenol and that was the only thing that I could receive in that moment. And I knew, because I was educated, that at almost 11 weeks pregnant, that I was definitely should have received a DNC procedure or some type of medication abortion in order to mitigate that miscarriage, but also to not compromise my future fertility and to be denied that not once but twice really showed me in real time what it is like to live under Donald Trump's abortion ban and the overturned Roe B. Wade that summer. To hear you describe being sent home with prayers, a Tylenol, a cyst, I mean as a mother who has gone through two pregnancies thinking about how scared I would have been and how much it would have been incumbent to try to be my own champion in a moment of extraordinary vulnerability is just unspeakable, Caitlin. And this is so personal, it is just a heart wrenching journey. What has compelled you to even speak out because this is deeply personal and one could not blame you if you wanted to keep it to yourself, I'm glad you did not. I appreciate that and you're right, it is deeply personal at times, I kind of ask myself oh Lord, what have I signed up for just because of course you hear so much in terms of how people conceptualize abortion care and understand the complexities of it or are not understand the complexities of abortion care. And that part is always really hard to digest, but I do know as a woman of color, as a black woman, I would be remissed if I did not speak about these stories or hearing stories coming out of the deep south, especially in Louisiana, in a place with such a egregious abortion ban. I am not just speaking for myself, I'm speaking for thousands of women that have dealt with this since the overturner will be weighed and that's been exacerbated since the abortion ban in our state. But most importantly, I know that I am bringing a contribution to a story that talks about black maternal health care, which is already so alarming in our country and we definitely have seen how that has played a role in the abortion ban and I know that there are plenty of women out there that live in our abortion ban in the 22 states and Donald Trump writes about this often. And what I'm yelling to the rooftops is that we don't want this to happen in all 50 states. My story can very well be your story and we don't need that, we don't want that, let's do what we need to do in order to restore a row and do even more and try and write in our constitution so that there is no abortion ban in any of the 50 states. Caitlin, thank you so much for sharing this deeply personal story because I think so many people need to understand what is really the face and the journey of those who are just trying to seek medical care, particularly in your circumstances. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. A head, he was a convicted murderer, granted clevency by Trump even though it was not recommended by the Justice Department. Now that man is back in legal trouble and will explain why next. They say opposites attract. That's why the sleep number smart bed is the best bed for couples. You can each choose what's right for you whenever you like. You like a bed that feels firm but they want soft, sleep number does that. You want to sleep cooler while they like to feel warm, sleep number does that too. You have to feel it to believe it. Find the bed that's for both of you, only at a sleep number store. Nine out of ten couples say that they sleep better on a sleep number smart bed. Only sleep number smart bed lets you choose your ideal comfort and support, your sleep number setting. Sleep number smart beds automatically respond and adjust to your movements so that you sleep comfortably all night long. Sleep the summer heat, temperature balancing, bedding, like true temp bedding, is designed to move heat and humidity away so you sleep just right. Can't agree on temperature? The sleep number climate 360 smart bed lets you adjust up to 30 degrees cooler or warmer on either side. So you can be polar opposites in the same bed. Sleep better together. JD power ranks sleep number number one in customer satisfaction with mattresses purchased in store. Now sleep number smart bed starting at $999, prices higher in Alaska and Hawaii. For JD power 2023 award information, visit jdpower.com/awards only at a sleep number store or sleep number dot com. New reporting tonight, a former cricket felon, Jamie Davidson, who was granted clemency in the waning days of the Trump administration sentenced to three months in a domestic violence case in Florida and back in 1993, Davidson was convicted of murder for his role in playing a robbery that led to the death of an undercover police officer in upstate New York. Now Davidson's clemency upset the late police officer's family and according to the New York Times, some White House officials objected to the commutation at the time. I want to bring in the reporter who broke the story, Judd Leggam, he joins me now along with senior law enforcement analyst Andrew McCabe. Thank you both for being here. This is a fascinating story of how it's evolved. What have you learned about where we are right now with this commutation and now this charge? Well there's some additional legal trouble now for Mr. Davidson. He was convicted in May on this trial, on this allegation that he strangled his wife during a domestic dispute in her apartment and is now appealing that conviction. But at the same time, he's running into even more serious trouble in federal court where he could be subject to a violation of his supervised probation and could end up back in jail federal prison for many years. All of that right now is being held at a behence while they pursue this appeal of the state conviction. And this wasn't a pardon, it was a commutation, right Andrew and so people might be scratching their temples as to why this particular person who would be implicated in a crime that occurred against an undercover officer, why would that be somebody that Trump would have given that commutation to? If they're curious about that, they should be. This case is a perfect example of why former President Trump, who was known to have essentially ignored the clemency process, there is an office of the pardon attorney within the Department of Justice, they receive requests for clemency, they do investigations on those people to determine if they're worthy of a pardon or a commutation from the President of the United States. President Trump ignored that office and often just spoke to friends and advisors and celebrities to get recommendations of people who they thought they wanted pardoned. This is a perfect example of why you should not do that. You end up pardoning the wrong person and taking on great risk as a result. You know, I should note that a spokesperson for Trump told CNN, President Trump believes anyone convicted of a crime should spend time behind bars unlike Kamala Harris, he says, who supports a limiting cash bail. As you have articulated though, this was not the normal process of how one initially gets to a president for a commutation, which is a lessening of the sentence as opposed to say a pardon fully. This happened in the waiting hours, I think it was the last day of his presidency, I think it was January 20th, we can imagine what was going on 14 days earlier in that run. But when you look at this case, this necessarily wasn't foreseeable to Trump to be fair that he being involved in another crime, but now that he has been, what impact does that commutation have? Anything? Well, he still has a commutation for that crime. So he was serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole. That maintains, but once you get the commutation, you have a five year period of supervised release, basically the federal version of parole. And that is what is going to be now at issue when this goes back to federal court and he could actually find himself having just been released, spent a couple of decades in jail back in federal prison as a result of this crime. By the way, you mentioned the office of the pardon attorney, Mr. Davidson did actually seek a commutation from the office of the pardon attorney twice and was denied both times. It went right to that in President Trump. How would he have access? I mean, this is the idea of most people think about fairness and a kind of due process. How did he have direct contact with at least access to the president? We don't know exactly, but we do know that his attorney also represented Donald Trump Jr., and his attorney's husband is also very well connected and represented other members of the Trump organization. So that probably got his foot in the door. Elbow rubbing indeed. Andrew, when you think about how often we hear the phrase soft on crime and how often this has been used as political ammunition during campaigns in particular, whether somebody is soft on crime, whether they believe someone should be released, this factor is into it conceivably. Absolutely. I mean, on a kind of an ethical and an effective level, former President Trump now has to bear responsibility for the fact that this convicted narcotics trafficker and cop killer was out on the street because of his judgment and decision to release them, and he now has committed a crime against his partner. And let's be honest, by ignoring the normal process, by ignoring the work of the pardon attorney and taking this on entirely himself, he now has no one else to blame. Or this is the product of a recommendation by the pardon attorney to grant clemency to this person. He'd have a little bit more room to explain, "Hey, this was the recommendation, I followed the recommendation." He can't say that now, this is all on him. It's the lingering why question, Judd and Andrew, thank you both so much. Ahead, it was a big feature at Trump rallies. Well now, a judge says the Trump campaign can't use what you're hearing in the background right now. It's an Isaac Hayes song, and his son joins me next. God bless you all, go out and vote. God bless you all, thank you, thank you. That was how Trump ended his campaign rallies, but not anymore. Today, a federal judge ruled the former president in his campaign, cannot use that song written by Isaac Hayes and David Porter, hold on, I'm coming at rallies. It comes after the estate of the late R&B artists and songwriter and icon, frankly, sought an emergency injunction to stop the Trump campaign from using the song, saying they do not have approval. And attorney for Trump spoke to the media after today's ruling. The campaign doesn't, has no interest in annoying or hurting anyone if the Hayes family feels that it hurts or annoys them, that's why we're not gonna, we're not gonna force the issue. With us now, Isaac Hayes' son, Isaac Hayes III, and his attorney, James L. Walker Jr., so nice to have both of you on this evening. Let me begin with you here, Isaac, because the judge ruled that Trump can no longer use the song, hold on, I'm coming. They denied a motion to force the Trump campaign to take down any previously recorded uses of the song, though. Are you satisfied by this result? I'm absolutely satisfied by this result. We wanted injective relief just based on the fact that Donald Trump was continuing to use the song after we told him not to use the song, and he actually served notice that he was no longer supposed to play the song in his rally, so this is definitely an outcome that I'm pleased about. And why is it so meaningful to you more broadly for this song and your father's legacy not to be used in this way? Well, my father lost the rights to his music a year before I was born. It took us 56 years just to get this copyright back, and we got it back in March of 2022. As soon as we get it back in May, Donald Trump starts using it without our permission at NRA, rally, and Houston moments after the youth holiday mass shooting, so I was definitely not pleased about that. I sent out a tweet about that later. A cease and desist went out, so it's important because we have to fight to get these copyrights back. A lot of artists get taken advantage of, and I want to make sure that people understand how important owning or publishing is for situations like this. I mean, 50 years to lose a copyright, and this work that others were likely profiting on James is a story of far too many artists, particularly of that particular generation and ongoing today. I wonder from your perspective, James, what else are you looking for from the Trump campaign? Because the songs have been played. They've been associated at different points in time. Is it too late to course correct, and what are the next steps? Oh, no. It's not too late. I mean, they try to create a argument today of free speech and also trying to say fair use, but we rejected that as the judge. What's going to happen now, Laura, is we're going to go through some 50 uses that we've seen since June, when they got the letter. We sent the letter BMI sent the letter, which is a music society that collects royalties. We're going to go through these 50 plus uses and determine how much they owe the Hayes family, and if we can't settle it, we'll go on the trial. But I think the move today is, let's figure out how to settle this. Because each instance would be an infringement, essentially, allegedly, and there would be a licensing fee that would have been owed really quickly, though, if you had this license, would you still have the power to be able, or if you had given the license to him or anyone else? Would you still have the power to be able to withhold the ability to perform the song? If you didn't like who wanted to use it, if it was, we're broadly available to have a license? Well, yes, if the way it works is BMI gives you what's called a blanket license, and they have a catalog of songs in this blanket that you can use at your rallies. Isaac Hayes, at Isaac Hayes III, the estate of Isaac Hayes, notified Trump's team. They no longer could use this song. It's a political rally, political exceptions to the blanket license that allows you to pull a certain song out. The difference I want to point out is when you see other artists doing it, say it's Celine Dion, some of the others who have complained, they don't own their copyright. Mr. Hayes Jr. here, excuse me, Mr. Hayes III here was fortunate that he took control of the copyright. He gave the termination notice. So he sets the groundwork for who can use it and who can't use it. Very important point and thank you for explaining how this was actually able to be authorized or not. I mean, Isaac, your father, he wrote this song, but it was the duo Sam and Dave who performed it. Now, Sam Moore, who's one half of Sam and Dave, that has come out in support of Trump using the song and actually suggested in a sworn statement filed with the court by the Trump campaign that he is opposed to what you're doing now. How would you like to respond to him? Well, I understand Mr. Moore has his political views, but for me, this is a non-political situation. This is about the fact that someone was using copyright without our permission. And it was more about the character of the nature of Donald Trump, a person that has been found liable of sexual abuse, and that said a lot of disrespectful things about women, especially black women. And I know for certain, as a brother to seven sisters and my father was a father to seven daughters, he would not approve of Donald Trump using his music to degrade and disrespect women in that fashion. So Sam's comments are fine, but they're not politically motivated. And I have no, you know, no further comment to say anything to Sam. Laura, may I point something out? Go ahead, please. Sam does not own the copyright, and I want your viewers are home to understand a lot of people sing songs, but they don't own the songs. So he can have an opinion about the song and we respect him as the singer and the legend that he is. However, the Hayes family owns the copyright. So they get to determine whether or not Donald Trump or any other politician can use the song at a rally or a fundraiser anywhere else because they own the copyright. And as you know, intellectual property rights, you have to police them. Otherwise, you could risk losing some of the rights that are corresponding to what you have. Isaac Hayes, the third James Walker, Jr. Thank you both so much. Thank you. Thank you. Elon Musk amplifying attacks against Kamala Harris, all with the help of artificial intelligence and appears to violate his own platform as policies. Kara Swisher is here to talk about it next. Elon Musk ruffling feathers again on X. This time, the X CEO reposted an account which included a screenshot amplifying misogynistic content that suggests only "high status males" to run the government. It comes as Musk's attacks on Vice President Harris are growing. Now, on Monday, Musk posted this AI-generated image on a social media platform that depicts Harris or someone who's supposed to look like Harris as a communist, wearing a red uniform complete with a hammer and sickle on her hat. And that fake, and I do mean fake image and false statement depicting Harris as a communist, the post has been viewed nearly 70 million times. Musk's post suggesting women shouldn't take part in democracy and had been viewed more than 19 million times. X did not respond to a CNN request for comment. With us now, CNN contributor Kara Swisher, also the host of the On and Pivot Podcasts. Kara, so good to have you. First of all, I mean, where do I begin? How about the sexist facts? This one at this point in time, I mean, this is the type of thing that's used in the dark corners of message board that's been amplified by his 196 million followers. I don't want you to try to get into his head, but I do. Why does he want to tell people these statements? I think he's he's he's he's eugenics, I mean, it's a version of eugenics that he was pushing, right? And that that men are more superior than women, presumably all kinds of weird stuff around DNA and stuff, genetics, it's strange and that it's it's so old school, but it, you know, he's he's managed to amplify it in a really horrific way. And the way he does it is say things like interesting, interesting observation and things like that. But it's just pushing eugenics, which is, you know, it's it's it's repulsive. And I don't think he cares because he wants attention, a voice to the bottom self, which is why he's fighting with almost everyone on the planet at this point. You know, if he were not himself and a user, I mean, there are some guidelines, right? You've got the community that the communist post, there was no community note. There was no fact check. It was obviously a fake picture. It doesn't even really look like her, but they're wanting to look like her. That actually violates the company's guidelines, not that it matters if you're Elon Musk, apparently. No, it doesn't matter. He can do anything he wants on his platforms or changes opinions like he's doing and, you know, attacking Brazil and then giving into India or Turkey. It just depends on his whims. And that's where we are at this point is whatever comes into his at all head at this moment at any time. Then he just tweets it and he has so many followers and, you know, and he games the system. And a lot of reporters have written about how he forces his information on others. You know, he's essentially become a, you know, the mega rage machine. I think that's what he's trying to do. Even back in March when I said he was going to back Donald Trump, because he was clear to me. That's where this was headed. You know, they denied it and said they wanted to be neutral, but he has no interest in being neutral. He's using it as a megaphone for all kinds of strange and odd things, including these crazy ideas about certain alpha males being more superior and they should run the government, I guess. Okay. I mean, I have to look at the first of all, I do wonder if it in fact is a strategy or it's reflexive, provocateurs coming together, who knows what it is, but the Washington Post released an article detailing the billions that investors have lost since he took over at the company's valuation went from 316 million to 88 million. So as far as high status males running things, looking at corporations to tell you a lot. Yeah. He's driving it right into a wall constantly. But why? But why? Because he can. It's, you know, rich people buy yachts or they buy a giant communication service. He doesn't care. He doesn't care about it. This is what he wants to do with his money. You know, it's also affecting his other very good businesses, whether it's Tesla or Star Link or other things he's working on, which have a lot of really interesting implications for future Teslas, a groundbreaking auto company, but now it's falling behind as other competitors ramp up as is inevitable. But he certainly doesn't have his eye on the ball there and he's way behind and they're trying to sort of do some hand-waving robo-taxi thing, but Waymo, which is owned by Google is way ahead of him, way ahead of him and others are catching up with Tesla and they're losing market share all over the place. I mean, this is just a rich man's folly and we've seen this before, of course, in history, but it's a real, it's really something to see, but he's hoping to gain power through it. He might do it. It's a high-risk, high-reward strategy, I assume. I mean, it's one thing if a rich man is trying to build his own ships in a glass bottle. This has consequences for everyone else, right? And thinking about that, which I've no idea how one puts a ship in a bottle, but I'll just digress it in a different conversation. Okay. But there wasn't an update today, by the way, Cara, on Brazil's ban of Axity, you mentioned Starlink satellite-based Internet, Saraswetter, also owned by Musk is backtracking because it will now comply with a Brazilian Supreme Court order to block Ax. Is that surprising? No, because he was, you know, he's a bully. So he bullies and he didn't win and he thought, I suppose, the Supreme Court wouldn't back this judge. He's been attacking relentlessly. You know, these are the rules of Brazil and he's got to follow the laws of Brazil. He's not immune from laws and so they've just told him, forget it, you know, and he has to comply because what they do is they, it would affect the business there and ground stations that they actually have in Brazil and if you want to, if you want to operate in Brazil, you operate by their rules and these are their rules. And, you know, some of them, some people think they're too much, but it's their country and they don't, they are very worried about misinformation there as are many countries. And so there are lots of people, including the Telegram CEO in France, you know, a lot of tech companies are finally being held accountable for certain behaviors and practices and which is something I've talked about a lot, but now it's happening elsewhere, not in this country, but elsewhere. Well, maybe it'll come on over the pond at some point in time. It's harder here. We do have the first amendment. Just remember that. Yeah. We do, which is a good thing. And then there's congressional work on trying to figure out about that section 230 and what it can really mean and leave it to the bureaucracy to be quite on pace with technology every single time. Cara Swisher. Nice talking to you. Thanks, Laura. Bye. Up next, huge growth in women's sports has many people aiming for a new goal, getting rid of the gender pay gap. One of them is Brandi Chastain, and she joins me next. A tale as old as time, frankly, for women in sports, demand for these athletes is rising, but the pay stays the same. That's the case with the National Women's Soccer League, but some players are now off the field and in the boardrooms, and it is making all the difference. The soccer icon, Brandi Chastain, the co-founder of New Team Bay FC, she's making deals to up the pay for her players, and frankly, it is needed. Earlier in August, the NWSL and the players union did sign a collective bargaining agreement that will bump up minimal salaries over the next six years. But even still, those numbers leave women earning less than the men. In the Bay Area in San Francisco, the median home price is 1.2 million bucks. Compared to other careers in the area, $37,000 is simply not enough to get by. Joining me now, two-time World Cup champ, two-time gold medalist, national soccer, Hall of Famer, Brandi Chastain, Brandi, I see your smile of humility. Save it. We think you're amazing. Don't even try it over here. Thank you for coming. I appreciate it. Talk to me about the deals you're making, glad you're here. Talk to me about the deals you're making, and what you're doing to ensure your players will get a more equal pay. Well, I think what's so spectacular about Bay FC is that we came into this as myself and the three other founders, Ali Wagner, Leslie Osborne, Daniel Slaton, with this idea that our club would be player-centric, that we would lead with the concept that we need to give our players the opportunity to be as great as they can be, and that's not just, can we give them a great training pitch in a wonderful practice facility and a great place to play, but also we need to take care of them as a whole person. What are the things they're interested in off the field? How can we facilitate their interests in, whether that's business, medicine, teaching, whatever it is, but we also have been very strategic in the partnerships that we are building within our team with the likes of Visa. They have historically shown how to lead globally in the pay equity space. They have been a supporter of US Soccer for many, many years, and I'm proud to say that I've been working with them for a long time, and they stood up to say we will only do business with you if you make the space equitable. I think people thought that they were bluffing, and they simply said we'll walk away. To make relationships like that, and to give our players an opportunity to earn more money outside within the rules of the salary cap and what they can maximize, Visa is helping us do that, and for us, that is just honestly the most important thing we can do is we see that we have this deep well of talented, intellect and passion and skill, and there's no reason that we should not be facilitating ways for them to earn more and to do things outside of the playing space that will enhance their lives going forward when they leave our team. I mean, Deloitte is predicting over a billion dollars in revenue for women's sports this year alone. That'd be, by the way, up 300% in 2021, where you've seen successes for women's soccer, for hockey, for basketball, just to name a few. What do you see as the future for women athletes, knowing that this revenue generation has increased 300% really, and yet you still have these lingering issues of the pay gaps? Yeah, this has been an ongoing conversation for decades, and I've been in soccer for five decades now, and we're still having the same conversations, however, we are moving the needle, and what I think we have finally, I think we are tackling systematic or systemic issues within the workspace, and you don't chip away at that in one swing, and so it has been, you know, I look at our U.S. women's national team, I look at the national team that helped sign that pay equity relationship with U.S. soccer, the Megan Rapinos, and you know, that is so critical, we are moving in the right direction, and we are making that change, and we see this uptick, and you said it, you know, we have Sydney, Simone, Anna Suni, Sophia, Alyssa, Lindsay, in the Olympics, and in, you know, playing in women's professional sports that are truly making an impact, and I think what we've seen in women's soccer specifically is now there's this interest because we see that the business works, and the business is going to lead the way, and before it may have been seen as like, oh, we love women sports, it's a charity, it's not a charity, it is a business that we have sponsors, the media rights, and things are changing, and we are very proud, and as a BFC co-founder, I am proud about what it is that we are doing for our players on a daily basis. So important to think about, you've got to mention unbelievably talented players as well, thank you so much Brandy Chassan, I'm glad to see you in the boardroom. Yeah, thank you so much, and let's go BFC. There you go, well, thank you, and thank you all for watching Anderson Cooper 360 starts right now. (upbeat music)
