US-Iran Ceasefire Hanging by a Thread

Summary

Podcast Summary: "US-Iran Ceasefire Hanging by a Thread"

Podcast: Amanpour (CNN Intl.)
Host: Bianna Golodryga (in for Christiane Amanpour)
Date: May 26, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode tackles three fast-evolving global crises:

1. The precarious US-Iran ceasefire after new American strikes near the Strait of Hormuz
2. Moscow’s escalation in Ukraine and the role of advanced drone warfare
3. The alarming Ebola outbreak in the DRC and its global humanitarian implications
   It closes with a detailed exploration of the US national debt crisis.

---

1. US-Iran Ceasefire: On the Brink

Key Segment: [00:51 – 11:47]
Guest: Beth Sanner (Former US Deputy Director of National Intelligence)

Main Discussion Points

• Recent Escalations

  • US strikes on Iranian missile and naval assets near the Strait of Hormuz in "self-defense," just after diplomatic talks in Doha ([01:01], Bianna)
  • Iran responds by downing a US drone ([02:59], Beth Sanner)
  • Iranian Supreme Leader warns US bases are now unsafe throughout the region.

• Fragile Diplomacy

  • Talks in Qatar move toward a potential memorandum of understanding (MOU) on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions ([01:21], Bianna)
  • Hardline divisions in Tehran: even conservative negotiators slam the proposal as surrender ([04:05], Bianna)
  • US domestic pushback: GOP hawks equate the MOU to "worse than JCPOA" ([06:18], Bianna), highlighting deep divisions.
  • Quote: “The fact that you have IRGC and related extreme hardliners coming out against that, it poses a huge problem.” ([04:34], Beth Sanner)
  • The White House calls a Camp David summit to strategize regional policy ([06:18], Bianna/Beth)

• Deal Dynamics: The 'No Dust, No Dollars' Approach

  • US seeks zero highly-enriched uranium in Iran ("no dust") and no sanctions relief ("no dollars") at first ([06:18], Bianna)
  • Intense Republican criticism: "How does that make sense at all?" ([07:08], Senator Thom Tillis, GOP)
  • Sanner notes ambiguity and postponing tough issues ("kicking the can") might be the only path forward for now ([07:52], Beth Sanner)
  • “You have to be less clear in the MoU in order to thread the needle. But that's still going to be tough.” ([07:52], Beth Sanner)

• Regional Complexity: The Lebanon/Hezbollah Factor

  • Israelis say they were blindsided by MOU reports, fear constraints against Hezbollah ([08:44], Bianna)
  • Netanyahu insists war on Hezbollah excluded from any US-Iran deal, leveraging his reputation for ‘security’ amid election season ([09:59], Sanner)
  • “North of Israel is uninhabitable right now, and we're seeing this expansion of the war, and they're doing this, I think, to try to get as much done as possible in case the United States forces them to stop.” ([09:59], Sanner)
  • Trump publicly asserts Netanyahu “will do what I tell him” — humiliating for the Israeli PM ([09:59], Sanner)

---

2. Russia-Ukraine Escalation & Drones: The New Fronts

Key Segment: [11:47 – 19:44]
Guests/Correspondents:

• Beth Sanner (analysis)
• Nick Paton Walsh (field report, Ukraine frontline)

Main Discussion Points

• Moscow’s Systematic Attacks on Kyiv

  • "Over the weekend, Moscow unleashed one of its largest bombardments on Kyiv: 90 missiles, 600 drones..." ([11:47], Bianna)
  • Putin orders foreign diplomats to leave Kyiv, raising concerns about further escalation ([12:53], Sanner)

• Interlocked Theaters: Iran & Russia

  • Iranian-made Shahed drones used for Russian attacks in Ukraine ([14:40], Bianna)
  • Russia shares anti-jamming tech with Iran operating in the Gulf, revealing ties between conflict zones ([15:00], Sanner)
  • Sanner: "You cannot isolate one regional conflict from another. They are all connected." ([15:00], Sanner)

• Ukraine’s Technological Leap in Drones

  • Nick Paton Walsh reports embedded with a Ukrainian deep-strike drone team launching 200 attack drones into Russia ([16:33], Walsh)
  • Massive scale, with new AI-driven target coordination and decoys to overwhelm Russian air defenses ([18:36], Walsh)
  • "The sheer number overwhelming, it seems, much of Russia's air defenses and causing persistent embarrassment to the Kremlin." ([16:33], Walsh)
  • “Ukraine had no cards, but now they've built themselves a new deck.” ([16:33], Nick Paton Walsh)
  • Drones now range deep into Russian territory, marking a reversal from the early days of the war.

---

3. Ebola Outbreak in Democratic Republic of Congo

Key Segment: [21:23 – 37:53]
Guests:

• Dr. Nahid Bedelia (Infectious diseases expert)
• Heather Kerr (Humanitarian worker, Kinshasa)

Main Discussion Points

• Scale and Gravity

  • WHO declares a global health emergency; 220+ deaths, over 1,000 suspected cases, many health clinics under attack ([21:23], Bianna)
  • Ebola is not a high pandemic risk (like COVID), but represents a huge regional threat ([22:27], Dr. Bedelia)

• Complex Field Conditions

  • The outbreak is worsened by community mistrust, attacks on treatment centers, misinformation, and a severe lack of PPE ([25:19], Kerr).
  • “This outbreak started probably in January…this particular strain of Ebola has been out there for really quite a few weeks. So we're very worried on the ground, and so is the population.” ([25:19], Heather Kerr)
  • Over a million displaced people in the outbreak zone—containing Ebola in a conflict area is vastly more difficult ([27:09], Heather Kerr)

• Global Response Challenges

  • US withdrawal from the WHO (member state dues unpaid) and USAID cuts hamper coordination and resource delivery ([29:45], Dr. Bedelia)
  • Criticism of WHO for slow response may be misdirected—primary responsibility lies with affected countries ([29:45], Bedelia)
  • Distribution of essential PPE and treatments is complicated by border closures, logistical challenges ([27:36], Kerr)
  • “This is a very labor-intensive disease for healthcare workers…they have to balance their own safety against the survival of their patients.” ([29:45], Dr. Bedelia)

• Deadliness and Novelty of the Outbreak

  • The new Bundibugyo strain has limited clinical precedent, fewer vaccines, and treatment options ([33:11], Bedelia).
  • Ebola’s lethality varies greatly based on speed and quality of care (50–60% mortality in African treatment units, <20% with excellent Western care) ([34:43], Bedelia).
  • “Huge part of Ebola mortality is tied to good care but also access to therapeutics.” ([34:43], Dr. Bedelia)

• Appeal for Global Support

  • Heather Kerr: "Time is of the essence...this outbreak needs funding. In 2018, the money came in quickly, but that isn't the case...definitely asking for funding for this response." ([36:30], Heather Kerr)

---

4. America’s Ballooning National Debt: Fiscal Crisis on the Horizon

Key Segment: [38:54 – 53:38]
Guest: Maya MacGuineas (President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget)
Host: Walter Isaacson

Main Discussion Points

• Debt Milestone & Market Complacency

  • US national debt hits $39 trillion, now 100% of GDP; only happened previously post-WWII and briefly during COVID ([39:30], MacGuineas)
  • Market reaction remains muted, as markets prioritize short-term gains ([40:37], MacGuineas)

• Political Dysfunction

  • Both Republicans and Democrats are now “competing to see who can give away more” (spending/tax cuts) to win elections, fueling the deficit ([43:10], MacGuineas)
  • "Now both parties prefer tax cuts...they both like tax cuts and spending, new spending programs, and promises not to fix the very things we need to fix." ([43:21], MacGuineas)

• Policy Solutions—Well-Known, Politically Difficult

  • Social Security will be insolvent in less than seven years; inaction triggers automatic 24% benefit cuts ([45:10], MacGuineas)
  • Reforms needed: raise retirement age, means testing, lift payroll tax cap, cut defense waste, fix healthcare inefficiency, close tax loopholes ([45:10 – 47:15], MacGuineas)
  • “Anybody who talks about no new taxes isn't looking at the numbers.” ([46:01], MacGuineas)

• Likely Triggers for Change: Crisis or Youth Pressure

  • Rising interest rates, inflation, foreign divestment could force action ([49:00], MacGuineas)
  • Young Americans may increasingly demand fiscal reform ([50:31], MacGuineas)
  • “We are spending a trillion dollars on interest payments a year... larger than national defense." ([51:55], MacGuineas)

• Fiscal Inflexibility Imperils US Power

  • Interest now among fastest-growing federal spending categories; crowds out investment in the future and constrains America’s global leadership ([51:55], MacGuineas)
  • “There has been a study that showed no country ever remained a superpower when it was spending more on interest payments than national defense.” ([51:55], MacGuineas)

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• On US-Iran Stalemate:
  “The fact that you have IRGC and related extreme hardliners coming out against that, it poses a huge problem.”
  – Beth Sanner ([04:34])

• On Regional Interconnectedness:
  “You cannot isolate one regional conflict from another. They are all connected.”
  – Beth Sanner ([15:00])

• On Ukraine’s Drone Leap:
  “Ukraine had no cards, but now they've built themselves a new deck.”
  – Nick Paton Walsh ([16:33])

• On the Ebola Response:
  “…Time is of the essence for this particular outbreak; the speed of it is really frightening.”
  – Heather Kerr ([36:30])

• On US Debt Politics:
  “Now both parties prefer tax cuts… and promises not to fix the very things we need to fix. …There are none of the adults in the room.”
  – Maya MacGuineas ([43:21])

• On Interest Crowding Out Priorities:
  “Interest payments are larger than national defense…It’s more than we spend at the federal level on all spending for children. ...It's catching up with us in these interest payments that are squeezing out all the other important priorities of the budget.”
  – Maya MacGuineas ([51:55])

---

Timestamps for Major Segments

• US-Iran & Regional Diplomacy: [00:51] – [11:47]
• Moscow Strikes & Ukraine’s Drone War: [11:47] – [19:44]
• Ebola Outbreak in DRC: [21:23] – [37:53]
• US National Debt Crisis: [38:54] – [53:38]

---

Tone & Takeaway

The episode maintains a sober, urgent, and analytical tone—where expert guests surface the complexity and fragility of each crisis. There’s a strong sense of interconnectedness: whether it’s the interwoven nature of modern conflicts or the global impact of resource and policy failures. The call to action is persistent—underscoring the necessity of coherent policy, honest leadership, swift medical support, and public engagement.

---

For listeners seeking a comprehensive, articulate briefing on simultaneous global security, humanitarian, and financial challenges—this episode is both essential and deeply informative.

Transcript

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Hello, everyone, and welcome to Amanpour. Here's what's coming up. Is the ceasefire at risk as the US Strikes Iran near the Strait of Hormuz? Is the region moving toward another round of escalation? Then Russia threatens new systematic strikes on Kyiv. We have rare access to Ukraine's drone war, taking the fight deep inside Russia.

[Walter Isaacson]

Plus, the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic

[Maya McGinnis]

Republic of the Congo is spreading rapidly.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

An outbreak outpacing the response with more than 200 suspected dead in Central Africa. I speak to Dr. Nakid Badilla, an expert on infectious diseases and humanitarian worker Heather Kerr on the ground in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

[Walter Isaacson]

Also ahead, we are hitting a lot of fiscal records when it comes to our debt, and none of them are good.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

America's national debt now exceeds the size of its entire economy. Walter Isaacson speaks to Maya McGinnis, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, about how to stop the crisis from spiraling out of control. Welcome to the program, Bianna. Everyone, I'm Bianna Golodrigo, New York, sitting in for Christiane Amanpour. The fragile ceasefire between Iran and the United States is facing a new test. Iran's Revolutionary Guard is warning that it has a legitimate right to respond after US Forces carried out what they called self defense strikes on Iranian missile launch sites and boats around the Strait of Hormuz. The strikes came just hours after Iranian negotiators sat down with Qatari mediators in Doha as Washington and Tehran pushed toward a possible memorandum of understanding. But major sticking points remain, including the future of Iran's nuclear program and sanctions relief. And the regional situation is growing even more volatile. Israel has launched fresh strikes in Lebanon, signaling a more aggressive posture against Hezbollah, as the Trump administration indicates continued support. So where does this leave diplomacy and how close is the region to another escalation? Joining me now is Beth Sanner, a former US Deputy Director of National Intelligence. Beth, it's good to see you as always. So we have the US Conducting what CENTCOM calls defensive strikes in southern Iran. Diplomats just finished up meeting. Meantime in Qatar. How sustainable is this escalate to de escalate posture that the United States appears to have taken in the last 24 hours, especially when you have the supreme leader of Iran threatening that US Bases are no longer safe throughout the region?

[Beth Sanner]

Yeah, I don't know if I would really say what happened over the last 24 hours and escalate to de escalate? I don't think we've quite seen that yet. I mean, my understanding of what happened is that the US Saw Iran, IRGC boats that were about to be emplacing mines in the strait, additional mines in the strait. The United States struck them, and then this tit for tat ensued in which we lost probably a $30 million drone, at least one of those. And that seems to have died down now. But the question is, what's next, as you say, does this derail the talks? The chief negotiator, the head of Parliament, Golubov, is now back in Iran from Doha. And, you know, the question is, is Iran going to do more than just shoot down a drone? Because they do have the capability to retaliate more. So this was a risk that the United States took. In fact, I think that we do need to prevent Iran from solidifying its control over the strait, which adding mines would do.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

You mentioned Mohammed Gallubouf returning back to Iran from Qatar. It's reported that a conservative lawmaker in Iran's own negotiating team has slammed this emerging proposal as a pure surrender of the control over the Strait of Hormuz. So if Tehran's hardliners are now already sort of revolt, testing the framework of this deal, how stable is any agreement that the sides can reach in Qatar?

[Beth Sanner]

Yeah, exactly. So I do think that, I mean, first Mohammed Gallobaaf is a hardliner. It just happens to be that there are people who are even more hardline in Iran, as you point out. And I think that this is one of the problems that we have when looking at this memorandum of understanding. So not even like at the deal, but just kind of like, what are the terms that we will be negotiating in the next period? And the fact that you have IRGC and related extreme hardliners coming out against that, it poses a huge problem. And I think that this is the problem, you know, really that came about when President Trump started to put this deal, you know, over the weekend on Friday came out with, you know, we're negotiating, we're getting close. And that has opened up a whole can of worms. And part of what's happened is the reaction from the more hawkish parts of the Republican Party saying that the United States is actually surrendering or capitulating too much, is forcing the United States to double down more on terms that, of course, Iran can't accept. So by putting this all out there, we're actually in a, I think, probably a more delicate and more difficult situation than we were when everybody was hopeful. So forget the oil markets right now. Reality is, is that this is a very tenuous period. And I think this is why we're seeing this Camp David talk that has been announced by the White House that Cabinet members will come together and talk about this and other things going on.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Right. Because over the weekend, the administration's approach appeared to be, you know, no dust, which is the nuclear material, the highly enriched material, and no dollars. So pushing for a phase deal that starts there. And you mentioned the revolt coming immediately from members of the President's own party. You had Lindsey Graham, Roger Wicker, Ted Cruz, all calling this a major mistake and invoking what is kryptonite to President Trump, and that is comparing it to the JCPOA saying that this deal would even be worse and the JCPOA deal that President Obama signed and that President Trump ran against and dismantled. I'd like to play sound from Senator Thom Tillis, another Republican who spoke out vociferously over the weekend against this proposed MOU.

[Maya McGinnis]

Look, we were told about 11 weeks ago by Hegseth and the Department of Defense that they had obliterated Iran's defenses and it was just a matter of time before we had the nuclear material. Now we're talking about a posture where we may accept the nuclear materiel remaining in Iran. How does that make sense at all?

[Bianna Golodrigo]

So given all of that and the pressure internally that the President is facing, does he have any off ramp that's available to him that you think would accommodate some of the concerns from Republicans, while also a deal that the Iranians would, at least on face value, agree to as well?

[Beth Sanner]

Yeah, I think that the only option here is probably to be less specific in this MoU about what the terms of the future part of, you know, the phase two, that would talk about the nuclear program. Because right now the United States is kind of on this zero stockpile, that that 440 kilograms of 60% uranium would have to come out or be destroyed. Is what President Trump has said that, you know, maybe it's possible for Iran to agree to that, but then there's still, you know, hundreds and hundreds of kilograms of 20% or lower, and that's going to make people very upset, too. So I think you have to be less clear in the MoU in order to thread the needle. But that's still going to be tough.

[Heather Kerr]

Right?

[Bianna Golodrigo]

And from Iran's perspective, and given what we've seen with the previous US Administrations that have been trying to negotiate and make clear that a nuclear Iran is not acceptable for Iran, it really does come down to kicking the can down the road. So if they can agree to anything that gets them past 20, 29 in the next election here in the U.S. perhaps they would take that as a win. I do want to ask, though, another component here, and that is Lebanon, because it does appear from reporting that the Israelis were blindsided and very unhappy with reports of this MOU as it was presented over the weekend. And Prime Minister Netanyahu, who is facing reelection in just a couple of months, came out publicly and stated that the war against Hezbollah would not be included in any part of this deal in terms of a ceasefire, and that he had the support of the president backing on that front. We see that they've expanded their operation just today north of the litany against Hezbollah. Just talk about the dynamics there, because Iran at the same time is saying that, no, a ceasefire has to be part of any deal.

[Beth Sanner]

Right. So I think that there are three components. I'm glad that you raised Lebanon. So we're talking about the degree of the nuclear program that's included. We're talking about how much sanctions relief or the release of unfrozen, you know, when to unfreeze and how much to unfreeze of Iranian assets, so money and sequencing. And then the third part of this that is sticking points, is whether and how much to include the Lebanese war. And President Trump put Netanyahu in a very difficult position because he basically agreed to include Lebanon. As, you know, the Iran front and the Lebanon front would both stop without prior notification or to discussion with Netanyahu. Then he had a call, told him it's on the list. Netanyahu has come back and said, well, you know, the United States will let us defend ourselves. But what we're seeing right now is Netanyahu trying to kind of frame this in a way that doesn't look so bad, because, Remember, Netanyahu is Mr. Security. This is what he's running on. And the north of Israel is uninhabitable right now, and we're seeing this expansion of the war, and they're doing this, I think, to try to get as much done as possible in case the United States forces them to stop. And at the same time, President Trump is humiliating Netanyahu by saying publicly he, Netanyahu will do what I tell him. So this is like a nightmare for Netanyahu on many fronts. If the nuclear program isn't solved in Iran, his entire raison d' etre for how he has talked about his role in protecting Israel would be off the table.

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

And.

[Beth Sanner]

And then this continuing threat from Hezbollah not being able to deal with this. And what the Israelis worry about. Yeah, go ahead.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

No, I was just going to say, not to mention that he's also campaigned on being the closest prime minister ever to a U.S. administration. And it was. Yeah. And it was quite surprising then to hear President Trump turn and tell all of these Gulf and Arab countries and their leaders that as part of any deal, they'd all have to join the Abraham Accords. Oh, and including Iran as well. And no surprise, this was all met with mut silence by those countries. But, Beth, while we have you, I do want to ask you about the other hot war happening in Europe, because there is a seeming connection, and that is between Russia and Iran. And over the weekend, Moscow unleashed one of its largest bombardments on Kyiv, some 90 missiles, 600 drones, and also another strike using their Oreshkin hypersonic missile. President Putin even went further, telling diplomats, foreign diplomats, to leave. Is this psychological warfare being played by the former KGB agent, or do you think this is a different front that we are now seeing?

[Beth Sanner]

Yeah, we will have to see whether this is indeed a different front. But I think there are several things going on here. You know, number one, Putin has a problem. He has a problem at home because elites are starting to question what is this all about and when is it going to end? And the fact that Ukraine has been brought the war to Russia front and center, the humiliation of the May 9 parade looking like a joke and having to downgrade it because of the threat of Ukrainian missiles. Putin is doing this for a domestic audience as well. Then, I think this threat against European diplomats and the United States, all foreign diplomats. But you had Foreign Minister Lavrov call Rubio, and Rubio reported on this publicly and said, you know, yeah, he said all diplomats are at risk here, but there's no sign that the United States and especially the EU will be pulling out diplomats. So that's good for now. But I think the goal here is to put pressure on the United States, more so than Europe, but also Europe, to get Ukraine to stop. To get Ukraine to stop attacking Russia because it is hurting. So we're going to have to see how this goes forward. But they are out of air defenses, and we are really low on air defenses. And Putin knows this. And the Orisnik missile is not a precision strike missile. It is a missile of terror. It is a missile of signaling because of the nuclear potential, which, of course, is not being played here. But multiple warheads and multiple submunitions, it is a way of spreading terror, and that's what they're doing.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

And connecting these two in the last moment here, we're seeing Iranian shahed drones being used in Ukraine now for a number of years. Russian anti jamming technology is being used in the Gulf. Do you have faith that the US Administration right now has a coherent policy in addressing those continued threats?

[Beth Sanner]

Well, I don't think that we. I think that this administration is struggling on how to deal with the Russian involvement in the Gulf. Let's not forget that Russia provided the means to help Iran kill Americans. And we're not talking about that. Right. We're talking about it with China. President Trump raised that with Xi. But where is the pressure on Russia about that right now? We still have not firmly put the oil and gas sanctions back on. They're kind of on, but we should see that. But what are we doing about this? And I think that these things are a disconnect and it shows you you cannot isolate one regional conflict from another. They are all connected.

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

Yeah.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

In the meantime, Ukraine continues to pound Russia's energy sector by those long range drones as well. Beth Santer, great to have you on. Thank you so much. Your analysis, really appreciate it.

[Beth Sanner]

Thanks, Biana.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Well, Russia is threatening a new wave of strikes on Kyiv after this week's heavy and deadly bombardment. Moscow is also warning foreign nationals, as we noted, including diplomats and international organizations, to leave Ukraine's capital as soon as possible. But a US State Department spokesperson said there are no changes to US Embassy operations as Russia refuses to let up. Ukraine continues to adapt. Correspondent Nick Payton Walsh filed this report from eastern Ukraine looking at the deep strike drone unit.

[Nick Payton Walsh]

President Trump once said Ukraine had no cards, but now they've built themselves a new deck. We're now with perhaps Russia's most keenly sought target in the war, a deep strike Ukrainian drone unit launching this night a wave of 200 attack drones into Russia. The issue here is the scale. Potentially 20 drones being launched just from here and three or four other locations around here also involved in tonight's attack. The sheer number overwhelming, it seems, much of Russia's air defenses and causing persistent embarrassment to the Kremlin, working fast in silence, knowing an error with the fuel or explosives or launch could kill them all. They are a key target for the Russian Shahid drones flying overhead, constantly interrupting their work, which is going to go on all night. Close to here, Russian strikes have just hit Ukrainian civilians. And in Russian Stavropol, these Ukrainian drones hit the mayor, telling Russians there to stay indoors. In another field, another technological leap is at work. Jet boosters used to get drones to their 120 mph speed in just seconds at their base. One screen is a glimpse of a world order turned on its head. Dozens of Ukrainian drones roaming inside Russia. Code coordinates targets. AI powered, pulsing on the screen faster than your eyes can read. Russia, often seen as the third largest military power preyed upon by a series of laptops.

[Maya McGinnis]

It's our biggest advantage and why it's

[Walter Isaacson]

so hard for Russia to destroy this program.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Because we split up, we don't have any common centers and we use dozens of places. Also, this software gives us a chance to work with thousands of UAVs.

[Nick Payton Walsh]

The Luty drone can take a huge payload over 1200 miles. There are decoys and a jet powered drone they say seems to appear like a rocket on Russian radar.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Those are decoys. We send hundreds of them. Some are empty, some with a payload. The payload is small, but it's enough to destroy air defense systems.

[Nick Payton Walsh]

It is dizzying, the speed of evolution, adaptation, ingenuity. Ukraine 2 years ago begging for old American missiles to hit just inside Russia's borders. But now it builds itself and launches so many drones, often as deep as Russian Siberia. Even Kremlin loyalists are questioning Putin's endgame. Now the west wants to learn from what Ukraine had to do to survive when it didn't get the help it needed. Each leap advantage lasts just months before the other side catches up. Ukraine is ahead for now, but only because it's learned it'll likely be on its own when it's not. Nick Peyton Walsh, cnn, Eastern Ukraine.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Later in the program, health officials try to contain the Ebola outbreak. With more than 200 suspected dead, health clinics attacked and fears growing that the crisis could spiral. That's a scientist race for an effective treatment.

[Heather Kerr]

Foreign

[Walter Isaacson]

source you can trust for weather

[Maya McGinnis]

forecasts should be easy, right? This is CNN meteorologist Derek Van Dam, thrilled to introduce the new CNN weather app. Check your daily forecast to plan your day, the weekly forecast to see what's

[Walter Isaacson]

on the way and prepare for any

[Maya McGinnis]

major storm with our robust real time video coverage. The app is stunning. And if you're a weather nerd like me, you'll love our in depth stories

[Walter Isaacson]

and the photo of the day.

[Maya McGinnis]

Download the CNN weather app on iOS today.

[Walter Isaacson]

I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta, host of the Chasing Life podcast.

[Maya McGinnis]

When the Wolverines asked me to deliver the 2026 commencement address to the medical school, I was honored and I jumped at the chance.

[Walter Isaacson]

We have a special episode because I'd

[Maya McGinnis]

like to share that speech with you all. To all the recent grads, whether it's

[Walter Isaacson]

high school or college or maybe, you know, Someone studying hard to get in

[Maya McGinnis]

or just get through medical school. I want to share a few lessons that I learned along. Even more than 30 years later.

[Walter Isaacson]

I never take for granted that the

[Maya McGinnis]

education afforded me the chance to say I'm Dr. Sanjay Gupta and this is

[Walter Isaacson]

Chasing Life Streaming now, wherever you get your podcasts.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

The head of the World Health Organization is traveling today to the Democratic Republic of Congo, the epicenter of the fast moving Ebola outbreak. So far, at least 220 people are now suspected to have died from Ebola. The disease can spread through bodily fluids. In Ituri Province, the heart of the outbreak, protesters are demanding the release of bodies for burial and have attacked healthcare facilities, burning tents and forcing patients to flee. Joining me now is Dr. Nahid Badilla, an expert on infectious diseases, and Heather Kerr, a humanitarian worker on the ground in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Thank you both for joining us. Dr. Bedelia, let me start with you because the head of the WHO just declared this global emergency. As noted, some 220 now believed to have died from Ebola and hundreds of suspected or thousand suspected cases at this point. But they say this is not the next COVID 19. How alarmed should the global community be at this point?

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

Yeah, Biana, dissimilar to COVID 19. As you said, Ebola virus disease and all the species related to it like Bundesbugio, which is causing the current outbreak, are all transmitted through bloodborne pathogen, close contacts and as healthcare workers and family members taking care of these patients that are at highest risk. I actually was an Ebola responder in West Africa and worked quite a few years in Uganda at the border of drc, again around viral hemorrhagic fevers. The biggest concern is actually for the communities that are affected because when you talk about 200 dead, you're talking about over 1,000 suspected, many of whom present similar to other infectious diseases like malaria or cholera. And so these communities and the healthcare workers there have to sort out which of these patients may end up being Ebola positive and protect themselves, the healthcare workers and their clinics, of course.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

So then, Dr. Bedelia, if the global pandemic risk is low, just explain to us why it is still so important that the global community still be focused and that governments in particular do as much as they can to try to contain this outbreak. Yeah.

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

Bianna, as of yesterday already, Jean Kuceya, the Director of Africa CDC responded by saying that 10 additional African countries are at high risk. So let me start by saying that even though it's not a pandemic risk, Regionally, this is a huge global health security concern because we're already behind. By the time this outbreak was discovered, it is thought to have potentially started maybe even at the end of March, if not earlier than that. That means that we're just discovering how far the outbreak is currently spread. So regionally, it is the impact that it has been on DRC's neighbor. Globally, the concern is that, yes, we may see sporadic cases that may end up being suspect cases like Italy saw yesterday, two returning aid workers. The issue is not so much that we can't handle Ebola virus disease, particularly in health care systems that are well to do. The issue is that the destabilization that comes from a large regional epidemic has global implications, has implications on conflict, has implications on all of our safety. If we miss another signal that may arise in that. And then, may I just say, as someone who's taking care of hundreds of Ebola patients, is it not enough to care that these communities are suffering and losing entire families?

[Bianna Golodrigo]

No doubt it is something we should all be focused on and should care about, and that is one of the reasons why. Heather, you're in Kinshasa now. We have reported overcrowded camps, burned out treatment facilities, rampant misinformation. Just tell us what you're seeing right now.

[Heather Kerr]

Well, the situation on the ground in Ituri is really very, very serious, as the doctor said. I mean, there's so many cases, and we're running out of time. I really feel that we need. We need to catch up because this. I mean, this outbreak started probably in January. We heard that today that the actual index case presented in a health center in Para back at the end of January, and he died at the end of February. So this means this particular strain of Ebola has been out there for really quite a few. For many, many weeks. So we don't really know what the spread is. So we're very worried on the ground, and so is the population. As I'm sure you know, treatment units will tend to be used. Treatment units have been set on fire. There's such a lot of mistrust in the community. And this, I feel, is where we all really have to start. We have to start by building the trust with the community and have the health and the medical response going alongside. And we saw this in the 2018 outbreak in Beni. And we found that once we built the trust of the community and the community leaders were the people who were working with their communities, telling them what Ebola is and where they need to present, then things started to go better. So we really need to make these things go hand in hand. But yeah, it's really, we really feel that things are spiraling out of control.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

And one thing that I continue to hear from those aid workers and organizations on the ground, there is concern about the lack of ppp, basic ppp, and just a lack of infrastructure as a whole. So, Heather, let me ask you, does the DRC have enough resources at this point, from what you're seeing, to treat the growing number of cases?

[Heather Kerr]

Well, there is a lack of ppe. I mean, quite a lot has been has been sent in and it's one of the things that we've done. We've distributed some PPE to government health workers. But, you know, so much more is needed. The response plan's been developed by the Ministry of Health and who, and it's a very ambitious plan and it requires a lot of funding. I mean, the budget for three months is 230 million. And that's got to come from somewhere. There's many of us responders on the ground. We've got our accreditation, we're ready to respond. But we a need to get the equipment in. And it's becoming harder because the borders all around us are closing. So the only flights in from Kinshasa to Bunya, UN flights which are still going, but we need more of them so that we can get people in, but also so that we can get the AID in. Yeah. So it's a very tricky situation and this is taking place in a conflict zone where there are many displaced people. There are over a million displaced people in Ituri. So very complex situation.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Yeah. And Dr. Badilli, I saw you nodding your head when I mentioned ppe. It's an acronym we became quite familiar with when covering Covid. You were one of the many experts that we had on our air talking about that pandemic. I do want to get you to respond to something that Heather just mentioned about the criticism directed at the WHO by the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, saying that they were late to respond and not tracking this latest outbreak fast enough. The US Withdre from the WHO as we know, just talk about the concern that you may have or may not have. I don't know. I don't want to put words in your mouth about that kind of statement and about the US not being part of the who. What does that mean in terms of reality on the ground in treating these types of outbreaks without the U.S. yeah.

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

Bianna, let me start by saying who doesn't do on the ground surveillance it is the countries and the regions themselves that do that. And then they coordinate, they inform the WHO and then the WHO sends in, which is a member state organization where member states pay dues. As you remember, as you mentioned, the United States pulled out of the WHO and left our member state bill unpaid. So we are, we have actually withdrawn our contributions in this member state organization which is what is supposed to help in these kinds of emergency situations. The other way, as you mentioned, that our lack of presence in this area because of the dismantling of USAID has contributed is that many of the organizations that are part of this response would have USAID funding, would have additional presence on the ground, as would our own agencies, which would make the coordination and operation of the response faster. I do want to comment on the PPE side. I mean I worked as a clinician in ETU's Ebola treatment unit for a very long time. This is a very labor intensive disease for healthcare workers to take care of. Many of these patients present, like cholera patients, they're completely dehydrated and it requires a lot of oral rehydration of intravenous fluid. And healthcare workers have to balance their own safety against the survival of their patients. And think about the, if you step back, if everybody who presents with Abella early on may look like malaria, you need that ppe. Not just need to use, but you need them in every clinic where there's tons of potential infectious diseases cases presenting. And that's what I would imagine the healthcare workers right now are facing in drc.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Heather, a new study in journal Science correlates the recent USAID cuts with the double digit spike that we've seen in violence across Africa. You're dealing with M23 rebels now in the middle of a hot zone. Is it even possible to try to contain an outbreak like this when you've got an active war zone around you?

[Heather Kerr]

Well, it's, it's, it makes it much, much, much, much harder and that be one of the things that we'd be calling for was, would really be, you know, to stop any, any military operations. But that's very hard to make happen. And as I say, you've also got many, many people displaced and on the move. And people being on the move when you've got an Ebola outbreak is extremely dangerous. And that's how it gets to spread to different provinces. So I mean it has actually spread all the way to South Kivu, which is a long way from Ituri. And we're seeing more health zones affected in North Kivu. But you can't stop people moving around. So, yeah, in. In a conflict area, having Ebola makes it far harder to contain than it would in an area where there is no conflict.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Yeah, that is understandable and speaks for itself. I do. Dr. Abdeli, I want to get to this specific outbreak. This is the DRC's 17th Ebola outbreak, I believe the third largest now on record. Talk about what makes this particular strain fundamentally different than the ones that you've seen previously.

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

So the Bundo Buzier species of Ebola, we've only seen two other prior outbreaks of, which means we have a lot less clinical experience. But also, there hasn't been as much investment made in medical countermeasures like vaccines and treatments. So in the absence of that, you know, presenting early to care is important, and ability to provide good supportive care is important. And what we know currently is that although there are two vaccine candidates that are being moved towards a potential trial, it may take months. And additionally, there are some medical treatments, monoclonal antibodies, as well as an antiviral. At least the monoclonal antibodies may be a little bit quicker, as might be the antiviral. All of that. The whole point will be how do we distribute that? How do we get those trials into place? Again, complicating factors, our remoteness of this outbreak, the conflict, as you mentioned, and the distrust, what for me complicates the entire thing is that we lost time. And if we don't know how big it is. When you have an earthquake, you set up an operating center in one place, where is the epicenter? But if the epicenter, as Heather said, is multiple urban places, multiple rural places, it's not just about the resources. It's about getting them to the places where they're needed.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

And Dr. Bedelia, for viewers who haven't been following this closely, Ebola kills up to 90% of those infected. That is a just a stalking, a shocking statistic. Mechanically. Can you explain to us what makes this particular virus so lethal?

[Dr. Nahid Bedilla]

Yeah, it's actually after West Africa, we've seen that the mortality of Ebola can be very variable. The average in my Ebola treatment unit in Sierra leone was about 50 to 60%. Huge part of mortality is actually related to how quickly you come to care and how good, even supportive care you receive. So, for example, returning travelers in West Africa, Americans like me, who were brought back, who may have been infected, actually mortality in those patients was less than 20% because they got targeted therapies. And so huge part of Ebola mortality is Tied to good care but also access to therapeutics. What makes it a deadly disease is that it's a one, two punch. Early on it can present like malaria, typhoid, cholera, as I mentioned, where patients have flu like symptoms, may have diarrhea. In later situations, the virus not just attacks your own body's cells, but also revs up your immune system, which can lead to later presentations, including hemorrhagic presentations like, you know, blood in your stool or vomit, etc. It's not like Hollywood patients present like septic shock with some bleeding in their vomiting, etcetera, etcetera.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

I want to end by asking you Heather, because Dr. Bedelia has given us her personal experience with covering past outbreaks there what this is like for you and the message that you would like to send to viewers who are watching this around the world about why they should be alarmed at what more they can do to perhaps press their own elected officials to provide more funding and basic essentials like ppe, as you said, absolutely no.

[Heather Kerr]

Thank you. I've worked in two previous Ebola outbreaks. I've worked in the West Africa outbreak in Sierra Leone and I worked up in Beni in between 2018 and 2020 particular Ebola outbreak. And as country director, when I came this time to drc, I said to myself, I'm sure I won't have to manage another Ebola outbreak or how wrong I was. But I'm glad to have the experience to bring and I've got an experienced team which is really excellent to help on the ground. So as I said earlier, I mean, time is of the essence, essence for this particular outbreak, the speed of it is really frightening. People on the ground are frightened. We are really keen to do a good response. I need to keep my staff safe. That's my number one priority as well as doing a good response. So my ask is this outbreak needs funding in the one in 2018. You know, the money, the money came in quickly, but that isn't the case and I don't think is the case this time. So definitely asking for funding for this response.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Well, Heather Kerr, thank you for all the work that you and your team are doing. Please stay safe. Their safety is paramount. And Dr. Nahid Bedelia, thank you so much for your expertise and all the work that you've done to fight a number of these types of diseases that we've seen over the last few decades. Really appreciate the time. And still to come for us, America's national debt is now bigger than its economy. So what can policymakers do to stop the crisis from spiraling out of control. Mai McGinnis shares her expertise with Walter Isaacson. After the break.

[Walter Isaacson]

Comedian Craig Ferguson is going coast to coast to unpack what it really means

[Maya McGinnis]

to be an American today.

[Nick Payton Walsh]

What could possibly go wrong?

[Walter Isaacson]

Craig Ferguson, American on Purpose new series premieres May 30 at 9 on CNN. And next day on the CNN app.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Now, three months into the war with Iran, the US government's borrowing costs are at their highest since 2007, with American taxpayers having to potentially fork out billions of dollars in interest. This has the national debt surpass the size of the US Economy in late March. So what does this spell for the country's financial future? Maya McGinnis is the president of the nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget and she speaks to Walter Isaacson about what policymakers can do to reel in this crisis.

[Maya McGinnis]

Thank you. Bianna and Maya McGinnis, welcome to the show.

[Walter Isaacson]

So nice to join you. Thank you.

[Maya McGinnis]

So we've just hit a milestone. Our debt is $39 trillion and the milestone is that's as much as our entire gdp, our gross domestic product. How much of a milestone is that and what's the significance?

[Walter Isaacson]

So we are hitting a lot of fiscal records when it comes to our debt and none of them are good. Debt as a share of the economy hitting 100% of GDP is something that has rarely happened in this country, only twice before, briefly during COVID and right after World War II. It's an inauspicious situation where we are now running a debt that is larger than the entire economy produces in a year. And the problem is we are supposed to we are projected to race right past that and continue to borrow more. With our debt as a share of GDP growing now, there's nothing magical about 100%. It's not like that's a tipping point. It is one of the many speed bumps or reminders that the fiscal policies of the country are really unsound and we need to make changes to get it back back into a territory where there are fewer things to worry about. This is a big, big warning sign.

[Maya McGinnis]

Well, the markets seem rather sanguine. Why is that?

[Walter Isaacson]

Yes, they do. The problem is that markets and national debt actually are kind of on different timeframes. If you look at the national debt where we're headed, we see projections of it growing indefinitely. Markets are very short term oriented. And some of the things that make the debt worse can actually feed markets because they like fiscal stimulus, they like big tax cuts, they like new spending program because Those juice the economy in the short run they can help you this year, year and a half, but they make things worse in the long run. The more that you borrow, the more it actually slows down the economy. But the market is very short term oriented, focusing on those things. And that's why markets don't tend to predict when there will be some kind of a fiscal emergency. What we do see though is ongoing nervousness in the bond markets and with interest rates. As interest rates are gradually getting pushed upwards for a lot of reasons. Certainly one of them is all of the excess of borrowing that we have in our economy right now that puts upward pressure on those interest rates and

[Maya McGinnis]

we're seeing that those interest rates going up. You talk about people having a short term view, but especially true for the loan bonds, in other words 30 year treasuries. Is that a signal because of the deficit?

[Walter Isaacson]

So a lot is going on in our economy and our world right now. But absolutely the deficit is one of the things that's affecting the pushing up of the 10 year and the 30 year that we're seeing in the markets right now. So one thing markets don't like is uncertainty. And this is a world filled with uncertainty right now, clearly on the global stage in terms of geopolitical risks, what's going on with oil. But also we are seeing people worrying about the debt in the US and around the world because there are a number of things factoring into this. Our plans are to continue borrowing at least $2 trillion a year. A lot of policies are on the horizon that are likely to push that up, up even more. And populism, the fact that the political parties now kind of compete with each other to see who can give away more to win voters support rather than taking the longer view. We've got to do something to get the debt under control and we're going to put in a plan. All of those are worrying markets where they see that it's likely that we are going to have inflation over the longer run, higher interest rates, all of those things that slow economic growth. And you can see the fiscal underpinnings of the situation is contributing to that on a regular basis these days.

[Maya McGinnis]

Well, you talk about the rise of populism, but I can remember when the populism meant being against runaway federal spending, being against having too much debt. When did that change?

[Walter Isaacson]

You know it's been a huge shift because for so long obviously there have been two parties, they disagree with each other. But routinely when the fiscal situation would get out of control and this was at much lower levels than we have today. Both parties would come together, acknowledge the problem, and put in place reforms that would gradually bring those debt, those borrowing trajectories down. That's something we don't see anymore. And I think the growth of partisanship and populism has led to a lot of big shifts in our country right now. But one of them is that almost every election feels like existential threat. Both parties are justifying almost anything because they feel like they need to win at all costs. And one of the shifts there has been, okay, I am going to give big tax cuts and new spending programs. It used to be that there was kind of the generalization that Democrats liked spending and Republicans like tax cuts. Both of those will make the fiscal situation worse if they aren't paid for. But it's shifted now where both Republicans and Democrats prefer tax cuts. They might look different, but they both like tax cuts and spending, new spending programs and promises not to fix the very things we need to fix. Social Security and Medicare. So you kind of have an unholy alliance between the parties of doing all the things that will make the fiscal situation worse, all in defense of winning elections. But there are none of the adults in the room who come forward and say, okay, this milestone of debt as 100% of GDP or the fact that Social Security is going to be InSolvent in just six years mean that we need to make changes. You're not hearing those voices. You're not seeing that kind of leadership.

[Maya McGinnis]

Well, both parties seem to be on a race to cut taxes and do more spending. And you say the adults in the room aren't there to say no. What can we do to stop this?

[Walter Isaacson]

So none of the solutions are things we're not familiar with. They're only things we're unwilling to do. I would say the place we really need to start is by fixing Social Security. It will be insolvent in less than seven years. And when that happens, if we haven't made changes, there will be across the board benefit cuts of 24% for every participant. That's unconscionable. Nobody thinks that's a good idea. We know the kinds of things we need to look at to fix Social Security. These are the things politicians won't talk about, but we need to gradually raise the retirement age for younger people who are living longer. We need to talk about weather, means testing in one form where we reduce the benefits from what they're promised to be for people who don't need them as much so that we can protect them for people who do. And there's a cap on payroll taxes. We should talk about lifting that so that taxes go all the way up the income level and the program would be more funded. There's different combinations of those things, but we need to be talking about them at the same time. We have to look at all the different places we can generate savings. I would say look at defense procurement. There's a lot of savings to be had there. Look at our healthcare system, which is just filled with inefficiencies through the hospitals, the insurers, prescription drugs. All of those powerful industries are actually sort of fighting against some of the changes that we could implement, many of which are bipartisanly supported to help make savings in healthcare. And then finally, you have to look at revenues. Anybody who talks about no new taxes isn't looking at the numbers. We're going to have to figure out a way to generate new revenues, one that can come from economic growth, but that won't do it nearly at all on its own. We should look at, for instance, $25 trillion in lost revenue due to tax breaks over a decade. All those credits, deductions, exemptions, exclusions. I could go on. The list is very long. And $7 trillion a year budget where we could generate savings. It's just that they're not politically easy to talk about. And we need to create an environment where our politicians are able to be more honest about the risks of these deficits and the realities of what it would take to fix them.

[Maya McGinnis]

Well, we just hit this rather shocking milestone of having our total national debt equal our GDP for one year. And yet, and correct me if I'm wrong, it seems a deficit is going to go up 16% this coming year. That's what the Trump administration predicts. Is that right? And is that adding to this problem in a, you know, in a surprising way?

[Walter Isaacson]

Yeah. So deficits are likely to continue to grow for a number of reasons. One, there's new spending on invasion. The invasion of the geopolitical situation that we see around the world and the situation that the US Is in, that is going to cost a of lot lot. Two, tariff revenue, which was bringing in important level of revenue, has been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. So we'll be generating less in revenue than we've been hoping for. And three, now we're likely to see a number of reconciliation bills coming out of Congress, which my deep concern is they will borrow more, not less. Reconciliation is a process that used to be used to reduce deficits. Boy, should we Go back to that. But the reconciliation bill that we just saw that moved tax cuts forward, those in the past that have moved spending programs, they have not improved the fiscal situation. That would be a great thing that we could return to. But the pressure is that we will generate more borrowing than already planned through additional spending that we're seeing right now and the loss of the tariff revenue unless it's replaced. So, yes, these deficits are likely to be 2 trillion or more for all the coming years. It's another reminder, just like, like debt at 100% of GDP, that changes absolutely have to be made.

[Maya McGinnis]

Well, you've just been saying we're not very good at disciplining ourselves these days, either party. Is there some outside force that can discipline us, such as really bad rising interest rates or inflation or the market?

[Walter Isaacson]

You know, it's so sad that it probably will have to be something like that. One of our board members always said, said, we're going to fix this problem. The question is whether it will come from leadership or crisis. It is becoming increasingly likely that there will be some kind of crisis, that this is forced upon us by bond markets getting skittish, by foreigners not wanting to lend to the US by interest rates continuing to grow or another bout of high inflation. All of those things would be improved and avoided if we got our deficits and debt under control. Now, there's another outside force that I'm starting to see more signs of, which is younger people who are really concerned about their future. They have the pressure of what does AI mean for jobs? How is hiring out of college? But on top of this, we know that Social Security will be insolvent in six years. All of the plans are going to, are going to protect retirees. So younger people realize, oh, I'm going to have to fix that, along with inheriting tens of trillions of national debt. And I think we're going to see young people starting to say all this borrowing so we can go on a spending spree as a country today, but push the bills onto younger people in the future. That's not fair.

[Maya McGinnis]

Wait, wait, wait, wait. Let me, let me push back on that, please. Do you have any signs that younger people are saying that?

[Walter Isaacson]

I do. We've been hearing a lot recently of younger people starting to say that. Well, unfortunately, you see it on social media, which is not my favorite place to hang out. But yes, there have been signs of that. There have been organizations that are starting to come up that are thinking about this. And in Congress, a lot of the younger members talk more and more about some of these issues that we need to think about about the future at the long run. So I will say I don't think 20 year olds are going home and talking about the fiscal situation of the country as their number one issue. They're worried about the high cost of student debt, the inability to borrow and get a mortgage. But what is linked is the fact that we're more, we're borrowing today is all pushing those costs to be higher. Part of this affordability challenge that we have is that the borrowing today is pushing up interest rates and prices, many of which are affecting younger people. So yeah, we have started to, we hear a lot more from people who are starting to worry about that on an intergenerational angle.

[Maya McGinnis]

So we have 39 trillion in debt, 100% of our GDP. We have to pay interest on that debt. And I think about 20% of the budget now is just going to interest payments. And that's more than education, transportation, research and development combined. What does it say about our country when we spend more paying for past borrowing than we do for our services?

[Walter Isaacson]

Walter I think this is honestly one of the most troubling signs that we're seeing that we are spending a trillion dollars on interest payments a year, some of which is leaving a good deal of which is leaving our economy and going abroad to foreigners who have lent to us. But interest payments are larger than national defense. There has been a study that showed no country ever remained a superpower when it was spending more on interest payments than national defense expense. It's more than we spend at the federal level on all spending for children. Talk about focusing on consumption from the past instead of investment in the future. Really troubling. And on top of all of that, interest payments are the single fastest growing part of our federal budget. And it's the one thing we don't control, right? So we can't bring them down unless we bring the deficits down. And that in turn brings those interest rates down. But this is something that is the result of, of people saying, oh, deficits, don't worry about them, nothing will happen in the past. And now that's sort of catching up with us in these interest payments that are squeezing out all the other important priorities of the budget. And I would say at a time where it's incredibly important to have a flexical, flexible budget, we know that risks around the world are growing. We know that that's expensive. We know that AI whether it's the greatest thing that's ever happened or a terrible dystopian thing, or most likely something in between, is going to have transition costs while we have to figure out how to adapt to it. That's going to require partnering with the federal government to help. But we don't have the fiscal flexibility right now in our budget because we've made so many promises and we owe so much an interest payment right now. So it's going to have a profound effect as interest keeps us from having the budget that we need for the modern moment.

[Maya McGinnis]

Mayim Aguinis, thank you so much for joining us.

[Walter Isaacson]

Thank you.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

And that is it for now. If you ever miss our show, you can find the latest episode shortly after it airs on our podcast. And remember, you can always catch us online on our website and all over social media. Thanks so much for watching and goodbye from New York.

[Walter Isaacson]

Hey, I'm Anderson Cooper. On my podcast All There Is, we explore grief and loss in all its complexity.

[Beth Sanner]

You have been, and I mean this

[Walter Isaacson]

so sincerely, the soundtrack to my healing.

[Maya McGinnis]

My guest on this episode is Chanel Jones.

[Walter Isaacson]

In January, she began hosting along with

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Jenna Bush Hager Today with Jenna and

[Walter Isaacson]

Chanel, the fourth hour of the Today Show. In May 2025, Chanel's husband, Uche O.J.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

died from glioblastoma.

[Walter Isaacson]

When you hear other people share, it is healing. And you don't feel as isolated. You feel less alone. And so I feel like you've created this beautiful quilt of, like, nurturing our hearts. And so I am honored to be part of this quilt.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Talking grief, building community.

[Walter Isaacson]

That's what the podcast is all about. This is all there is.

[Bianna Golodrigo]

Listen and follow wherever you get your podcasts.

[Maya McGinnis]

I'm Daniel Dae Kim. I'm going to South Korea to figure out how this small nation conquered the

[Walter Isaacson]

world with its culture.

[Maya McGinnis]

Join me and meet the artists and creators behind the phenomena on K Everything

[Walter Isaacson]

now streaming on the CNN app.