Black sea fleet was killed. Kyiv, now accusing the kremlin of seeking revenge. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and around the world. Wolf blitzer is off today. Im pamela brown and youre in the situation room. First this hour and the nation on the brink of a financial crisis. U. S. Government funding is set to run out at midnight on saturday and right now, theres no solution in sight as republican hard liners stand firm in their rebellion. Lets go to manu raju. What is Kevin Mccarthy doing and saying as shutdown nears . Hes trying to pressure those members on the far right that refuse to go along with his spending plans, to pass a shortterm funding bill to keep the government open past saturday. But theres a problem. He does not have this votes. He can only afford to lose four republican votes. He is at the moment could lose up to seven or ten members who refuse to vote for a shortterm plan no matter what and they are warning if you are to turn around and cut a deal with democrats on this, that could cost him his speakership. Only one member could call such a vote. I asked him this afternoon whether or not he is making a calculation to not work with democrats over concerns that a vote could come to seek his ouster if he were to go to bipartisan route. How much of the fact that if you do cut a deal with democrats, there could be a vote to push you out . How much is that driving your Decision Making . Wouldnt that have driven my Decision Making 15 times before . But you could have cut a deal with democrats . Did i cut a deal then . When . 15 rounds right now. Let me explain something to you. Im no different than i was then or before. My whole focus was in my mind what drives me is the American People. Im not worried if someone makes a motion. If somebody votes no. At the moment, the House Republicans are still planning to go forward with a strategy thats not been successful in the last couple of weeks. Tried to pass longterm Spending Bills that simply dont have the support to become law and try to convince those members to get behind a shortterm plan to keep the government open for at least a few weeks as they try to negotiate a longer term spending plan for the entire federal government. None has the votes at the moment so there are gauchnegotiations happening among Senate Leaders to find a deal that can pass that chamber, but there will still questions about how quick that can pass and how quickly it can get approved by the republicanled house. All raising concerns around washington that it could be barrelling into a shutdown by the end of this week. The question also, how long it will last. Something that a lot of people have as fears are now growing that possibility is real. Manu, thanks so much. Stand by. Were going to be back with you in a moment. But now we want to go over to the white house where the president and his team are issuing new warnings about the impact of a shutdown on the American People and u. S. Economy. Ml lee has the latest on that. Walk us through the biden administrations strategy as the deadline gets closer. Pam, the white house is trying to do several things here but at least on the messaging front, they are very much wanting the label of a republican shutdown to really stick and what we are hearing from white house officials, the argument that theyre trying to make is look, democrats and republicans came together several months ago and reached a broad agreement on federal spending levels and now the white house officials are saying if Kevin Mccarthy is unable to get certain members of his party to fall in line, so really, pam, the political bet that the white house is making is that if there ends up being a shutdown that republicans would largely be to blame. White House Press Secretary talked about this earlier. Take a listen. Going to be very clear. This is, this will be a republican shutdown. This is extreme House Republicans who have made it very clear that the chaos were seeing in the white house, they are marching us towards a government shutdown. That shouldnt be happening. This shouldnt be happening. This is the job of congress. One of the basic jobs of congress is to keep the government open. This is a deal that they all agreed upon. Not too long ago. Just a couple of months ago, and now they cant stick to the deal. We just heard from President Biden himself as well. He said that it was a small group of extreme House Republicans that are reneging on the deal that was reached several months ago and that they are willing to let the government shutdown. So as we inch closer to the possibility of a shutdown, pam, expect the white house to continue this kind of Finger Pointing at House Republicans. Stay with us. Were joined by raju and mark. How would that impact the u. S. Economy . Its not good. The economys struggling with a bunch of headwinds. The uaw strike. Student loan borrowers. Higher interest rates. Oil prices rising. Gasoline back up to 4 a gallon. Depends on how long the government is shutdown for. Any length of time, thats going to do a fair amount of damage. If it drags on longer than that and rivals the longest in mystery, the one back in 201819, its going to start showing up in the economic data. Anything longer than that, i think the economys in jeopardy. Mj, the white house is framing this as a republican shutdown and its stepping up its rhetoric against a shutdown. Warning about significant consequences and programs that will be lost if that happens, basically appealing to the every day american. Tell us more about that. Thats right. Even as white house officials are eager to do this kind of Finger Pointing, theyre also trying to make very clear that a shutdown is really the last thing this white house wants and what they are doing in the course of the next week or so is bringing out Senior Administration officials to try to paint a picture of sort of the every day real america ramifications if a government, if the government were to shutdown. We saw this playing out in the White House Briefing room earlier today when we saw Agriculture Secretary come out to the Briefing Room podium and talk about some of the dirfferet ways in which a shutdown would have ramifications for people across the country. One of the things we heard him talk about is this wic program. A food program that affects women, infants, children across the country. When i asked the secretary is there any way in which the administration could exercise some kind of authority to extend that program if the government were to shutdown, he simply said no. There is no authority that the administration has to do that. So, again, the white house is in the position of trying to blame republicans for what might be to come and also just make a lot of warnings clear that if this were to happen, there would be Desire Consequences for people across the country. And manu, donald trump is weighing in on social media. On his social media account telling republicans quote, unless you get everything, shut it down. How much is this likely to embolden the hard liners . Its not helpful to mccarthy. He is telling them the opposite. Telling them a shutdown would be bad politically. He says i dont see how anyone wins in a shutdown. Trying to make the case of all the things, people that would go without pay, whether its folks along the border, Military Personnel and the like and it is not good politics to shut things down. Thats the view also of Mitch Mcconnell has argued this could be a significant backlash for the gop but those members dont take their Marching Orders from the Senate Republican leader, the speaker of the house, despite the pressure campaign. They are more in line with trump on this issue so at this point, while the speaker is trying to pressure them to cave, hes not facing, not getting much help from the former president whos telling them to do opposite. So at this point, its unclear whats going to happen. What we know is theres a lot of dysfunction on capitol hill. What im curious about, mark, is with this level of dysfunction, getting so close to a potential government shutdown, is this something moodys would take into account when deciding on the u. S. Credit rating . We know earlier, the summer that fitch downgraded the u. S. Credit rating, whats your take . Im not going to comment on the rating. Its on top of the drama we experienced a couple three months ago regarding the tre treasury debt limit. Our fiscal situation is dramatic. If we dont make spending policy, our deficits and debt are going to rise. A combination of bad fiscal outlook without policy changes given the dysfunctions, cant even keep government open let alone pass legislation thats wide ranging to address these longterm economic problems. And these governance issues, obvious dysfunction, doesnt add up to a very pretty picture. What that means for ratings is a different story. Clearly, doesnt argue well for our own fiscal future. Mj, a lot of Finger Pointing going on. Republicans. When you look at the past, they have generally faced the brunt of the political fallout from past shutdowns. What is the concern in the white house in terms of if it could play out differently this time with President Biden facing blame . Well, pam, if the white house is making the political bet right now that if there were a government shutdown, the republicans would shoulder much of that blame. Yeah, the reality is that is not a guarantee. We dont know if voters are going to make that distinction between President Biden and capitol hill and lawmakers overall. We saw some of this play out back in the spring. Yes, it is very much possible that President Biden himself, even if he personally believes this is the fault of republicans, that he could take a bit of a hit in public polling for example. So, yes, the white house is making the public bet that republicans will end up shouldering much of the political sort of blame if there were a shutdown, but again, it is not guaranteed that every voter is going to feel that way. Thanks to you all. Catch inside politics sunday with manu raju every weekend. Just in to cnn, we have new reporting from fulton county, georgia, where the judge has just issued an order having to do with the safety of people involved in the trump election subversion trial. Thats next. Plus, a Second Democratic senator is calling for embattled democrat, bob mendezs recognition from congress in the wake of the explosive bribery allegations against him. Youre in the situation room. Well be right back. Just in, the judge overseeing the Election Subversion Case in Georgia Against Trump has issued an order to protect the identities of jurors during any trials in the case. Sarah murray is working this story. Tell us more about this order and potential impact here. Yeah, well the prosecutors had asked for an order to essentially make sure the jurors potential identities were kept secret. Any jurors chosen because of course we know theyre going to be dif vied up into some kind of capacity with the first defendants set to go in october. Essentially, a Media Coalition took issue with how broad the district attorneys ask was for keeping these identities secret. Theyve now reached an agreement. The judge has issued this order saying you cant release identifying information of the jurors during this trial so no video. No sketches of them. Theyre going to be referred to by numbers so they cant be referred to by any sort of personal identifying information that would make their identities known while the trials are going on. This comes after we saw with the grand jury that handed out the indictment, a number of their supposed names, addresses, identities were posted on the internet. Law enforcement had to get involved. A number of them started receiving threats so the District Attorneys Office was trying to head that off. Theres a little maneuvering behind the scenes with the Media Coalition to try to come to an agreement that would allow reporters to report on the rough make up of these jurors without compromising peoples safety. Stay here. Much more to discuss. I want to bring in our experts. Andy to you, your reaction to this order. You know, amid real safety concerns. Yeah, pam, i think its totally understandable and kind of expected. I remember the evening the indictment came out. I remember sitting in the studio with colleagues. Many of us were shocked to see the names of the grand jurors were included. It is a requirement in Georgia State law. So these some of those folks who were identified online and subject to threatening attacks. Clearly what the prosecution is doing here is trying get out in front of that to make sure that folks in the jury pool, potential jurors, and those who are actually selected to be one of the final 12, wont experience that sort of aggressive, threatening activity. Jennifer wh, what do you makf this given the context around the case . As a legal matter, you just need to make sure youre protecting the defendants rights. Its still a public trial. The defendant and all their lawyers will still be able to see the jurors. Theyll know demographic information about them so they can choose their jury knowing as much theyre entitled to know. This really just stops the rest of us. People who would watch on tv, from know who they are. Theres really no reason all of us out there in tv land need to get our eyes on the jury. As long as its fair to the defendant and we know the process is being handled the way it should. So i think its a good thing. I think it will lead to a fairer trial. Certainly for prosecutors. You dont want jurors concerned that if they convict defendants they might have something bad happen to them or their families. I think it will be better for everyone. Sarah, im going to bring you in on cassidy hutchison. She worked inside the trump white house. She was that star witness for the january 6th committee. She is now speaking out. Tell us what shes saying. Thats right. She is speaking out. She is speaking out and has started to come out publicly. Shes talked about what her life was like in the aftermath of testifying. Before the january 6th committee. How she sort of became isolated after that. There were a lot of Security Concerns for her. She said she even relocated to atlanta for a couple of months. When she testified before the january 6th committee, one of the sort of blockbuster moments she described was this moment that allegedly happened on january 6th where trump really wanted to go to the capitol. Lunged at a secret Service Agent in the beast when they told him they would not redirect to the capitol. The secret Service Agent said he doesnt remember that incident. She is standing by all of that in this interview she did with cbs and is making it clear it would have been easier for her to stay silent to trump and his allies. Take a listen to what she said. What would i have to gain by coming forward . It would have been easier for me to continue being complicit and to stay in the comfortable zone of i had some sense of security. A semblance of security. I knew people i could easily reach out to for jobs. I had friends. Again, the interviewer here was saying why should people believe your version of events. You had these pro trump lawyers. Got new ones. Shes saying my life would have been a lot easerier if i stayed quiet. Shes also standing by that the president lunged at the driver. Theres been a lot of focus on that account and a lot of pushback. How significant is her standing by that . Well, you know i think its interesting that she relayed that account, not as a firsthand witness. She wasnt claiming to have been inside the limo but rather as a result of a conversation she had with one of the secret Service Agents who were present and who understood what happened. She related where they were when they had the conversation. How that individual seemed you know very stressed and anxious about what had taken place. And so she included that in her testimony. I dont really think theres any reason whatsoever to believe that she has created this anecdote out of whole cloth. Theres no reason to. Shes not putting herself in a situation that she wasnt in. Its simply something she heard from someone else. Is it possible that person told her a version of the events that wasnt true . In the heat of the moment, these two exchanged a significant conversation and she relayed it truthfully to the panel. Thats the impression i get from her. Jennifer, she testified before the grand jury. Washington and fulton county. How could her testimony have impacted the cases against trump . Do you view her as a credible witness . I think she is. I think theres some issues that youre Going Forward in a trial court setting. One is the heresay problem. Its not entirely clear that all of what she told the committee and even the grand juries, in some testimony, here say testimony is allowed in the grand jury. That wont necessarily make it into the courtroom. It will depend on whether they can find an exception to the here say rule. The other, they dont like it when witnesses are out giving interviews, writing books. Now that shes written a book, you could argue she has a bias. She wants to sell books so she has an incentive to make these kind of inflammatory or at least explosive statements. So you know, well see what happens when she actually gets called as a witness. It may be that her testimony is pared down to what weve heard from