Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

U.S. Economic Growth Slows To 1.5 Percent, Inflation Stays High In June; Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Is Interviewed About Sources: Blanche Met With Sens. Cornyn, Tillis This Afternoon, New Push For Russia Sanctions Bill To Honor Late Sen. Graham; Egypt Struck For First Time As Conflict Pulls In More Countries; Shell Profits Hit Second Highest Level Ever As War Surges Oil Prices; UEFA: "The World Cup Is Not For Sale". Aired 5-6p ET

Aired July 30, 2026 - 17:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KASIE HUNT, CNN HOST: Thanks so much for being with us. "The Lead" anchored by Pamela Brown starts right now.

[17:00:59]

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN BREAKING news.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT: And welcome to The Lead. I'm Pamela Brown in for Jake Tapper today. And we are following breaking news on several fronts. First, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche meeting moments ago with two Republican senators who are standing in the way of Blanche becoming the permanent attorney general. Two sources tell CNN the meeting with Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis lasted a little more than 45 minutes.

It's unclear whether the meeting led to a resolution over the senators demands that Blanche promise in writing to officially kill President Trump's $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund and make changes to the agreement with the IRS concerning Trump and his family's protection over tax audits. In just minutes, I'll talk with a key member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Also breaking right now, the Justice Department handing over unredacted documents that are part of the Epstein files to a federal judge. This action is part of a lawsuit brought by an attorney and journalist who sued the DOJ, claiming it overly redacted some of the fires -- files. We're going to get to that in just a moment.

But first, the major news impacting your money tonight. U.S. economic growth is seeing an unexpected slowdown even as inflation starts to cool. The economy reacting to a drop in gas prices in June amid the currently volatile war in Iran.

The U.S. gross domestic product, or GDP, expanded at a rate of 1.5 percent over the last quarter. That's down from 2.1 in prior months. Now, economists were widely predicting this measure of goods and services would hold steady for this quarter. Consumer spending, however, is holding strong, picking up at a rate of 3.2 percent, the fastest pace in nearly a year.

Consumer sentiment also shot up as gas prices improved in June from the war in Iran that brought inflation down in June for the first time in six years to 3.7 percent. Still a far cry from the Federal Reserve's long term goal of 2 percent. Some economists say the booming artificial intelligence industry could be pushing inflation higher. Mark Zandi from Moody's analytics tells CNN "households must spend just over $375 more to purchase the same goods and services as they did this time last year due to its inflationary impact."

If those price pressures create even more affordability concerns, that could be bad news for President Trump and his party this November. A new CNN poll out today shows more than 60 percent of registered voters, including more than 50 percent of Republican or Republican leaning voters, think the GOP is focusing too little on cost of living issues ahead of the midterms.

Joining us now to discuss all of this and more is the director of the National Economic Council, Kevin Hassett.

Director Hassett, always nice to see you. I'm just curious --

KEVIN HASSETT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL: Thank you.

BROWN: -- what your reaction is to the GDP rate. Were you expecting it? Would have been closer to last quarter, slightly higher, 2.1 percent growth?

HASSETT: Yes, it was a little bit lower than I expected because there are so many other things that are really strong right now. Like we have initial claims for unemployment insurance to the lowest they've been since the 1960s. We have real income growth of about $3,000 per family since President Trump took office. And we've got this incredible investment boom because of artificial intelligence and other things.

And so if you dig down deep into the numbers, one of the things you can see is that final domestic demand, which is sort of the amount of stuff that actually was purchased in the U.S. was up a really healthy 3.9 percent or about 4 percent. And the reason you got the 1.5 number is actually that we're importing so many machines right now to build new factories. That import shot way up and took the growth rate down from what you put the consumer data up. That plus strong investment usually gives you a three or four percent number. It was one and a half because there were so many imports of capital goods.

But imports of capital goods are a long run positive sign because those machines are going to get turned on. They're going to make more output and create more jobs.

BROWN: You know, there are so many numbers being thrown around. But when you talk to the everyday American, they will tell you that prices at the grocery store, mortgage rates are higher, you know. So you have the gas -- prices at the gas pump. And so, yes, it is true that there is income growth, but then at the same time, Americans out there are saying that they're hurting. Is the White House in touch with what the everyday American is feeling right now?

[17:05:23]

HASSETT: Oh, absolutely. And, you know, I think that if you look at the last couple of inflation reports, the thing that we got today that showed the Fed's favorite measure actually went down, it was negative for one of the first times at a log tie. The Consumer Price Index had a -- just a massive, massive decline in the latest monthly report.

And it wasn't just because of energy. A lot of the policies that we've been pursuing, like TrumpRx is making it -- so the drug prices are going down. And so we're mindful of the fact that prices went up a lot over the last four or five years before President Trump came in. But -- and that people still are feeling pain. But on the other hand, real incomes have grown about $3,000 in President Trump's first couple of years.

They declined that much over four years under President Biden. And so people are seeing their wages go up more than prices, and they're finding, you know, as you looked at that consumption number, that was adjusted for inflation. And so a big, solid consumption quarter like we saw in Q2 is a sign that consumers are optimistic about what's going on average.

BROWN: Well, Kevin, President Trump, as you well know, talks about the economy frequently bragging about it. He calls it the hottest country in the world. And here's something Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said back in December.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOWARD LUTNICK, COMMERCE SECRETARY: Look for the second quarter of 2026 to be amazing as all this money comes back into the economy from this Big, Beautiful Bill which really takes care of Americans. Finally, the president has the power to take care of Americans. Someone actually in the White House cares about the real people.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Secretary --

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: You said just a moment ago, Kevin, that consumers are optimistic. But we have this poll where 77 percent of Americans say economic conditions are overall poor. That is the lowest of Trump's second term so far. Is this the, quote, "amazing economy" the administration thought you'd all be boasting about when the, quote, unquote, "Big, Beautiful Bill" was passed more than a year ago?

HASSETT: Well, again, right now, the economy does look amazing to me, that the inflation is going down, the unemployment rate is low. Initial claims like no one's getting -- almost no one's getting fired, and final demand was up about 4 percent, which is about what my friend Howard Lutnick was predicting back then. It was the sort of surge in imports of capital goods. And I think they caught people a little bit by surprise that's why the number was a little bit lower. But I think that you're seeing really, really strong growth.

And in the end, one of the things that I can say as an economist is that there's a big economic literature that says that in the end, people vote based on what's in their pockets. There's a guy named Ray Fair at Yale that has a famous paper that shows that that's the -- what people have in their pockets is the best indicator of what's going to happen to elections. And so if you take the Ray Fair model, then you could say, well, actually really comes with down under President Obama that President Trump won and real incomes went down. Under President Biden, President Trump won again. And so I think that the real incomes growing right now are really positive side politically and much more positive sign than something I would see the poll.

BROWN: And of course, when you look at the economy, there are so many different factors, right? And some are certainly looking good, but others aren't. And you say the economy looks amazing. The job growth cooled last month and 66 percent of people, these are Americans, everyday Americans, they say President Trump's policies have worsened economic conditions in this country. That's 10 percent more than in the final months of the Biden administration.

So, I mean, you say the economy looks amazing, but what do you say to that person who's part of that group, that 66 percent who say Trump has actually made the economic conditions are worse?

HASSETT: You know, I just don't believe a poll like that, given how strong the numbers are and how strong income growth is, how optimistic people are. Like, the best measure of how optimistic people are is are they consuming. What happens when people are pessimistic is they start doing what we call precautionary saving. They cut back expenditures because they're worried they might lose their job or something bad would happen to the future.

When you've got strong consumption growth like we're seeing right now, then consumers are, by definition, very optimistic. They're not being cautious at all. And so I just don't believe that poll.

BROWN: And by the way, it was 65 percent, I just want to correct that. But June did see, to your point, spike in consumer spending and higher consumer sentiment than in May as gas prices settled amid the Iran war. But crude oil prices rose sharply yesterday after President Trump threatened retaliation for Iranian strikes. And have continued to sit just under $90 a barrel after that retaliation. Do you worry that this volatility in the Middle East will impact consumers long term?

HASSETT: Well, of course, you know, President Trump made this action because these Iranians who you saw or you've seen right now over the last few months have been, you know, shooting at just about every nation's boats. Imagine if they had a nuclear weapon. President Trump got intelligence that they were very close to having a nuclear weapon and decided to act. And so when we're talking about the cost and benefit of what we're doing right now, of course the benefit is enormous.

[17:10:15] What are the costs is that oil prices are a little bit higher, but not nearly as high as people predicted. Because we've been taking so many actions to keep oil prices down by first having the Navy escort ships out of the straits, increasing the amount of oil going through pipelines, waiving the Jones Act so the energy from the U.S. can move around to U.S. ports. And we expect that if we have to, we'll continue all those measures to keep energy prices as low as they could be.

BROWN: Right. But also President Trump said last year that nuclear weapons have been obliterated after that bombing. And Americans are watching this war enter its six month and wondering where is the end here? Because this war is impacting the everyday American. So what do you say to those Americans who are worried about that?

HASSETT: Well, I think that in the end, President Trump and the national security team will decide when they've achieved every single objective that they have. And they've yet to do that, but I trust their judgment.

BROWN: Just quickly as we wrap up on the -- on the AI front, there is this reporting out there that it's adding to inflation. We're already seeing AI take jobs. How concerned are you about just how rapidly AI is developing, taking jobs of the everyday American?

HASSETT: Well, right now what we're seeing is that job growth is strong in the U.S. And Mark Zandi's estimate that AI is causing inflation, it's just incorrect. The bottom line is that we're having some of the strongest productivity growth that we've had in the U.S. in my lifetime. And when productivity goes up a lot, that puts downward pressure on prices not up with (inaudible) prices.

BROWN: But AI is not going anywhere. It's accelerating.

HASSETT: No, AI -- the investment in AI is making it so that firms all around the country are becoming more and more productive and creating more jobs. We had one estimate from a private vendor that the small businesses that have used AI to improve their business over the last year have seen their revenues about double. And the ones who haven't used AI have not seen growth like that in their revenues. And so AI is --

BROWN: And certainly that is true.

HASSETT: -- a very positive economic story right now.

BROWN: No, there is that economic story as well with AI, but there's also the story of lower level jobs not being there and kids graduating from college and not having the job opportunities that they once had and worried about what this means for their future.

National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, thank you so much for coming on. Always nice to have you.

HASSETT: Thank you, Pamela. Thank you.

BROWN: Thank you. And just ahead, what we're learning about a private meeting among acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and the two Republicans blocking his nomination for the permanent role. Plus, what could be Trump's workaround to this GOP revolt? And a growing protest against FIFA, the United Front pushing back on FIFA's plan to inject private money into the global game of soccer, including one possible investment from Jared Kushner's younger brother. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:16:56]

BROWN: Breaking news in our Politics Lead. CNN has learned that Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis privately met with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche this afternoon as his nomination for attorney general job hangs in the balance. According to a source familiar with the matter, the meeting was a little over 45 minutes, but it's unclear whether it will shake loose the stalled nomination. And this comes after President Trump indicated he may delay his push to confirm Blanche. In a social media post this morning, the president wrote, quote, "I have no objection to temporarily withdrawing Todd's name if they do not do the right thing and put him back after Cornyn and Tillis are out of office."

With us now is a Democratic member of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

Hi, Senator. So you are also opposed to the Blanche nomination. What are your concerns?

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D-CT), JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: My concerns are just as Cornyn and Tillis are saying that this unconscionable, unacceptable, corrupt deal is there. Todd Blanche says it's dead, but he won't put it in writing. And really the obstacle here is the president who stands to benefit from the deal, the slush fund, I call it the thug fund, and more importantly, a tax immunity deal that is worth about $100 million to him personally. So the question for everyone is will the president forgo a $100 million tax immunity deal so as to confirm Todd Blanche as attorney general?

But I also object to Todd Blanche because I think he's unfit. He will be the president's lawyer, his personal advocate, his consigliere. He's demonstrated that he will enable the crypto corruption, the vanity and vengeance projects, all of what Donald Trump is doing contrary to the law.

BROWN: When you say he has enabled the crypto corruption, be specific about that, if you would.

BLUMENTHAL: Donald Trump has made $1.4 billion from crypto. A lot of it has come from foreign governments, specifically the UAE that have invested in his World Liberty Financial and his memecoin. He's made overall $2 billion last year. For Americans struggling to put food on the table, that is absolutely obscene and --

BROWN: But how does that tie back to Todd Blanche? BLUMENTHAL: Because Todd Blanche has, in effect, defended those schemes. He has refused to take action to enforce the law. And these schemes are illegal, contrary to the Constitution, the emoluments clause. Todd Blanche has enabled the president to do it.

BROWN: But as you know, the president is immune from most conflict of interest laws and that kind of thing. I mean, you can question whether the president should be making this kind of money off of crypto or making billions of dollars while in office. But in terms of the law, the President is exempt from a lot of the corruption or conflict of interest laws that other people would be subjected to.

[17:20:00]

I want to go on and move to this. Before this afternoon's meeting, Senator Cornyn posted on social media that the president, quote, "is mistaken if he believes concerns about the provisions and his tax lawsuit settlements are limited to me and Senator Tillis." And here's what Senator Tillis told our Manu Raju about the nomination fight earlier today, particularly the $1.776 billion anti-weaponization payout fund. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Your reaction to the president saying he may withdraw Blanche, and put him back after you're gone.

SEN. THOM TILLIS (R-NC): My reaction is the president's getting bad advice. He should listen to Blanche and others who think if it's dead, it should be rendered completely dead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: What is your reaction to that?

BLUMENTHAL: Well, the president's not getting bad advice. He's just thinking badly himself. He knows what's at stake here. I wouldn't blame it on the advisors.

And I think the idea that he will get a better result with a new Congress is a misjudgment. I think that the new Congress is likely to be more adverse. The more we know about Todd Blanche, the more this nomination really stinks. It smells because Todd Blanche has indicated that he's going to defend the unlawfulness of what the president's doing.

And just to clarify a point here, you mentioned the president's immune from criminal prosecution while he is in office, but the attorney general of the United States has a responsibility under civil law to potentially stop illegal schemes while they are underway. And Todd Blanche has failed as acting attorney general. There's no reason to think he'll do better as attorney general.

BROWN: But do you really think that the president would nominate anyone to be put in a role that would bring charges against him? Or on the civil law front?

BLUMENTHAL: Todd Blanche has a responsibility to the Constitution and to the people of the United States. All presidents before now have nominated people who have pledged fidelity to that priority. Todd Blanche has failed to demonstrate that kind of adherence to principle. Whether the president would nominate that kind of person is questionable because it's Donald Trump. And Donald Trump has demanded loyalty to him, not to the Constitution.

BROWN: All right, I want to go to a different subject. Russia hit Ukraine with deadly strikes across the country overnight. What are you hearing, Senator, about the prospects for the Russia sanction bill that was championed by your late colleague, Senator Lindsey Graham. It's passed its first vote in the Senate, but now President Trump said he wants tariffs on Iranian oil added to the bill. What do you think?

BLUMENTHAL: Lindsey Graham and I partnered on this legislation. I was the leading Democratic co-sponsor. I am still leading the effort along with others on the Republican side, Katie Britt of Alabama, Roger Wicker of Mississippi have been at the forefront. John Thune, the majority leader, is a co-sponsor. It is very much bipartisan.

And Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and I are hopeful that we will reach the finish line next week. We have already had two resounding bipartisan votes, 86 to 12 on the first one. And here's the blunt reality, and you alluded to it, Pamela, the Ukrainians are deluged. They're beaten with bombs and missiles from Russia every evening, killing civilians, eight of them just last night, children included, because Putin is going after the apartments, the hospitals, the schools. His targets are civilians.

And his murderous slaughter must be stopped. The only thing he understands -- he's a thug. He's a KGB criminal thug. And he understands only strength. That's why the Russia sanctions bill will bring his economy to its knees.

They're dependent on the oil revenue, which the sanctions bill aims to stop. And if we throttle the oil revenue going from the major purchasers, as the sanction bill would provide, Putin will be forced to come to the table. Plus, they also need air defense, no question. But the Russia sanctions bill is a key part.

BROWN: All right. Senator Richard Blumenthal, thank you for coming on. We appreciate it.

BLUMENTHAL: Thank you.

[17:24:29]

BROWN: And we have some breaking news to get to on the Epstein files. Up next, unredacted files just handed over to a federal judge who will determine whether portions of them were lawfully kept from public view. What we know about the contents up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BROWN: In our Law and Justice Lead, a federal judge has taken a closer look at the Justice Department's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Journalist Katie Phang challenged the government's withholding of information, prompting the DOJ to hand over unredacted documents to the court for private review. The judge will determine whether the redactions were properly made.

Joining us now to further discuss this is CNN's Katelyn Polantz.

Katelyn, walk us through what happened here.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Pamela, this is a moment where the Justice Department is being scrutinized for how they handled the redactions of the Epstein files when they released them and had to, under the law, release them earlier this year. This judge, it's Emmett Sullivan in the D.C. District Court, he demanded that the Justice Department give him the unredacted versions of 10 different documents in the Epstein files that had redactions in them. Those redactions were supposed to be to protect witnesses or victim names. That's what the Justice Department says they were and they are redactions that the judge wanted to look under the blacked-out marking there and see what those names were and if they were names that should be out there in the public domain.

[17:30:15]

The Epstein Transparency Law that Congress passed it did tell the Justice Department that they needed to be clear and put forth information if there were co-conspirators or people in political or very high-profile positions around Epstein, those names should be released and not protected.

The judge, he's now checking this work but he's doing it by himself in the courthouse. No one else is able to look at it. It is just something the judge has his eyes on it alone beginning at about 2:30 today when he got those 10 documents hand-delivered by the Justice Department.

BROWN: So tell us a little bit more about what this judge is looking for and whether it could mean more documents could be released to the public.

POLANTZ: Well, Pamela, what could be released here is some names inside of these documents and they could be what journalist Katie Phang, who brought this lawsuit to force the judge into this position, she was alleging that there are co-conspirators names around Epstein that are redacted improperly, that hadn't been released when all of the Epstein files were released. Those co-conspirators could have potentially been talking with Epstein about underage girls, about trafficking, those sorts of things.

This judge is going to make sure that the Justice Department did the work correctly but he's a one that is very skeptical historically of the Justice Department and prosecutors. So he's going to look very closely to see if these names should still be protected as victims.

BROWN: All right, Katelyn Polantz, thank you so much.

And up next, what could be a new phase of the war with Iran? Now it's Egypt pulled into the fray, drones hitting two ships including one U.S. vessel. What signal these strikes may send as the President weighs his next move? We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:36:24]

BROWN: In our World Lead, Iran wants to keep the Strait of Hormuz closed after heavy overnight U.S. strikes along Iran's coast. Iranian state media says U.S. strikes on one of its islands killed a couple and their two-year-old. An official there warned every killing makes Iranians more determined and united. And now new questions about the lengths Iran and its proxies are willing to go after a drone attack hit an Egyptian port.

If it's confirmed as a deliberate strike, it would be the first time Egypt has been directly drawn into the war. Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Ben Hodges joins us now. Lieutenant General, nice to see you. So let's talk a little bit more about this. No party has claimed responsibility for that strike and Iran maintains Egypt as a friend. But it seems this war keeps expanding. What would Egypt getting involved mean for Iran and for the overall war right now?

LT. GEN. BEN HODGES (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Well, I think that Iran realizes that the United States has reached the limits of what it can achieve with military power alone. And I think Iran has also decided that it's in their interest to have some sort of a controlled confrontation versus a ceasefire. They have more leverage that way.

And so by striking, if it was Iran that struck Damietta or one of their proxies, what they're doing, of course, is spreading the potential economic impact of this war, which would raise pressure on the Trump administration.

BROWN: U.S. Central Command put this post on X, fact checking Iranian claims about the Strait of Hormuz and destroyed U.S. F-35s and included this apparent radio transmission from the IRGC threatening ships on the strait today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are running danger. Don't put your life in danger. To maintain the health and safety of the ship and crew, you are ordered to go back to your departure immediately. If you disobey, you will be targeted and destroyed immediately. This is Navy out.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: So what do you make of the CENTCOM P.R. strategy of putting this all out there?

HODGES: Well, I think the Iranians showing that they are still in control of the Strait, even if the U.S. Navy, the world's greatest Navy, is able to do certain things. The fact is, shipping companies do not have confidence that they can move cargo or people through the strait and their insurance companies are not willing to underwrite this. So as long as that's the case, Iran, in effect, controls the Strait. So that's why I think they would publish something like that.

BROWN: How does U.S. get out of that, though, of Iran controlling the strait? There's a blockade. There's been these back and forth strikes and a pause and then strikes again. I mean, where does this go from here?

HODGES: Well, of course, you're asking me to try and provide a logical analysis of a strategy that makes no sense of what the administration has been doing thus far. And I think, honestly, at this point, the administration is going to have to seriously consider a restart. I mean, to back away from this, maybe even take the temporary loss or the embarrassment and start over. Go back to basics. Clearly define the end state. Come up with the ends, ways, and means to achieve that end state. Consult with the Congress. We need allies. And then make sure you have the resources to do it. Otherwise, I think the administration is going to have to accept the fact that Iran is it's not going to go back to the way it was.

[17:40:03]

It's not going to be freedom of navigation, at least the way the administration has done this so far. It would help if the administration was more transparent in how they talk about things. Explain what's going on. You know, how many times have we heard the President say the Iranians are begging for a deal? Or Secretary Hegseth has said we have destroyed everything. Obviously, that's not the case. So nobody believes anything that comes from the White House. Regaining trust would help. And that would include talking with our Congress, as they should.

BROWN: All right. Retired Lieutenant General Ben Hodges, thanks for coming on to share your perspective on all of this.

And all of this action on the Strait of Hormuz is causing huge fluctuations on global oil markets. Meanwhile, Shell's latest quarterly profits soar to the second highest levels in the company's history. Exxon and Chevron are expected to reveal their own profits tomorrow, which analysts also expect to approach company records.

Joining us now is Mike Sommers, the president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute. Hey there, Mike. So last time you were on this show, you sounded the alarm on the dwindling strategic oil reserve. Now you say it's at its lowest level since the 80s. How much is left? And what happens when the reserve runs out?

MIKE SOMMERS, CEO, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE: We are very concerned about continuing dwindling inventories, not just in the strategic petroleum reserve, but also commercial inventories as well. If you look at the inventories in Cushing, for example, Oklahoma, where we have a lot of commercial inventories. And really, that is the crossroads for the American oil and gas industry. It's where the oil goes and then is delivered to various points throughout the United States. We are at historic lows, both in the SPR and at Cushing, and that could lead to significant price increases if we don't get those filled as quickly as possible.

BROWN: You just heard the conversation I had with the lieutenant general. I mean, it doesn't look like this war will get resolved anytime soon at the rate it's going at this point. Are there other avenues for the global oil trade to potentially bypass the strait entirely?

SOMMERS: Well, the most important place is really that strait of al- Mandab, which is the southern way that oil is flowing through the Saudi east-west pipeline south through the Red Sea. But there are concerns there as well, as the Houthis potentially go into that area and start threatening Saudi tankers out of that Strait.

The other place for it to go is essentially through the north end of the Red Sea, through the Suez Canal. But there are logistical concerns there. You can't put the very large vessels through the Suez Canal. So it should be a big concern to all lawmakers about where this is headed.

Fortunately, we are buttressed by the fact that the United States is now the largest producer of both oil and natural gas in the world. And that continued supply has really been the insurance policy for the world, given the circumstance that we've had for the last five months in the Strait.

BROWN: So gas, it's been back over $4 a gallon for more than a week now, and the prices keep climbing. What is your message to Americans who see these oil companies making near-record profits because of a war that, at the moment, is not near an end, as far as we know?

SOMMERS: Well, the message is that we need a lot more production here in the United States if we're going to keep prices at the right level. Fortunately, because of the fracking revolution, we've been able to produce more oil and more natural gas than any other country in the world.

This is a commodities business. Prices go up, prices go down. In 2020, we were meeting with President Trump when we were actually dealing with negative oil prices. And nobody in the oil industry was asking for a bailout then. What we need is sustained production and a level price for oil and natural gas to make sure that we can continue to produce for the American people and the world.

We also know that there are a lot of people that are hurting right now as a consequence of these prices. Production has gone up. In fact, our rig counts, which is a real measure of how much production is going up, are up by 45 rigs just this year alone. That is a direct result of the industry responding to consumer prices and making sure that we're producing more here in the United States so that we don't have to be dependent on oil from the Middle East.

BROWN: All right, Mike Sommers, thank you for coming on. SOMMERS: Great to be here.

[17:44:27]

BROWN: And in the sports lead, FIFA's growing problem. Teams protesting FIFA's new private investment plans, plans that could involve Jared Kushner's younger brother. What has one coalition calling for a FIFA boycott, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROWN: Breaking tonight in our Sports Lead, shock and outrage. FIFA faces backlash over its plan to create a $20 billion operation to run the World Cup with private investors. The coalition of 55 European teams is boycotting all future competitions if FIFA's new investment plan passes. And another organization that includes the United States is rejecting the proposal.

And part of the anger is directed at the main proposed investor group, Thrive Eternal. That's headed up by Joshua Kushner, the younger brother of Jared Kushner, President Trump's son-in-law. So let's talk all about this with CNN's Christina Macfarlane and two soccer experts with the athletic senior writers Megan Linehan and Felipe Cardenas. Thank you so much for coming.

Also, Christina, to you first. After unanimously voting to boycott future FIFA competitions, part of the statement from this European coalition, it's known as UEFA reads, "No part of it should ever be surrendered to private investors. The World Cup is not for sale." What about this deal makes it so controversial?

[17:50:12]

CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Pamela, look, what we saw from UEFA today was a furious rebuke to what Gianni Infantino has been trying to do here, which is to commercialize the World Cup through the sale to private entities without notifying its members, its leaders or even, you know, FIFA members within his own orbit, including apparently his own vice president.

So the plan for this FIFA Forward Enterprise or FFE, as it's being called, is to sell stakes in its World Cup competitions to private investors for a commercial entity that will run its main events. Now, the one company that's being earmarked to lead this investor group is the investment fund Thrive Capital, which is being run by Jared Kushner's brother, his younger brother, Joshua Kushner.

So Gianni Infantino at this point, he came out yesterday and said that all FIFA federations, 211 of them, have got until September the 19th to sign on to this deal. And in return, they could receive anywhere in the region of up to $40 million for doing so. He is insistent that this is an offer and not an obligation.

But quite honestly, that is not how many of these federations are viewing this, hence the reason why we saw such a unanimous and strong boycott today. BROWN: So Felipe, how do you see this playing out? Will FIFA's plan pass without European or North American support?

FELIPE CARDENAS, SENIOR WRITER, THE ATHLETIC: Well, we have to wait and see. I think right now we are in the backlash stage of this, not necessarily the fallout yet. But right now, 96 of the 211 FIFA national associations have come out and opposed this plan. So you're nearing the majority here. And they still have plenty to go. We haven't heard from South America at the time of, you know, we haven't heard from Africa. We haven't heard from the Asian confederation either.

And those are key allies, I think, of FIFA president Gianni Infantino. So the way this plays out is we have 24, 48 hours to find out what these confederations are going to say. It does feel like the inevitability of a commercialization arm for FIFA perhaps is something that doesn't happen this week, but perhaps it's part of the future of the sport.

And that is really what is upsetting a lot of the fans. And that's been coming out of the reports out of the U.K. as well, that you're hearing actually members of these associations saying that this is everything from irresponsible to indefensible. So I think when cooler has prevailed, perhaps these dialogues are more professional. But right now, Gianni Infantino having a bit of a P.R. crisis that he's having to deal with at a global scale right now.

BROWN: And Meg, the pressure is on FIFA to resolve the standoff with UEFA because there's a lot of upcoming competitions, right? The big one is next year's Women's World Cup, but the Under-20 Women's World Cup starts in September, followed by several others. As someone whose beat is women's soccer, are you hearing about any changes to these upcoming tournaments?

MEG LINEHAN, WOMEN'S SOCCER REPORTER, THE ATHLETIC: There haven't been any announced changes at this point, but I do think to your point, the U-20 competition is actually being hosted by Poland, which is, of course, a member nation of UEFA, the European contingent. So there is a potential that this tournament could be cancelled or rescheduled if it's not immediately reconciled as to next steps.

But also the senior national teams are in the middle of World Cup qualifying and the next round of qualifiers for the 2027 World Cup for Europe are set to start in October. England is a part of those, these are massive teams involved in World Cup qualifying still.

And so to me, the really unfair part of this is every part of this plan has been focused on the Men's World Cup, men in general, and the women are set to pay the more immediate price for Infantino's plans.

BROWN: So just to follow up with you, Meg, the 2023 Women's World Cup generated $570 million in revenue and FIFA is projecting $1 million for 2027. Is there a world where FIFA's new investment plan could even surpass that?

LINEHAN: So what I do think is interesting is FIFA has finally split up media rights for the Men's and Women's World Cup. So now Women's World Cup is finally earning its own valuation alongside the men. But to be fair, FIFA has also historically undervalued basically every single women's project. It feels like based off the success of 2026, there's really no end in sight to how much money FIFA thinks they could make off of major tournaments.

The challenge is, you know, is the soul of the sport itself up for sale? You know, hydration breaks are one of the main topics of this World Cup and the commercial impact they could have. So right now it just feels like FIFA is willing to extract every single ounce of value they can get out of major tournaments.

BROWN: How do you see it, Felipe? Do you think it could be a good thing for women's soccer on a global scale?

[17:55:03]

CARDENAS: I mean, I think right now it's difficult to say. Obviously, there are going to be member associations both from the men's and the women's side that see this as an opportunity to try to play at a more even playing field from a financial perspective. I think the way this has been rolled out, though, and to Meg's point, what we've seen in the past in terms of FIFA's obligations and the responsibilities with women's sports and women's soccer, it doesn't paint a very nice picture.

And so I think that's what's really concerning everyone is that the fallout is going to be just as loud as the backlash. And right now, there -- we don't really see who the winners are in terms of the sport and the product of football.

BROWN: All right. Thank you all so much for coming on and sharing your reporting and perspective. We appreciate it.

Well, two Republican senators, the man they're blocking to be attorney general and a 45-minute meeting. Did the conversation today change anything? We've been getting new details almost every hour. And we're checking in with CNN's top reporters covering the Justice Department, the White House and Capitol Hill, up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)