Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Senate Holds Rare Saturday Session As GOP Pushes Trump Bill; Trump Praises Court Decision That Expands His Power; Interview With Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD); Waiting For Key Senate Vote On Trump's Agenda Bill; Protesters Call For End Of War In Gaza, Return Of Hostages; Protests, Opulence For Finale Of Bezos-Sanchez Three-Day Venice Wedding. Aired 5-6p ET

Aired June 28, 2025 - 17:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:00:38]

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN HOST: Welcome to the CNN NEWSROOM, everyone. I'm Omar Jimenez in New York. Jessica Dean has the day off.

We're going to start this hour with breaking news.

The Senate is convening for a rare Saturday session as it negotiates President Donald Trump's sweeping national agenda bill, with Republican leaders hoping to pass their version of the legislation this weekend.

Right now, we are waiting on a procedural vote where Republicans can really only afford to lose three votes. That needs to pass first before lawmakers can formally debate the bill on the Senate floor.

Once the debate kicks off, though, that could last up to 20 hours.

So we're following this from all angles right now.

I want to bring in CNN congressional correspondent Lauren Fox, who's here also with senior reporter Annie Grayer and senior White House reporter Betsy Klein.

Lauren, I'm going to start with you. Can you just update us on what the situation is right now? What are you watching for at the moment?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, right now we are waiting for this key procedural vote to get underway on the United States Senate floor. We have seen members mingling in and out of that room. We see staff getting prepared for a potential vote, but we have not heard the bells yet, indicating that this vote is getting underway.

I am told that there's nothing amiss here, that this is just the Senate taking some time before they begin this procedural vote.

But obviously it's going to be extremely key and we are watching to see if John Thune, the Republican leader, has the votes he needs to advance this bill.

A couple of members we are watching really closely. We already know that Senator Ron Johnson has said he is going to be voting against this procedural step, as well as Senator Thom Tillis is planning to vote against this procedural step, as well as Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who has been long saying he has concerns about how much this bill may add to the federal deficit.

In addition to that, I'm watching really closely. Senator Mike Lee, another Conservative from the state of Utah, as well as Jerry Moran, a Republican from Kansas, who has been expressing concerns about some of the Medicaid changes and the impact it could have on rural hospitals in his state.

And then we are watching Senator Lisa Murkowski, who has not said yet how she plans to vote on this procedural step. She has in the past expressed concerns about cuts to Medicaid. She has also expressed some concerns about changes to the Federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known more informally as food stamps, because there is a provision in this bill that would shift some of the burden, the cost burden onto states. Right now, that program is covered by the federal government.

So those are some members that we're going to be watching really closely. John Thune can afford to lose three members. He can't afford to lose one more member from that.

Obviously, if this process takes time, if there's some arm twisting on the floor, if he thinks he may get close to needing to bring in an official tie breaker, meaning the vice president, that could all take time. That could delay this process.

Once, and only if they can advance the bill, then this process is going to get even lengthier. And that is because Democrats are going to force them to read the bill. That could take between 10 and 15 hours, we are told.

After that there's 20 hours of debate. We expect Republicans will yield back most of their time. But that probably is still going to take between 10 and 12 hours.

Only then will they get started on what is known as a vote-a-rama. That is a marathon voting exercise where lawmakers can continue that process until ultimately they are just too exhausted to keep going.

Only then will they have a final vote on this proposal. So that just gives you a sense that this process is just at its beginning. And we expect this bill could change throughout the next 24 to 36 hours.

JIMENEZ: Well, you talked about the marathon vote-a-rama. You listed two marathons before we even got to that point right now. And what's tricky at the moment is it seems some of the folks that we're waiting for either on holdouts who have already indicated they're not going to move forward, seem to be doing so for different reasons, whether its Medicaid concerns, deficit concerns, debt limit concerns.

[17:04:43]

JIMENEZ: To keep -- to keep that train moving, one step further, if this does actually get through that vote-a-rama and passes the Senate, it would still have to go back to the House. Do we know Lauren -- have we gotten a sense of where House Republicans stand on the Senate version now that we at least have some idea of what the text is, at least as of now?

FOX: Yes. I mean, we are starting to hear some concerns from Republicans in the House of Representatives who initially supported the House version of this bill.

And it's really interesting because just a couple of hours ago, Speaker Mike Johnson convened a call of his Republican members and told them in a very short conference call, essentially, keep your powder dry. If you have concerns about this bill, if you want changes to this bill, talk to your senators. They are in the driver's seat on this process right now.

But don't be going out and tweeting red lines in the sand at this moment, because again, this will go back over to the House of Representatives. And Mike Johnson is going to have to corral his members once again.

We already saw that was a really difficult process for him. There are significant changes in this bill, all of which he's going to have to convince his members to rally around in order to get this to the president's desk by that 4th of July recess.

JIMENEZ: And the headwinds were seeing here were already ones we are getting indications of even when the house version passed as well. We're just now seeing some of that play out in real time.

Lauren Fox, really appreciate it.

I want to bring in CNN's Annie Grayer now because, Annie, you know, it was late last night the Republicans put out a version of the bill that was over 900 pages long. Do we have a sense of what's changed since even that was published? How did we get here?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, Omar, there were a lot of changes happening overnight, and we're still not sure what the final version is going to look like because as Lauren was laying out, there are still so many Republican senators who have issues with this bill for various reasons.

But there are three major changes overnight that I want to walk you through that are -- that are meant to alleviate some of the biggest concerns.

So the first has to do with senators who have been very concerned about the deep Medicaid cuts that this bill has. So one of the things that this new version of the bill will do is add a relief for rural hospitals. It's going to be $25 billion up for over five years.

I'm just referencing my notes to make sure I get all the specifics right for you, which is really going to help rural hospitals offset some of the biggest concerns that they have here.

The next big thing that the changes to the bill has to do with is the provider tax. This has been a big controversial piece of the bill, and the new version is going to lower the percent of the provider tax and have it kick in later, which a lot of Republican senators say they like.

So after those two big changes we saw this morning, Republican Senator Josh Hawley come out in support of this bill. And he has been one of the loudest senators who's been advocating to not cut Medicaid as much as the rest of his conference may have liked to.

And the third biggest change has to do with state and local tax deductions. A lot of the New York Republicans in the House have been advocating for an increase for how much households would have to pay in state and local tax deductions, and they've been working with the Treasury Department, with Republicans in the Senate and they got a big increase from $10,000 to $40,000 off for households in their districts. But instead of a ten-year deal, it's now only down to five.

So as you can see, all of this has got a give and take here. It's a moving target. But these changes show the Republican leadership really is trying to meet their senators where they are and kind of accommodate all the concerns that they're hearing.

JIMENEZ: And for those watching who maybe thought we just got way in the weeds there as Annie Grayer so expertly laid out, I mean, those are the details that actually could make a difference in whether this procedural vote actually moves forward and whether this bill actually passes in the end.

So Annie Grayer really appreciate that.

Betsy is at the White House for us, and she's really -- the White House is really setting the context here because as Senate Republicans are scrambling to get Trump's agenda passed the finish line, the president spent part of the day hitting the links at Virginia Golf Club. And we I believe we had some video of him arriving back at the White House a short time ago.

But Betsy, look, president not just playing golf here, he's playing politics as he typically does, always trying to win over some Republican holdouts in this process.

What do we know about the White House strategy on this, especially at this point as we await this next step moving forward?

BETSY KLEIN, CNN WHITE HOUSE SENIOR REPORTER: Well, look, Omar, this is President Trump's art of the deal. The president views himself as a deal maker. It is on him right now to close this deal.

And the White House is acutely aware of all of these concerns from these various lawmakers on this so-called Big, Beautiful Bill, all of the hurdles and uncertainty ahead.

But this is really mission critical for the White House. And their stance is that failure is not an option here. And so for that reason, President Trump, as well as Vice President J.D. Vance, have really spent the better part of the last 24 hours working the phones, talking to multiple senators, inviting them to the White House, as well as the president scrapping a planned trip to New Jersey, where he was expected to go to his golf club.

[17:09:49]

KLEIN: Instead going to his golf club here in the northern Virginia area, where he hosted Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Senator Eric Schmitt of Missouri, as well as one of those very critical holdouts, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky.

Paul, of course, has expressed concerns about the debt ceiling increase that is included in this bill as it currently stands. But Graham said in a post to social media after that particular time on the golf course earlier today that the Big, Beautiful Bill is, quote, "on the way".

So it's unclear if President Trump was able to change his mind on that. But the White House fielding all kinds of questions and concerns from Republican lawmakers as they try to get this over the finish line.

The White House is also seeing some criticism from someone who's been a major critic of this bill, and that is Elon Musk, the president's former top adviser, head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, who, of course, had that explosive fight with President Trump just a few weeks ago.

But Musk, posting in the last hour, quote, "The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country. Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future."

But President Trump making this push, he also had a key event at the White House last Thursday where he really intensified that pressure on this, getting this bill over the finish line. He took aim at so-called grandstanders that he said are not good people who are essentially opposed to this bill.

He also said that the bill would not -- would leave Medicaid essentially the same. Of course, that is not true. The bill, as it currently stands, has major cuts to Medicaid and changes to that policy and could see millions lose their coverage there.

But the White House has been pushing toward getting this done by that self-imposed 4th of July deadline. President Trump appearing to soften on that deadline a little bit. He said it's important, but it's not the end-all. The White House, of course, very closely tracking what happens on the Senate floor in these moments ahead.

JIMENEZ: Yes, a lot to keep an eye on. Betsy Klein, really appreciate it. We will continue to follow the Senate process as it moves forward as well. And we'll bring you that as it comes. We're also talking about what's next for Democrats as the Senate looks

to move President Trump's Republican agenda forward. Congressman Jamie Raskin is going to join me next.

[17:12:24]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIMENEZ: All right. Welcome back everyone.

We are continuing to monitor the Senate floor as we are waiting for a key procedural vote where Republicans can only afford to lose three votes here. And this is a process that would then move voting -- the voting process forward on the president's spending bill, obviously, one that the president has wanted to pass as quickly as possible. So we're continuing to monitor that.

But as President Trump seeks a major policy victory on that front, he is celebrating another big win. This one from the nation's highest court.

In a six to three ruling, the Supreme Court gave the president significantly more power by limiting the ability of lower courts to strike down a president's policies.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing specifically for the majority opinion, quote, "When a court concludes that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, the answer is not for the court to exceed its power too."

Despite previously griping about her in private, the president was quick to praise Justice Barrett.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I want to thank Justice Barrett who wrote the opinion brilliantly.

I just have great respect for her. I always have. And her decision was brilliantly written today from all accounts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: I want to bring in Democratic Congressman Jamie Raskin of Maryland. He's also the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and a former constitutional law professor.

Congressman, I appreciate you being here.

You know, you've described this as a ridiculous interpretation of the Judiciary Act of 1789. Can you just explain why you think that is, and why you think the justices made a mistake here?

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Well, formally, the decision was about how far the equitable jurisdiction of federal district courts goes. And the whole point of equity going back to 1789 is that the courts could adapt to circumstances to see that justice is done and that a lawless government actor is reined in.

So to use some kind of frozen originalist jurisprudence on a statute written in 1789, in order to give the courts expansive authority to address illegality is ridiculous.

Everybody knows that the that the president's executive order on birthright citizenship is blatantly unconstitutional as a Reagan judge put it. He said in his four decades on the bench, he'd never seen a more unconstitutional executive order or executive action than that one.

So it's been struck down by four district courts, two Democratic- appointed judges, two Republican-appointed judges and three appeals courts have struck it down. So seven courts have looked at it, and 100 percent of them have said its plainly unconstitutional.

[17:19:50]

RASKIN: So in the Supreme Court's absurd effort to torture out some kind of consolation prize for the president and to soothe his wounded ego, they suddenly, radically constricted the authority of courts to decide cases in a way to vindicate the rights of the people, which, after all, is what counts here, because the people are sovereign.

This is all about the rights of the people. It's not about Donald Trump's feelings and how aggrieved he feels about the fact that he's lost in seven successive cases, just in this -- on this particular executive order.

There are now 199 preliminary injunctions and temporary restraining orders against this reign of lawlessness that Trump has unleashed against us.

So I think that on its terms, it was a ridiculous decision. And Justice Jackson did a great job pointing that out. Justice Sotomayor also completely dismantled the majority's opinion.

But everybody can see what's happening here, which is they're trying to look for a way to throw a win, a procedural win to Donald Trump.

So we've won in four district courts. If we've got to go win in 94 district courts, vindicating the constitutional right of birthright citizenship, we'll do it.

JIMENEZ: Yes. And yes, liberal justices warned that the ruling makes the Supreme Court complicit in a culture of disdain for lower courts.

I want to play a clip from Chief Justice John Roberts this morning, because he was actually asked about the anger and criticism aimed at justices after major decisions like the one handed down this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS, SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES: It becomes wrapped up in the political dispute that a judge who's doing his or her job is part of the problem. It's not the judge's fault that a correct interpretation of the law meant that, no, you don't get to do this.

If it's just venting because you lost, then that's not terribly helpful. Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: What do you make of that reaction?

RASKIN: Well, look, this is a radical U-turn in the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court and the interpretation of the Judiciary Act of 1789. And so Congress can correct it because it purports to be an interpretation of congressional intent and will.

Of course, for decades and decades there have been universal injunctions rendered, and Congress has never done anything to cut them down. And so if I have anything to say about it, you know, we should figure out some kind of compromise.

Maybe what we need is an appellate court to deal with nationwide injunctions and people who want nationwide injunctions can go to that court, which would either allow the district court to do it. It could take it upon itself. But it could be fast tracked all the way up to the Supreme Court.

But the idea that the president of the United States can basically play hide and go seek and hopscotch and say, oh, well, you struck me down in those courts, but I'm still ok in those districts over there I'm going to keep violating the law is absurd.

And it is an insult and an affront to the rule of law. I understand the impulse to try to appease Donald Trump, but I think what we've seen with the law firms, what we've seen with the colleges and universities, is that there is no appeasing authoritarians.

And I hope the court doesn't get into that habit. Their job is to decide actual cases and controversies.

JIMENEZ: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. But you know, we have heard criticism from both sides of the aisle on nationwide injunctions. I mean, back in 2022, Justice Elena Kagan said it just can't be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process.

I mean, is there needed reform though, when it comes to how nationwide injunctions are currently or were carried out before this ruling? I mean, I guess what comes to mind is will Republicans come to regret this ruling if Democrats take back the White House and then choose to do the same thing?

RASKIN: Well, undoubtedly, because they tailor their approach to the procedure to what their political agenda is. I mean, when Judge Kacsmaryk from Amarillo, Texas, who's the only judge in his district court, began to render all of these culture war decisions, the Republicans were lined up around the block to get in there. And that's why they, you know, he issued a nationwide injunction against mifepristone, and they weren't complaining about it at that point.

But you know, the issue here is that there's been severe damage inflicted on the ability of the courts to render equitable judgments after they've decided that there's a blatantly unconstitutional presidential action or executive order. And we're going to have to correct that.

That's why I'm saying if they don't like the idea that every district court in the country has that power, let's create a special district court that would be able to render judgment in nationwide injunctions with some special standard of proof like, you know.

[17:24:45]

RASKIN: If it's blatantly unconstitutional, which is what you've got Republican judges right now saying about that executive order that directly contradicts the first sentence of the 14th Amendment, which says all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the state within which they reside.

So we can work something out. But really, it's up to Congress to do it, because Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789.

So you're telling me it was just pure coincidence that these justices who are under fire from MAGA and Donald Trump constantly Decided to just decide in this case that nationwide injunctions are unconstitutional? I'm sorry. I mean, you know, I was born on a Friday, but I wasn't born yesterday.

JIMENEZ: Congressman, I'm going to write that one down. Congressman Jamie Raskin, I really appreciate the time. Thanks for being here.

RASKIN: Thank you.

(CROSSTALK)

JIMENEZ: -- we'll take a quick break.

[17:25:42]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:30:08]

JIMENEZ: All right. Welcome back. We are still waiting to see if Senate Republicans will hold a rare Saturday night vote as they try to pass President Trump's agenda before his 4th of July deadline. A lot of steps to get to that point though.

I want to bring in Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, because, Senator, I mean, it's not yet clear if Republicans have enough votes to pass this bill, but what are your biggest concerns with the latest changes that have been made on the Senate side?

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): Well, this bill is a big, beautiful betrayal of the middle class, and I am not surprised they seem to be having trouble because the vote was supposed to be at 4:00. We had 40 Democrats sitting out there on the floor waiting for them. And now we still got a number of Democrats out there. I guess we like each other because they are nowhere to be found.

So, it makes me think that they maybe don't have the votes, and let me tell you why. One, $4 trillion in debt, this bill, in ten years, up from what it was even in the House bill. $4 trillion, that's increased interest rates on mortgages and the like. Then it's another a hundred billion dollars in Medicaid cuts, which were already at $800 billion, throwing 16 million people off of their healthcare, and then rural hospitals closing 300 rural hospitals. When I talked to my constituents in rural Minnesota, the last thing that they want to see is higher prices for groceries and a closing of rural hospitals, which is the lifeline for so many people in rural areas.

So, this is a real world effect. They're hoping no one notices it. That's what one of their senators said the other day. People are noticing it. 60 percent, as you know, Omar, 60 percent of Americans think this is a bad bill when they're asked about it.

JIMENEZ: You know, you mentioned rural hospitals. There are several Republican senators, including Josh Hawley, who were concerned by the cuts to Medicaid, which, of course, Democrats have also criticized. This latest version does include a relief fund for rural hospitals. Does that make it any better for you?

KLOBUCHAR: You know, one of the things they're not saying, and, by the way, relief fund, really? So, the bill is so bad and it works so hard to give tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, like $400,000 in one year that you have to have a relief fund?

So, the way I look at this isn't just Medicaid cuts. Coming up there are Medicare cuts because of the fact that it adds over $3 trillion, now $4 trillion to the debt. That triggers some automatic Medicare cuts, in this case, of $500 billion. So, the rural hospitals are hit by both the Medicaid cuts and the Medicare cuts. So, no, this doesn't fix it, and it doesn't fix any of it, and what they should do is start over.

So, I am not surprised they're holding off on this vote after putting a bill in the mix at midnight that was 940 pages. Most of them, in fact, all of them have not really read it.

JIMENEZ: And, you know, to this point and again, as we wait to see the, this procedure inching along, we still don't know exactly what the timeline is, it sounds like you guys don't even know exactly what the timeline is at this point. But we know --

KLOBUCHAR: No, we were out there ready to rumble and make the case I just made and debate them and do whatever we can to change the bill. We're going to put votes out there. That's our right. But, you know, they were just missing an action.

JIMENEZ: And, you know, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, as we've heard, is planning a major delay tactic by forcing clerks to read the entire bill out loud, as you know, over 900 pages at this point.

KLOBUCHAR: Okay. But how -- why -- maybe someone should read it, because they just put it out at midnight and all this stuff they've been saying about how it's immoral to make Medicaid cuts, this bill makes it worse. So, there's a good reason for them to read the bill.

JIMENEZ: Yes. So, I guess that was my question, do you agree with that with moving forward in that way? Do you think it's going to break up any Republican coalition that may have formed on this bill in the last 24 hours, AKA, do you think it will actually be substantive?

KLOBUCHAR: I think what it does is give the nation time to start hearing about what this bill really does, because we know there's still people that don't know about it. Donald Trump's trying to do whatever he can to distract them from knowing about it. But when people hear anything about it and they look at the facts or they listen to some of their local officials, they find out it's 2-1, that they believe that this bill helps rich people and not them, and that's a Fox News poll.

JIMENEZ: All right, we're going to continue to monitor again any progress that may be made on that front. It looks pretty empty at least from the live look at the Senate floor right now. But I do want to ask you about something else, Senator, because your close friend, former colleague, the late state representative from Minnesota, Melissa Hortman, she and her husband, Mark, were laid to rest today in a private funeral. How are you feeling right now? What changes are you hoping to see?

[17:35:00]

Forget the changes for a second. Just how are you feeling today?

KLOBUCHAR: You know, I would have wanted to be there so much. My husband was there. I watched on live stream from here, but there's no way I was going to miss working on this bill, but I would have liked to be there grieving with their friends and family.

Senator Smith and I were able to go yesterday when she was laying in state, along with her husband, Mark, and was able to talk at length with the family. And Colin and Sophie, they're incredibly strong kids. And those kids have been a pillar of strength for our state. They're the ones that said literally days after the horrendous murder of their parents, they said, do something good for the world in the name of our parents.

They said anything from plant a tree, I'm wearing green in Melissa's honor today because she loved the outdoors and she also loved making the world a beautiful place or pet a dog, they said hopefully a golden retriever. And they were just the most beautiful parents but also they love to serve.

And I thought one of the most moving moments from the funeral today, which was very -- a mass. It was based on in their faith. But was when our archbishop at the end quoted the new pope, Pope Leo, in which Pope Leo has said that politics is the highest form of charity, well, I want to see a little bit of that from my colleagues today. I want to see a little bit of charity and a little bit of realizing that this bill is not just immediately bad. It's bad for their kids and their grandkids, and bad for the United States of America.

And so maybe they should do what these kids ask and let's do something good and stand up, because all we need is four Republican senators to stand up. And this bill, we could make major changes to it.

JIMENEZ: Yes. And as you were speaking, we were showing some video from the mass from the funeral and former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Walz were there as well.

KLOBUCHAR: Yes.

JIMENEZ: But, Senator Klobuchar, I really appreciate the time. I guess people are supposed to --

KLOBUCHAR: By the way, what you hear in the background, if you hear it, those are faith leaders with Raphael Warnock who doesn't need a microphone. So, the faith leaders are here. I'm going to go down and be with them right now in strong opposition to this bill.

JIMENEZ: Yes. Well, when Senator Raphael Warnock gets preaching, you can hear it from a mile away, so --

KLOBUCHAR: That is true.

JIMENEZ: Yes. Senator Klobuchar, I really appreciate the time. Keep us posted on how things are going.

KLOBUCHAR: All right, thank you.

JIMENEZ: All right. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of anti-war protesters packed hostages square in Tel Aviv calling for an end to the Gaza War and a return of the remaining hostages. We'll bring you those details coming up.

You're in the CNN Newsroom.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:40:00]

JIMENEZ: All right. Welcome back, everyone. Just a week after the U.S. strikes on three of Iran's nuclear facilities, CNN has obtained these satellite images that seem to show activity at Fordow, one of the nuclear facilities at the core of Iran's nuclear program. You can see what appear to be vehicles there, excavators, and other earth-moving machinery around its tunnel entrances. These images were captured on Friday.

Now, Fordow is buried deep inside a mountain to guard from attacks and a U.S. official tell CNN six B-2 bombers were used to drop 12 bunker- buster bombs on the site.

Now, Trump has repeatedly said that U.S. strikes, quote, obliterated Iran's nuclear sites, but he's not ruling out striking again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: If the intelligence reports conclude that Iran can enrich uranium to a level that concerns you, would you consider bombing the country again?

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Sure, without question, absolutely.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: Now, Trump later cast serious doubt on any diplomatic progress with Iran, blasting the supreme leader on social media, claiming he personally held back Israel and U.S. forces from assassinating the ayatollah, which echoes some of what we've heard before from both Netanyahu of Israel and President Trump of the United States.

Speaking of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he says Israel's, quote, victory against Iran is an opportunity to defeat Hamas. But tonight, he's under pressure, tens of thousands of anti-war protesters packed Hostage Square in Tel Aviv calling for an end to the war in Gaza and the return of remaining hostages.

CNN's Nic Robertson was there. So, Nic, can you just explain what was the scene like?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes. The whole of our team, we've all covered a number of these rallies before, really felt that this was one of the biggest that we've seen in some time, and it was overflowing Hostage Square from the front to the back, out to the sides, additional big screens on the roadway there as well, and another protest in the center of Tel Aviv as well, more of an anti- government flavor there, protests in other parts of the country. And you get that sense from people that what they perceive as this victory with Iran or over Iran, if you will, has given the prime minister some political space to maybe do a deal with Hamas and they really want to get him over the line.

But you know what? It's that President Trump there really looking to get their own prime minister to take that last leap.

[17:45:00]

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON (voice over): On hold during the Iran conflict, energized by the possibilities of that perceived victory.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We want all of them now. Bring them home now.

ROBERTSON: Free the hostage protesters in full voice at their first regular Saturday rally in three weeks. Viki Cohen, mother of hostage Nimrod, hopeful she'll get her 20-year-old son back soon.

VIKI COHEN, MOTHER OF HOSTAGE NIMROD COHEN: We feel that it's a little different. Trump is very demanding and we believe in him. We trust him, and we know he has the power to stop the war. He can pressure our prime minister to do it, to finish the war in Gaza. And in this way, all the hostages can come back home.

ROBERTSON: The deal they want now is a comprehensive agreement, bring all the hostages home, 50 of them, about 20, believed to be alive, and get the army out of Gaza.

In Gaza, peace can't come soon enough either. Tents pitched on this sand hit, rescuers say, by an Israeli airstrike early Saturday. The IDF say they are looking into the incident.

By daybreak, this night's horror revealed, a huge crater and no tents.

The recovery not done. Alone with a shovel, Abu Muhammad searching for two children, eight of their deceased brothers and sisters already found.

Among the dead were children age 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, and 10 and 11 years old. Mohamed says. There were two boys, five girls, their mother and their grandmother.

TRUMP: I think it's close. I just spoke with some of the people involved. And it's a terrible situation that's going in Gaza he's asking about, and we think within the next week we're going to get a ceasefire.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERTSON (on camera): So, President Trump really does seem to be sort of turning up the mood music for Israelis about the possibility of change and the fact that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who's top confidant is expected in Washington in the next couple of days, really hints at that sense of momentum.

You know, but when you talk to people in the crowd there, they're hopeful, but they've been to this place before, a place where even the slightest difference between the prime minister, the president, or the prime minister and Hamas just dashes everyone's hopes because the deal just doesn't get done.

ROBERTSON: Yes. And as you pointed out, just the latest in a number of protests we have seen happen in Israel over the last year or so in regards to stopping this war and bringing some of those hostages home as well.

Nic Robertson in Jerusalem, I really appreciate the reporting, as always.

And everyone else stay with us. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[17:50:00]

ROBERTSON: Welcome back. So, if you haven't heard the last three days, the streets and canals of Venice, Italy, have been filled with famous faces, attending the wedding weekend of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez. The lavish and very secretive at times event has prompted some local anger and protests throughout the city, but that didn't seem to have ruined things for the newlyweds who were seen heading to the final wedding gala just a few hours ago as our Melissa Bell was live on CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This is the boat of Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez Bezos now carrying them to their final party. You can see them there just through the window waving at people. They're waving at us. It is them heading to their last party.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ROBERTSON: I mean, literally she was just on that boat live as they were going through, and she wasn't the only one. A lot of cameras on those boats as well.

And from the protests to the parties, Melissa has been following the story all weekend.

BELL: Day three, the end of the Lauren Sanchez Bezos now, and Jeff Bezos wedding that has so dominated attention here in Venice for the last few days, as each day of the last three, this south side, the Aman Hotel is the scene. Police boats, boats filled with paparazzi as they wait to see not just the couple emerge day after day but also many of their celebrity guests.

This last evening, they're waiting for them to get into their vaporettos head off to the last party that's to be held at the Arsenale. It had to be moved because of protests. Still undeterred protesters took to the streets again, this final third day of the wedding this Saturday to make their anger known. There were workers from Amazon, there were anti-capitalists, there were climate change protesters, there were those opposed to Venice being used as a backdrop, as a postcard for this wedding, and opposed to the extravagance of it. We've seen them carry out a number of actions over the course of the last few days against the holding of this wedding and everything that went with it.

[17:55:04]

Still, it's gone on really without a hiccup largely apart from the moving of that final venue with all of the guests really abiding by what seems to have been their non-disclosure agreements. You'll have seen very little of what went on within the parties simply at the paparazzi shots of many celebrities that were invited making their way around the streets of Venice over the course of the weekend.

Melissa Bell, CNN, Venice.

ROBERTSON: Melissa Bell with a tough assignment, thank you so much.

All right, we've been talking about it. It could be a long night on Capitol Hill as the Senate works through President Trump's big, beautiful bill. But why will it be a long night? We will explain.

Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:00:00]