Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Senate Begins Marathon Debate Session On Trump Agenda Bill; Israel's Netanyahu Holding High Level Meetings On Gaza Today; NOAA to Stop Providing Crucial Weather Data From Satellites; Debate Over Trump Budget Megabill; GOP Sen. Thom Tillis Says He's Not Seeking Reflection A Day After Voting Against Trump's Agenda Bill. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired June 29, 2025 - 16:00   ET

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


[16:00:00]

AUDREY WASHINGTON, WSB-T.V. REPORTER: But the hunters told me when they took a look at it, they knew it was a piece of meteorite.

CHRIS SANDERS, EDUCATOR: Yes, 24 hours ago, it was a piece of an asteroid that somehow gravity sent it to us.

WASHINGTON: And now it's in your hand.

SANDERS: And now it's in my hand.

WASHINGTON: These self-proclaimed meteorite hunters, one, a former broadcaster, and the other a science teacher, told me they found these pieces hours after a meteorite, about three feet in diameter, weighing more than a ton, landed in parts of metro Atlanta.

SANDERS: Super exciting. I'm a collector. I've collected for a while.

WASHINGTON: Chris Sanders and his partner Craig Zilman traveled to the McDonough area after they learned pieces of the meteorite landed off of Poland Road, and possibly through a roof on Cathedral Drive.

CRAIG ZILMAN, METEORITE HUNTER: In this case, it hit a house, so we knew that something actually hit the ground. And when that happens, we come down and we start, we look at radar returns.

WASHINGTON: Thursday, a Channel Two Action news viewer sent us these images of the event. Brad Weber lives nearby and felt the moment the meteorite landed.

BRAD WEBER, RESIDENT: I heard sort of a rumble when I was in my garage, stepped outside.

WASHINGTON: And here's another look at the meteorite here in my hand. I got to tell you, it's pretty lightweight, and at first glance it looks like a rock. But the hunters told me when they took a look at it, they knew it was a piece of meteorite.

SANDERS: This is broken. So you see the inside of it, this white color. But the outside of it is dark and it's kind of black and shiny and a little bit frothy. And that's from where it burned up. It's called a fusion crust.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN HOST: So fascinating. All right, that was Audrey Washington bringing us that report with CNN affiliate WSB.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

WHITFIELD: Hello, again, everyone. Thank you so much for joining me this Sunday. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

We begin with our breaking news on Capitol Hill. Just moments ago, senators began formally debating the president's sweeping tax and spending bill. In the last hour, clerks actually finished the nearly 16-hour marathon read session of the 940-page measure. The Democrats and Republicans now each get a maximum of 10 hours to debate it.

And all of this follows a late-night win for the president, as Republicans narrowly voted to advance the bill after making concessions to some GOP holdouts. New analysis from the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the Senate bill will add nearly $3.3 trillion to the deficit over the next decade. That's nearly a trillion more than the estimates for the House version.

We've got a team of correspondents covering these developments. Kevin Liptak is at the White House. Julia Benbrook is on Capitol Hill.

Julia, you first, bring us up to speed on where things stand and what is expected next.

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, a lot has happened. There is still a lot to go. Overnight Senate Republicans passed a major hurdle when it comes to passing President Donald Trump's massive agenda package. His so-called one big beautiful bill.

Trump is calling this a great victory, but there are still some potential hurdles ahead. We saw just two Republican senators oppose vote to not advance this bill. That was Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky and Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina. And then just hours ago, we learned that Tillis will not be seeking reelection.

But there are several other GOP lawmakers who have voiced various concerns throughout this process. This is a massive multi-trillion package that would lower federal taxes. It would boost spending on the military and on border security, and it would downsize some of those government safety net programs, including Medicaid.

Now the process last night we got through that procedural hurdle. And then we saw Democrats play a major delay tactic. They had the clerk read the entire bill. It's 940 pages. This took approximately 16 hours to get through. And then just moments ago, they have started formal debate. This could go up to 20 hours. And that's split evenly in opportunity between the two parties.

We expect Democrats to take most of their time. Republicans could use less. We just caught up with Majority Leader John Thune here at the Capitol a little while ago. And he was asked specifically how long they would take. He did not give a definitive answer. But once they get through that, then it's vote-a-rama, which is an open ended series of votes on amendments. Some of those focused on political messaging, some of those more substantial.

Then we will see them move toward final passage of this in the Senate. If it is successful, all eyes go back to the House where there will likely be more challenges since there have been changes. House Speaker Mike Johnson warned that they were able to pass this the first time very carefully. It was a delicate balance and any changes could cause more issues.

But Republicans have set this lofty goal of getting the bill to the president's desk for a signature by July 4th. Johnson said he is determined to get that done -- Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Julia, thank you so much.

Let's go to the White House now with Kevin Liptak.

[16:05:01]

Kevin, what are the plans coming out of the White House as they continue to watch before any voting?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and it's clear President Trump faces an enormous amount of pressure to get this bill passed. Remember, it contains almost the entirety of his domestic agenda, whether it's money for immigration enforcement, extending and expanding on those tax cuts. And that's part of the reason why the president is really making this bill into a test of Republican loyalty.

And you saw that sort of explicitly in the White House messaging to Capitol Hill yesterday, saying that President Trump was committed to keeping his promise and that failing to pass this bill would be, quote, "the ultimate betrayal." And you see, the president really twisting arms of Republicans to try and come on board, including Thom Tillis, who ultimately voted against this procedural measure and who has now said that he will not run for reelection in 2026.

Before that, President Trump had said that he was ready and willing to meet with potential primary challengers to Tillis, really putting his political weight and the political weight of his very loyal supporters behind someone who could potentially unseat the North Carolina Republican. Tillis clearly saying that he doesn't want any part of that. He doesn't necessarily want to be part of these loyalty tests.

And he says in his statement that he looks forward to having the freedom now to call balls and strikes in these sort of interim period before he retires. And so, I think very evident that the president is looking to get all of these Republicans on board. I think the challenge that the president faces is that there are continue -- will continue to be various reasons why not every Republican is getting behind this bill. Tillis, for example, was concerned about some of these deep cuts to

social safety net programs. And in fact, President Trump, in an interview today, did acknowledge that you have to be careful how much you cut because you have to win reelection. And so lending voice to some of those concerns.

On the other side of the coin, you have Republicans who are concerned about how much this bill would add to the deficit. And just now, within the last couple of hours, the House Freedom Caucus, which is that group of ultra conservative Republicans, tweeted out concerns that this Senate bill would add far more to the deficit than the House bill that they passed. And remember, once the Senate clears this, it will have to go back to the House and those House Freedom Caucus members will be necessary to get this bill across the finish line.

So combined, you can really see all of the hurdles that the president will continue to face before this bill makes it to his desk. Of course, Republican leaders, the White House, they're all confident that this will ultimately be successful. But I don't think that the president is necessarily counting his chickens before they hatch.

WHITFIELD: Right. Because seemingly, there's a long way to go. All right. Kevin Liptak at the White House, thank you so much.

All right, earlier, I spoke with Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar about her thoughts on this tax and spending bill. And here's part of that conversation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN): So people need to know that this so-called big, beautiful bill is really a big, beautiful betrayal of the American people, and they know it. FOX News poll found that 60 percent of Americans think that this is a bad bill. It's bad for them that it helps the wealthiest on a 2-1 margin. And they're right. It takes 17 million.

The Senate version is worse in this way. 17 million people off of their health care. $900 billion in Medicaid cuts. And half of the seniors who are in assisted living in our country are on Medicaid. So many families know the date when their loved ones' retirement savings end up, and they need Medicaid. That is a program that's been there for people that need it.

And so that piece of this, that's horrible. And then food assistance, four million people off of their food assistance and that includes the bulk of them, seniors, veterans, people with kids. So this is a pretty outrageous bill. And the thing that really bugs me, Fredricka, is that it adds $4 trillion to the debt, up from $3.4 trillion over in the House bill. So it's gotten worse. And that's going to mean higher mortgage rates, interest rates.

So those are the things that I'm going to talk to my colleagues until the very last hour, because especially in the Midwest, this bill is a bad deal for the American people. And they should be voting with their constituents instead of trying to rubber stamp the president because they're afraid of him.

WHITFIELD: So there are many ways in which to look at it. I mean, the plan extends nearly $4 trillion in tax cuts, including, you know, living up to Trump's campaign promise of no taxes on tips funding deportations, another campaign promise, cuts or changes to Medicaid and SNAP as you just underscored.

[16:10:00]

So, you know, tell us why you did vote no in the procedural and what -- of those concerns that you have, what kind of modifications would you be willing to make or able to make?

KLOBUCHAR: Well, I voted no because I don't think this bill is ready for primetime. And I think that you've got a situation where they should start over, or at least when you talk about those tax cuts, you know, we can keep in the tax cuts for people making under $400,000 a year. That is the vast majority of all Americans. The problem with this thing is that it gives multimillionaires a $400,000 tax cut.

So what you could do is if you got rid of the tax cuts, the major add on tax cuts from last time, and this time on people making over 400,000, you could save $2 trillion. You could put that into debt reduction. So our debt isn't sitting there on our kids and our grandkids' backs. You could put it into housing and child care. And of course you would make health care more affordable instead of putting in place Medicaid cuts.

So a budget is really a choice. Who are you going to help? And they have chosen to help the very wealthy instead of standing with their constituents. Energy prices alone, affordable energy, electricity is projected to go up $400 a year from this bill for the average American. In the Midwest really bad deal for so many who rely on rural hospitals. Over 300 rural hospitals are closed.

The debt is so huge in this bill, Fredricka, that it triggered automatic Medicare cuts of $500 billion under the law.

WHITFIELD: So when you have Republicans like Thom Tillis, Rand Paul, and Ron Johnson among those who have expressed some apprehensions about the bill, how do you find openings, perhaps with them, whether it's in arm twisting, handshakes, collaboration, especially with the backdrop of President Trump's posted threats, whether they be veiled or otherwise?

KLOBUCHAR: Very good question. And they have repeatedly said, Josh Hawley said that the Medicaid cuts were immoral. They are going to have a chance to do good because we have the power to bring up amendments and say, OK, let's do some sensible things. Instead of these Medicaid cuts, let's get rid of some of the tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy. That's a choice. And they're going to be able to vote on it because we're going to put forward amendments.

So they have the power even at the end of this bill. They are going to have the power to get rid of the $900 billion in Medicaid cuts. They're going to have the power to change this so we're not shifting all of these burdens on food assistance to the states, red state, blue state governors. They know that's bad. 41 states have balanced budget amendments and suddenly we're going to say to them, hey, North Carolina, you suddenly have over $500 million for food assistance that you're going to have to pay for, or people are going to go hungry.

Hey, Texas, you're going to have over $1 billion. And that is exactly what this bill does. It's a fraud because the actual debt add-on is $4 trillion.

WHITFIELD: Are you worried that a July 4th kind of looming deadline will lead to buy now, pay later?

KLOBUCHAR: I believe that the problem with this bill is that our Republican colleagues are more afraid of the president than they are in working with their constituents. The White House even said it last night. They said voting against this bill, in their words, would be a betrayal of the president. And they're threatening primaries, all kinds of things. I think they should be more worried about betraying the American people.

And so many of our Republican colleagues care about the debt, the ones in rural are especially focused on making sure that we've got rural grocery stores, which, by the way, half of the counties that only have one grocery store are in the Midwest. So they better vote their constituents. And this was a procedural vote. It got us on the bill. Then we had the bill read because there's no way they could have read it, because it's 940-pages.

Now we're in the middle of debate and we are going to have the chance to have these amendments. So they could still change this bill.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right. Our thanks to Senator Amy Klobuchar.

All right. Just ahead, a new assessment of the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. The U.N.'s nuclear watchdog now saying Iran could restart enriching uranium, quote, "in a matter of months."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:19:27]

WHITFIELD: All right. New today, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog says Iran could restart enriching uranium in a matter of months. Rafael Grossi's comments appear to back an early assessment from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency that suggests U.S. strikes did not destroy the core components of Iran's nuclear program.

CNN's international diplomatic editor Nic Robertson is in Jerusalem.

So, Nic, even as we get these comments on Iran, Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel is holding high level meetings on Gaza today. And what are we learning about that?

[16:20:05] NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes, with seven key top ministers and aides and confidants, the output that we have of the meetings so far today is that they'll have another meeting on the same subject tomorrow. We don't know any conclusions of the meeting today. The only thing we can surmise is it wasn't conclusive enough, and therefore it continues.

To what point is a question mark, but we are beginning to see a shift in Prime Minister Netanyahu's narrative over what can happen in Gaza. And it's worth noting here that President Trump has -- on social media has said get the deal done in Gaza, get the hostages back, and that's a narrative that seems to be echoed in part by the prime minister.

He was speaking to the internal security service, the Shin Bet, earlier today, and he said, look, following the victory, as he described it, with Iran new opportunities are opening up, including, he said, getting the hostages back from Gaza. And he said the -- getting the hostages back, that was sort of his first priority, which is a real change in his narrative because previously he would say we must defeat Hamas first. That's the way to get the hostages back.

Now it's putting the hostages first. This is new. We're also hearing something new from the government. The government is saying that it no longer considers some of those communities in the Gaza envelope that were originally overrun by Hamas on October the 7th, like Kfar Azar, Kibbutz Bari, Nir Oz, places like that, it no longer considers them to have a security threat.

That's new. And it's causing some people from some of these communities to say, particularly those communities, by the way, that still have hostages being held inside of Gaza to say, well, if there's no security threat then, get the hostages back. We should have an end to the war. But they're also asking, what are their own new security arrangements?

So new territory by the government, new language by the prime minister, what does it all mean? Where is it going? Was it in response to President Trump? All unclear. It's different and maybe it's momentum towards getting the hostages back, ending the war in Gaza.

WHITFIELD: And of course that would be good news to the many people that you interacted with at Hostages Square in Tel Aviv last night. What has been their message?

ROBERTSON: Yes, the message has been very clear. You know, they want a comprehensive agreement. And when they say that, they don't want this deal that seems to be or has been in the air at the moment that some people here call the Steve Witkoff deal, which is just to get 10 hostages released for a temporary ceasefire. They're saying, no, we want all 50 hostages, of which more than 20 are believed to still be alive, released now.

And we pull all our troops out of Gaza, ending the war and end for good. That's what they're saying that they want. And they believe, you know, that President Trump really holds a lot of sway with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They've got a lot more faith, these hostage families and friends and supporters in President Trump than they do in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

So they look at the president's social media postings, and in that, they hope that they can see some daylight to get all these hostages released. That's where -- that's where they believe they might get some luck.

WHITFIELD: All right. Nic Robertson in Jerusalem, thank you so much.

All right. Still to come, weather forecasters in this country will soon lose access to crucial satellite data. Why some experts say this will put lives at risk.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:28:14]

WHITFIELD: All right. Welcome back.

In the midst of the Atlantic hurricane season, some crucial data used by forecasters to track storms will soon no longer be available. Starting tomorrow the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration says it will suspend a program that provides weather data from satellites claiming, quote, "recent service changes," end quote, are to blame without giving any more explanation.

Joining us right now to discuss is meteorologist Scott Pille.

Scott, great to see you. Thanks for being with us. You're in New Orleans, which has seen some pretty awful storms, including Hurricane Katrina, over the past couple of decades. So how concerning is this for you to hear this?

SCOTT PILLE, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Hi, Fredricka, thank you so much for having me. You know, when I first heard about this, of course, both as a resident and as a meteorologist, this was something that was kind of not taken lightly, you know, and not only with myself as a scientist, but as a resident of the Gulf Coast, born and raised here in New Orleans, my house and my family received four and a half feet of flood water from Hurricane Katrina coming up on the 20th, hard to believe, anniversary of Katrina.

And you know, this was shocking. I think what was most shocking about it was just the fact that we have so many tools, right, as scientists to be able to analyze hurricanes and tropical storms. So this is one of those tools that is pivotal, right? It's something that is crucial to being able to accurately predict and forecast tropical storms and hurricanes. And we want as many tools as possible to be able to get the forecast right. We want to limit the amount of inconsistencies or inaccurate forecasts.

WHITFIELD: Right. And it's not for your own pleasure as a scientist to know, to have these tools available, but it's to inform people because then people are prepared. These are life saving measures.

[16:30:12] So then are there other sources to receive this kind of data that will be instrumental in forecasting, alerting people about the potential dangers?

SCOT PILIE, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Right. So what is being taken away or what is being not accessible to scientists starting tomorrow is what we call microwave data. And microwave data, I like saying that it is a fancy term for saying an X-ray or giving us the inner workings of what's going on beneath the hood or beneath the clouds of tropical storms and hurricanes. So whenever we, you know, as meteorologists on TV, we show satellite, we often show what is called as visible satellite and infrared satellite or water vapor imagery. All of these are kind of common nomenclature that people use.

But microwave is one that's a little bit less known by most people. Microwave helps us see like beneath the clouds. And why is that useful? It helps us detect where the center of the storm is. It helps us also see kind of the inner rain bands or stuff like the eye wall. And what's really important is what we aren't able to detect if we don't have these satellites.

So when a storm is way out in the Atlantic, we don't have access to hurricane hunters, right? Hurricane hunters typically fly closer to land because they leave out of air bases that are on land. When we have these satellites that can monitor these storms way out in the open Atlantic and the Eastern Pacific, then we can kind of get an early read on where is the storm center.

And if we get good data from these satellites, then that data is put into our forecast models. And then we have a more accurate forecast model trajectory. But if you get bad data early on, or if you don't get the data early on, then that starts to extrapolate. You start getting worse forecasts longer out in time. Does that make sense?

WHITFIELD: Absolutely. I mean, this is all really vital information. So then do you have any guesses as to why these kinds of tools would be taken away or is it, you know, inadvertent?

PILIE: Yeah, you know, I will leave the politics aside from this, but I think what's really interesting is that we haven't been given a true reason, right? There are things that you can assume as such as to possible budget cuts or maybe even replacing technology.

Look, if this was replacing technology and we were getting a brand new satellite, I would hope that when an announcement like this is made that we would be like, yes, this is a victory. This is something that could be an advancement of science and technology. But with this statement, it was really something that kind of took a lot of meteorologists, residents, et cetera, off guard because it wasn't a statement that was made as if we're getting an upgrade, you know, it was made as such as we just aren't going to have that tool in our belt any longer.

And of course, we have a lot of other tools, but microwave imagery is so useful at night. Visible satellite can only show us the cloud movements during the daylight. That's why it's visible when the sun is up and the satellite is able to get kind of the broad picture of a storm. But microwave data, you can get those scans at night. You can also get this satellite that's orbiting the globe constantly, and you get more frequent scans. So I want to make this point that not only are we not going to be able to receive this data, the gaps between other data are now much larger. We're losing about 50 % of our frequency of this data.

WHITFIELD: Oh, that's very big. Well, we're all bracing for the best forecast that all of you brilliant minds can put together, whether you have these tools or not. Scot Pilie, thank you so much. All the best --

PILIE: Thank you so much.

WHITFIELD: -- and I know we'll be calling upon you again. Appreciate it.

PILIE: Appreciate it. Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right. Happening right now, U.S. Senate Republicans trying to secure enough votes for President Trump's budget megabill.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:39:03]

WHITFIELD: All right. More breaking news right now on Capitol Hill. U.S. senators are formally now debating the President's sweeping tax and spending bill on Capitol Hill. The process could take up to 20 hours. Senate Republicans are hoping to vote on the bill as early as tomorrow.

I'm joined now by Stephen Neukam, He is a Congressional Reporter for Axios. Stephen, always great to see you. So two Republican senators joined the Democrats on voting no on advancing this bill. But President Trump and Republican leaders were able to get enough votes to finally advance it after the procedural vote. So do you think it will have enough ultimately GOP support to actually pass it tomorrow? Or might there be a lot of other new obstacles?

STEPHEN NEUKAM, CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER, AXIOS: (Inaudible). I think that there's still a lot that is going to happen over the next sort of 20 to 24 hours. If we were taking bets, I would I would bet that Senate Majority Leader Thune is able to get this past the Senate tomorrow, but there's a lot of dominoes that could fall.

[16:40:09]

I mean, just in the last three, four, five hours, Senator Tom Tillis deciding not to run for reelection obviously voted no against the motion to proceed.

The procedural motion has drawn the ire of the President. The fact that he is not running for reelection probably a good signal that he's not going to change his no vote. So then you look at folks like Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and then some conservatives like Mike Lee or Rand Paul, who will be the three, the other two on top of Tillis and possibly more that vote no against this package.

WHITFIELD: Right. In fact, there have already been several changes or proposals, you know, to change the bill, to sway GOP holdouts, including a fund for rural hospitals, new requirements for wind and solar projects, tax cuts for whalers in Alaska. What other kinds of deals do you see potentially in the works?

NEUKAM: Well, last night, Senate Republican leadership agreed to back an amendment being proposed by Senator Rick Scott that would essentially the federal expansion of Medicaid for new expansion states. It's hard to see that being adopted. Getting Rick Scott support was part of that agreement, having leadership sort of standing behind that amendment. But just because leadership is backing it doesn't mean that it's something that that will pass.

I mean, there's a there's a number of Republicans who just are supportive of that amendment. So I think there are going to be a number of things. A number of amendments that come to the floor that some Republicans could be supportive of, but I just don't see anything major right now that could meet that 50 vote threshold to be adopted.

WHITFIELD: And there are wide range of polls showing this bill is unpopular with the American public. Do you think Democrats see this bill as an opportunity to kind of circle the wagons and potentially take back control of the House and Senate?

NEUKAM: Yeah, they definitely do. I mean, you can run down the list of Medicaid cuts, Medicare cuts, cuts to SNAP. I mean, these are programs that are incredibly popular with Americans, particularly in a number of swing states North Carolina and Maine coming next year are top of mind.

So, yeah, everything you're seeing happen right now on the Senate floor, the amendments that they're going to offer over the next day and get Republicans on the record to vote for or vote against is going to be part of the 2026 campaign that, you know, is essentially already kicking off at this point with again, Tom Tillis stepping out and Republicans throwing their hat in the ring to fill his spot on the Republican side of North Carolina

WHITFIELD: All right. We'll leave it there. Eat your Wheaties, get a little rest. It's going to be a long next few days working on Capitol Hill especially. Stephen Neukam, appreciate it.

All right, up next, after more than six weeks of testimony, jurors in the Sean Diddy Combs sex trafficking trial prepare to deliberate the case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:48:06]

WHITFIELD: Jury deliberations in the criminal sex trafficking trial of Sean Diddy Combs are set to get underway tomorrow. This comes after the panel heard hours of closing arguments from the legal teams. The defense argued that the prosecution exaggerated its case against Combs and has only shown evidence of his sexual preferences and personal drug problems, not a criminal enterprise. The prosecution accused the defense team of blaming the victims and urging the jury to find Combs guilty.

The music mogul has pleaded not guilty to charges that include racketeering, conspiracy, and sex trafficking. If convicted on all counts, he could face up to life in prison. With me now is trial consultant Richard Gabriel. He is the author of Acquittal: An Insider Reveals the Stories and Strategies Behind Today's Most Infamous Verdicts. Richard, great to see you.

RICHARD GABRIEL, TRIAL CONSULTANT: Good to see you.

WHITFIELD: So it's been more than six weeks of testimony in this case. We've heard from 34 witnesses, all called by the prosecution. What do you think the jury will latch on to most?

GABRIEL: Well, you know, juries are funny in terms of that. They have sat there for six weeks. You have these very voluminous closing arguments and they usually follow two courses. One is what they call a verdict driven deliberation where basically it's like, okay, how many people say yes or no to the following questions? Typically those are a little bit quicker or they have really evidence driven deliberations, which is they really go into very deep analysis of each of the pieces of evidence, all the testimony with six week trial.

Typically the jurors do like to take a little bit of their time here, but fundamentally I do think it's going to come down to two core themes from either side. One is control versus choice? Did Sean Combs control all these people for his criminal enterprise, or were these actually the choices of people that are participating in a maybe a very different type of lifestyle?

[16:50:09]

WHITFIELD: All right. So the jury will have had a weekend to think things over after the closing statements and before hearing the instructions about deliberations, is there a way in which to forecast whether that's helpful or harmful at all for either side?

GABRIEL: Not really. I mean, they've spent a long time in this trial. They've had lots of weekends to think about it. Obviously, the closing arguments, quite frankly, closing arguments at this point in the trial are not necessarily as helpful for the jury because there may be some middle ground jurors who are kind of on the fence and the closing arguments make a difference with. But a lot of times they've already kind of made up their minds.

The thing I found interesting, especially about the defense's closing arguments, is they really did personalize it. And they said, this is really just isn't about Sean Combs is about you and sort of taking a shot at sort of saying, if they -- if this is criminal, -- if these are criminal acts, then who are they going to come for next? And that's sort of an interesting message because I think both sides are trying to kind of send a message and say, what's the message you want to send with your verdict? WHITFIELD: All right. So looking at the jurors and this jury, it's made up of eight men, four women, the youngest is 30, the eldest is 74. They are represented by a physician assistant, a deli clerk, a charity worker. There's a massage therapist, actor, scientist, and social worker all in the mix. I mean, incredibly a diverse. How important is the makeup of the jury? How might it potentially impact the verdict?

GABRIEL: Well, the makeup of the jury is key. It's obviously where we spend a lot of our time in jury selection to kind of find out not only who are the people but also what are the personalities? Because remember, prosecutors need a unanimous verdict. They need everybody to get along in the group there, and they have to have absolute agreement on all of the issues and all the counts in order to have the verdict that they want.

Quite frankly, defense only needs one juror to say, I don't see it, I don't believe it. So the personalities and how well they get along, how well they cooperate is important. That being said, the research is very clear. Diverse juries make better decisions because you have lots of different perspectives. It just happens to be interesting to find out sort of how do they go about the process then of actually working through the evidence and also working through any disagreements about how they see the evidence in the case. So the makeup is very important.

WHITFIELD: As you write in your book, you worked on several high profile cases, including the trials of Casey Anthony, O.J. Simpson, Phil Spector. And in your experience, are jurors able to separate kind of preconceived notions of what they know or what they think they know of a celebrity defendant versus what they have heard during trial.

GABRIEL: They really are. It's amazing because we test this all the time. We take a look at polls and we see, you know, how the thing, and, you know, obviously there's a lot of public pressure on jurors to especially convict a defendant, especially when they have kind of the behavior that Sean Combs has been accused of. It's very sensitive.

But they take their jobs incredibly seriously. And they really are able to kind of go, okay, I know how I initially felt, but all of a sudden they do hear all the specific evidence that sometimes we at home don't. And they really get to go into the details of it and find out whether it matches or mismatches what the charges are. So jurors do a good job.

WHITFIELD: Richard Gabriel, what a pleasure. Thank you so much.

GABRIEL: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:58:27]

WHITFIELD: All right. New today. Space company, Blue Origin, successfully launched a new flight of human tourists into space after a string of delays due to weather. The flight finally launched taking six tourists up into space. The flight lasted about 10 minutes, taking them just past the internationally recognized boundary for space and giving them a brief moment of weightlessness. The rocket known as New Shepard is the 13th tourist flight launched by Blue Origin. The company owned by Amazon founder, Jeff Bezos, has now flown a total of more than 60 people into space.

And will they even need a honeymoon after a lavish party of a wedding? The newlywed Bezos had in Venice, Italy. Well, new video taken today shows Jeff Bezos leaving a Venice hotel and there she is, his wife Lauren as well. The newlyweds can be seen waving to photographers as they exit, once again, by boat.

Well, this caps three days of celebrations estimated at a price tag of $50 million for the couple who invited some of the world's wealthiest and most famous people. The festivities, however, were marred by protests involving local residents and activists who declared this wedding a symbol of harmful wealth inequality.

All right. Tonight, CNN's Fareed Zakaria takes a look at the fragile state of relations between the U.S. and Iran. Tune in at 10 p.m. Eastern for United States versus Iran, a Fareed Zakaria special.

And thank you so much for joining me today. I'm Fredricka Whitfield. The Newsroom continues with Omar Jimenez right now.