Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Trump, E.U. Announce Framework For Trade Deal; Israel Pauses Operations In Some Parts Of Gaza As Outrage Grows; GOP Lawmakers At Odds Amid Fallout Over Jeffrey Epstein Files; Trump Wants Beyonce Prosecuted For Something That Did Not Happen; Polls Show A Very Confusing Political Landscape. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired July 27, 2025 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Yes. And of course, we know that this kind of schadenfreude and shaming can have horrible effects especially when the social media involved has to do with children.

Kat Rosenfield, as always, interesting, interesting, provocative article. Thanks for coming on.

KAT ROSENFIELD, CULTURE WRITER, THE FREE PRESS: Thanks for having me.

TAPPER: You can follow me on Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, and on the TikTok, @JakeTapper. You can follow the show on X, @TheLeadCNN. If you ever miss an episode of THE LEAD, you can listen to the show once you get your podcasts.

The news continues now on CNN.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN ANCHOR: You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Jessica Dean here in New York.

And tonight President Trump is celebrating what he calls the biggest deal of them all after agreeing to a trade framework with the head of the European Union. This deal includes a $600 billion investment in U.S. goods, along with $750 billion worth of energy purchases from the U.S. The main thrust of this agreement is a 15 percent tariff on European goods sold to the U.S. Now that is lower than the 30 percent that Trump had previously threatened but higher than the 10 percent the E.U. was looking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think it's great that we made a deal today instead of playing games and maybe not making a deal at all. I think it's a -- I'm going to let you say it, but I think it's the biggest deal ever made. Thank you very much. Congratulations.

URSULA VON DER LEYEN, PRESIDENT, EUROPEAN COMMISSION: Thank you very much. Thank you.

I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find. Rebalance but enable trade on both sides, which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic, and that was important for us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN's Jeff Zeleny is traveling with the president and joins us now live from Edinburgh, Scotland.

Jeff, heading into this weekend he said it was a 50-50 chance. How significant is this announcement?

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It is very significant, Jessica. There's no question that this deal averted what could have been a very significant Trans-Atlantic trade war. Of course, the European Union is the largest trading partner of the United States. The member nations of the E.U., some 27 member nations have $1.7 trillion worth of goods. So that was at stake here.

And as you mentioned, that looming deadline on Friday for a 30 percent tariff across the board, that threat of that certainly brought the E.U. to the bargaining table. But even though this was announced in a somewhat sudden fashion earlier today at Trump's golf course, he gave a little bit of a window into this. How it's been going on, the negotiations have, behind the scenes for months.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I think we, you know, this didn't just start today. We had a meeting. I wasn't sure, I said 50-50. I think you probably felt the same thing.

VON DER LEYEN: Yes.

TRUMP: But this started months ago. This negotiation. So we knew pretty much what we were getting into. And we were able to make a deal that's very satisfactory to both sides. So it's very -- it's a tremendously, it's a very powerful deal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ZELENY: Now there are still many more fine print details to be learned about this. And the reactions from European Union members is positive in one respect, largely because it brings certainty to really an uncertain period. But these tariffs, this 15 percent across the board is higher than they have been paying but of course lower than the threat of that. But the by and large the bottom line here is they wanted to reach some type of a deal to bring certainty to businesses.

Now of course, these tariffs will ultimately, like all of them, be paid by consumers in America who are buying these products. But across the board from the auto sector to others, it's very, very significant. There's no doubt this is the biggest trade deal yet, as the president has worked to reshape the global trading order.

DEAN: Right. And, Jeff, the president's August 1st deadline is coming up. It's just around the corner now. Any more indications about potential deals to come between now and then?

ZELENY: Jessica, there is no doubt that the deal today was being carefully watched by every country that still has to make a deal. If you look at China and Mexico and Canada, those are three of the biggest ones coming up. And in fact, in Stockholm, this week, tomorrow, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will continue talks with China. This is the third round of talks between the U.S. and China trying to negotiate out of the ongoing trade war back and forth.

The U.S. thought it would hurt China's economy by raising tariffs. That hasn't happened as much. So there are still other countries on the horizon. But no doubt the deal today sort of signaled that the race to make a deal with the president is likely the only way or the best way to lower your tariff rate -- Jessica.

[18:05:05]

DEAN: All right. Jeff Zeleny there in Scotland, thank you so much for that reporting.

And joining us now is the chair of the International -- of International Economics at the Atlantic Council, Josh Lipsky.

Josh, thanks for being here with us on this Saturday evening. We heard the president there saying this is, he believes, a good deal for everybody. What are your initial thoughts on this announcement?

JOSH LIPSKY, CHAIR, INTERNATIONAL ECONOMICS, ATLANTIC COUNCIL: Well, thanks, Jessica, for having me. And I agree, this is a major moment for transatlantic trade and potentially, and we should underscore the word potentially, avoids a broader transatlantic trade war that could have crippled the global economy. And the reason I say potentially is because there's so much we don't know yet about this deal.

We heard the outline. We heard President Trump, we heard President von der Leyen, but the devil is in the details as we learn with Japan over the past week. When the Japanese negotiators went back home, they had a very different interpretation of what was agreed to. And that's where there's so much outstanding here, including on pharmaceuticals. One of the biggest E.U. exports to the U.S. and think for a second about heart medication, flu vaccines, Wegovy, Ozempic.

We have disputing readouts right now over what's covered and what's not from the deal. So if it goes through a major moment in the trade wars, and it will have ripple effects on every other country and their negotiation, but a lot of hoops left to jump through.

DEAN: Yes. There's so, as you note, so many questions still around this. And yet as Jeff was saying, too, some sort of sense of certainty or let's say additional certainty where there had been nothing but uncertainty.

LIPSKY: I think that's fair. And I think this provides some clarity about what the future of trade deals will look like, meaning the new floor globally is 15 percent. I think that's pretty clear. And some countries will get higher and that doesn't account for sectoral tariffs. We're thinking steel and aluminum still at 50 percent, Trump said that today. Pharmaceuticals, as I said, becoming autos in some sectors will stay at 25. Not for the E.U.

And that means the global tariff rate from the U.S. has gone from 2 percent in January to somewhere around 15 percent or 16 percent right now, and inching higher. So we do have clarity, but perhaps it's not the kind of clarity everyone was looking for a few months ago.

DEAN: Yes. OK, so let's dig into this just a little bit because also, and as you note, there's still a lot of questions, but this $750 billion investment in U.S. energy, what might that mean?

LIPSKY: Well, it's important to say, first of all, that the E.U. had to wean itself off Russian energy. So that's a product of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the E.U.'s strong response to Russia and their signaling over the next three years that they're going to buy $750 billion of LNG, liquefied natural gas, from the U.S. But they already purchased over 200 billion a year.

So sometimes these announcements look very impressive on paper. But if you look at the difference between what they're already doing and what they're committing to over three years, I'm not sure that it's as significant as it seems. It's good news for U.S. energy exporters and probably means more coming from the U.S. than would otherwise, but you have to take it and compare it to what they were already planning to do because of their diversification away from Russia.

DEAN: And look, the head of the E.U. was asked what concessions the U.S. made in this deal. She didn't exactly answer that directly. She said this was about creating balance in the trade deficit. They avoided a higher tariff, for sure, than 15 percent. But what did the E.U. gain from this?

LIPSKY: Well, the E.U. avoided the worst case scenario. So this was 30 percent or higher or the China situation, a spiraling trade war that went back and forth between the two countries. But this now has to get sold back domestically in Europe. And already there's talk this evening, it's late over there right now, that the E.U. capitulated on this. And you're going to see some domestic pushback within France, within Italy, within the E.U. member countries who think that the commission should have pushed harder from the outset and perhaps threaten more retaliation.

Of course, hindsight is 20/20. We are where we are. So the E.U. didn't get the worst of all outcomes, but it certainly got a heavy outcome that they did not anticipate a few months ago. And there's going to be an economic price for this on both sides of the Atlantic.

DEAN: Yes. And look, you know there are more than two dozen countries in the E.U. and they all have slightly different exports and expertise and things that they -- that they pride themselves on making and that, that is kind of, you know, I would think that's challenging to sell that to -- you know, something that's equal to everyone where they have different strengths and weaknesses.

LIPSKY: Well, this is always the challenge in Europe. So the Germans, I think, they're happier than most tonight because their auto exports, which is really literally the engine of the German economy, they're going to face a 15 percent tariff now versus a 25 percent. That's good news for Mercedes and you think of BMW, the major German auto exporters. But as you said, other countries in Europe aren't so sure what this means for them.

[18:10:02]

Pharmaceuticals, agricultural exports. We don't know if wine is exempt. So we're thinking of Italy here, France. So all of these dynamics play out across Europe. And it's important to say this 15 percent, as we always talk about, Jessica, this is paid by the U.S. importers. So that is going to translate back home. And you're already seeing the effects of this. We saw GM lose about a billion in profits last quarter. We saw Hershey's say they're going to raise prices on chocolate.

So tariffs don't bite immediately. But now that we actually have this certainty of 15 percent, I expect as we get into this back-to-school timeframe, September and October, people are really going to notice those price increases because now we actually know what the formula looks like going forward.

DEAN: All right. Josh Lipsky, great to see you. Thanks so much.

LIPSKY: Thanks.

DEAN: A new round of aid drops into Gaza. But the World Health Organization says malnutrition rates there are hitting alarming levels. We'll have a report for you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:36]

DEAN: The United Nations says more than 100 truckloads of aid was delivered to Gaza today, as Israel eases restrictions on the flow of much needed help to the region. Even 100 trucks, though, just a drop in the bucket of what's needed. Before the war began hundreds of aid trucks were going into the enclave per day. Now there's reports of widespread starvation and lack of essential supplies to meet basic needs.

President Trump today saying the U.S. will provide more aid to Gaza, but also had this message for Israel.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Israel is going to have to make a decision. I know what I'd do, but I don't think it's appropriate that I say, but Israel is going to have to make a decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN's Nic Robertson has more now from Jerusalem -- Nic. NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It's not really

clear if President Trump there is pushing Prime Minister Netanyahu to make a deal or do what the president said a couple of days ago, which is go in and finish it off. But for right now, the aid is beginning to flow a little more freely than it was. Jordanian and Emirati aircraft dropped 25 tons of food and humanitarian supplies airdropped into Gaza today. A hundred trucks were on the move from Egypt with 840 tons of flour, 60 trucks on the move from Jordan, all headed for Gaza for these new humanitarian corridors that the IDF is putting in place. And those tactical pauses.

Now, the IDF says that they're still fighting Gaza, that still fighting Hamas, that Gaza is still an active conflict zone. But these temporary tactical pauses of six to eight to 10 hours in certain areas are designed to allow the U.N. and other organizations to get those aid trucks in safely and disburse the aid. And this really looks like something of a climbdown by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow this greater amount of aid coming in.

And he's taking a lot of heat for it politically from ministers in his own government who are saying the only thing we should be sending into Gaza right now is bombs. So the prime minister does seem to have walked back from a very tough position. That said, he is saying that it's the U.N. that's been lying about the aid situation, that it's Hamas who's responsible for the shortages of food and that Israel is doing nothing more, nothing different than what it's been doing over the recent months, that these aid corridors, if you will, have always been available to the U.N.

That doesn't seem to correlate with what the U.N. understands. But bottom line, it does appear to mean that more aid will get in. For how long it's not clear.

DEAN: All right. Nic Robertson in Jerusalem, thanks so much for that.

And we are joined now by CNN global affairs analyst Brett McGurk. He served the last four presidents and was the Middle East and North Africa coordinator with the National Security Council.

Brett, great to see you. Thank you for being here. I know you helped negotiate two ceasefires that led to the release of over 100 hostages. So you have a unique perspective on this. And I want to kind of use some of that. Are these new measures -- let's start first with what's happening right now. Are these new measures allowing more aid in the result of international pressure, in your mind, or how would you assess that?

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Yes, Jessica, look, it has to -- aid has to flow into Gaza. Let me -- let me kind of back up. When I was working on this file, whether it was in negotiations for the hostages, ceasefire, every morning at 7:30, we had a phone call on the aid situation with a humanitarian coordinator out of the State Department, very senior U.S. official focused solely on this problem, with experts from USAID trusted by Israel, and the U.N. with our ambassador. Every morning, and when there was a problem or bottleneck, we tried to

solve it. Now, it's an incredibly complex, difficult equation, but we kept that aid flowing every single day. What's happened unfortunately, you know, in January we had a ceasefire internationally endorsed by the U.N. Security Council. It broke down in March. And then Israel imposed a 10-week total blockade of Gaza. That was unprecedented. That was something in the Biden administration we never would have endorsed.

And that, I think, is what led to this set of events. But you also, the Trump administration eliminated that humanitarian coordinator position. They removed a lot of those key USAID officials. So the focus on this issue has just been lacking.

[18:20:02]

And, look, even if you're a big supporter of Israel, the aid has to come in because what's happened now, it was Hamas last week that basically said no to a ceasefire deal and talks broke down. And yet all international pressure here is on Israel. And we've got to put international pressure also on Hamas because that is the shortest way to end the war. But the aid has to flow, period. And it's good these steps are being taken. But now this has to continue and be sustained.

DEAN: And so do you see now that we have these humanitarian pauses for somebody like you that's been in these rooms, does that lead to an opportunity to get to a more comprehensive ceasefire? Does that kick start any of this that's kind of stalled out?

MCGURK: Well, you know, look, it's difficult and let's just be up front. A number of things can be true. Number one, Hamas is the obstacle to a deal. That is very true. Second, Hamas does benefit indirectly in some ways directly from flow of aid into Gaza. But the aid has to flow. It has to flow. Israel has tried now a 10-week blockade as I mentioned. It didn't work. So aid has to flow. We have to help these civilians in need. Full stop. Period.

On the hostage negotiations, Jessica, you just -- you got to stay at it. Now I know we walked away from the table last week together with the Israelis. I think that's to put some pressure on the negotiations. I know there's a lot still going on backchannel. You got to stay at it. Every little compromise in that deal got in January was brokered by the United States. We were the bridge and we got to stay at it.

I'm hopeful they stay at it because the fastest way to end this war and end this suffering is the deal on the table, a 60-day ceasefire, half the hostages, and then you talk about the longer term.

DEAN: And why -- I mean, I feel like we asked this question all the time, but why can't they get there?

MCGURK: Well, it's my understanding, Jessica, there's a division right now within Hamas. And there is a -- there is a camp within Hamas saying, let's take this deal. There's another camp saying, you know what actually this is -- all international pressure now is on Israel and our core demand, Hamas's core demand here, it has been from day one, they get to stay in power in Gaza. They have the guns, they retain security control, as we actually saw in the ceasefire deal earlier this year.

What happened? They came out of the tunnels in full military uniform to retake power. That's what they want. Israel will not accept that. But Hamas has not backed off from that -- from that core demand. And I think that's what they hope to see, that Israel just basically gives up. That's not going to happen. You're going to have to have a deal here. And you just -- you got to -- you got to keep at it.

Qatar can put a lot of pressure on Hamas. Egypt can put a lot of pressure on Hamas. Turkey. It's a whole diplomatic effort, multidimensional. And we got to stay at it. I have a lot of respect for Steve Witkoff. He's working this, but I don't see underneath him, you know, myself and Bill Burns, director of CIA, every single day, talking multiple times a day to keep this going. And you need that kind of concerted effort.

I really hope, Jessica, this goes on because we have to get this done over the coming days and weeks. He got to bring this war to a close and get those hostages out and get relief to the people in Gaza.

DEAN: And as you just laid out that scenario, I think the question, too, is you did mention some of these other nations putting pressure on Hamas to agree to these terms. Is that what -- I mean, the U.S. has certainly a huge role to play in all of this. What role do these other nations have to play?

MCGURK: Yes, completely. Look, you got to put -- if Israel has positions in the talks that are unreasonable, the U.S. should say, hey, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Israeli team, that's unreasonable. You got to cave on that. Let's get to a deal. On the Hamas side, it is Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, but also the broader international community.

What I think helped us in the talks last year was we had a deal endorsed by the U.N. Security Council that actually mattered to Hamas because they feel that pressure. I've talked to hostages, Jessica, about what's it like when you're a hostage? What are your -- what are your guards doing? And he told me the Hamas guards are watching Al Jazeera all day long. And like, they really focus on international opinion.

Right now and, you know, rightfully so, given the situation in Gaza, it is all focused on the aid situation. It's all on Israel. But you got to let -- keep the aid flowing. Israel has got to do the right thing. We got to push them and then put some more pressure on Hamas to try to get to this 60 day ceasefire. It's just essential. And we got to stay at it. Every day in the negotiation until it succeeds feels like a failure. So I get it. But you got to stay at it and I hope we can get back to the table this week.

DEAN: Yes. And in the meantime, you have -- you have children who are starving. You have hostages that are still being held.

MCGURK: Yes.

DEAN: Brett McGurk, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

MCGURK: Thank you, Jessica.

DEAN: Jeffrey Epstein on the minds of a lot of voters and Republican lawmakers are hearing about it.

[18:25:02]

We'll talk more about that.

You're in the CNN Newsroom.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DEAN: With President Trump overseas in Scotland, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson is back at home, still trying to manage the political firestorm surrounding the Epstein scandal. The GOP splintered over how the administration should handle documents related to the disgraced financier with many prominent Republicans calling for them all to be released.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MANU RAJU, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What do you think of the way that the White House has handled this Epstein matter, this sort of drip, drip, drip, rather than putting everything out?

SEN. KEVIN CRAMER (R-ND): I don't know, I'm kind of a rip the band-aid off sort of guy myself.

RAJU: Do you think the appearances that they're not releasing it because his name is on there, are you worried about that appearance?

[18:30:02]

CRAMER: Well, yes. I mean, I think that's a risk you run doing what they're doing. But I don't know everything that they may know.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): Release all the Epstein stuff.

RAJU: You think all of it? Justice Department should.

GRAHAM: Yes. Just, you know, release, release stuff. I want to protect victims, but be as transparent as you can with Epstein.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: CNN's Julia Benbrook is joining us now.

What else are Republicans saying about this?

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Jessica, even as President Donald Trump has called on supporters to shift their focus to other topics, the conversation surrounding the Epstein investigation continues, and some of the loudest calls for more information, more transparency are coming from within his own MAGA base. But let's take a look back at the timeline. Some of the comments from members of the administration that have caused confusion.

Back in February. Attorney General Pam Bondi hyped up soon-to-be released documents and even suggested she had the so-called client list sitting on her desk. A couple of months later, Trump himself was asked about when the Epstein. files would be released. And he said this. He said, quote, "One hundred percent of all of these documents are being delivered."

New reporting shows that sometime in May, Bondi informed Trump that his name does appear in some documents related to Epstein. It's very important to note there that that does not mean there's evidence of any wrongdoing, or that Trump had any knowledge of Epstein's criminal activities. But fast forward to July, that's when we saw the Department of Justice released an unsigned memo announcing that it had not found the so-called client list, and that it would not be releasing more documents related to this.

All of those details creating a delicate situation for Republicans. And each of them handling it a little bit differently. GOP Congressman Eric Burlison of Missouri spoke with CNN's Manu Raju earlier today. Burlison is a member of the House Oversight Committee, and he has called for more documents to be released. He said that he believes that it was a political mistake, really hyping up, raising expectations when it comes to new information. Take a listen part of this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ERIC BURLISON, (R-MO): Part of this problem is that there were some false expectations. That are created and that's a political mistake. I think that, you know, saying that you're going to be able to deliver when you when you haven't even looked at all of the files and what's available was probably a misstep.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BENBROOK: Now we did see some movement on Capitol Hill when it comes to calls for more information before the House members left for August recess, a House Oversight Subcommittee voted to subpoena the Department of Justice for more documents related to Epstein. House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer has told reporters that members of his committee have been very interested in this topic in recent weeks.

Now it's still up in the air when Comer will sign off on that subpoena. A member of his team tells me that we should expect an update on that in the near future -- Jessica.

DEAN: All right. Julia Benbrook there in Washington. Thank you so much.

And CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero is joining us now.

Carrie, thanks for being here with us. I want to play a clip, first. of something that Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin told CNN this morning. This is what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MARKWAYNE MULLIN (R-OK): Every piece of file that they have, every video, every document, every flight log has all been heard by a grand jury. They've all been seen by a grand jury. And we want the judges to release it. Pam Bondi has called on the judges release it. Trump has called on them to release it. And Congress has called on them to release it.

But we can't because there is a true co-equal branches of government. So we can't force a judicial branch to do anything. All we can do is ask them to do it. We assumed that the judges would release it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: Carrie, we just heard him there. He says they can't force them as the legislative branch to do this. Is that correct legally?

CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. This is protected information. I mean, a lot of the information and what I think he's referring to there is grand jury protected information. The evidence that was presented to the grand jury during the course of the investigation and that is protected by rules that govern grand jury secrecy. And those rules exist for a reason. They exist to protect the integrity of the investigation, to protect the secrecy of the investigation, to protect witnesses and victims whose information is revealed through that investigation. And so that is why the rules exist. And that's why the courts are not inclined to make additional exceptions that are not under the rules.

DEAN: And look, there -- what about these other -- what about other things that aren't -- haven't been seen by a grand jury? Is that different?

CORDERO: So there is a difference between investigative information that is revealed through other sources and sometimes there can be different rules that would depend on the way in which the information was acquired and the legal process that was used so each different method of legal process, search warrants, grand jury information, they all sort of have a different set of rules.

[18:35:13]

But grand jury information in particular is very sensitive. And that really is an extensive amount of the information that it sounds like Congress potentially would be interested in getting. But the courts -- the courts are not going to release information that doesn't fall into the exceptions if there was some sort of proceeding going on that the information was relevant to. But they can't just release the information because there's political interest in a particular case.

DEAN: Yes, yes. And there is this bipartisan effort in Congress that's looking to force a binding House vote on releasing the Epstein files. Again, just with your legal expertise, what does that actually mean? CORDERO: Yes, I mean, I think this is -- there's a -- obviously, with

respect to Congress, there is a political effort here to try to appear to do as much as they can when at the end of the day, the grand jury rules are probably going to hold in place, and, you know, there potentially could be litigation between the different branches of government. But a judge that has ruled on the Justice Department, the Trump administration's request so far has said no. The judge said, I can't release that information.

So part of this putting on a political lens might be that Congress is trying to appear to do as much as they could when the information just won't be released. And again, from a rule of law perspective, from a former Justice Department perspective, from an investigative perspective, this information should stay under seal.

DEAN: All right. Carrie Cordero, always great to have you. We really appreciate it. Thanks so much.

And President Trump says Beyonce needs to be prosecuted for something that didn't actually happen. Daniel Dale fact-checks the claim. That's next.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:41:48]

DEAN: President Trump putting the spotlight on Beyonce in a new way, calling for the music superstar to be prosecuted for something that didn't happen. Yesterday in a social media post, the president said Beyonce broke the law by supposedly being paid $11 million to endorse Kamala Harris.

Let's bring in CNN's Daniel Dale who can walk us through the facts here.

Daniel, what did you find?

DANIEL DALE, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: I found that this claim about an $11 million payment is imaginary. This simply did not happen. There is not one shred of evidence that the Harris campaign or any other Democrat paid Beyonce anything like $11 million for an endorsement. Now this claim began circulating among random Trump supporters on social media last year. It's been repeatedly investigated by fact- check outlets. No one has produced any support for it. The White House did not comment when I reached out this time.

Now federal election spending records do show that the Harris campaign made a $165,000 payment to Beyonce's production company after this event you're seeing where Beyonce endorsed then Vice President Harris at an event in Houston in October 2024. But two things about that. First of all, there's no evidence that this was payment for an endorsement. The Harris campaign said that they are obligated by law to cover the ancillary costs related to celebrity appearances when celebrities come to their events. And second of all, $165,000 is a far cry from $11 million. That figure

just seems to have been fabricated, invented out of thin air. So I reached out to the Harris campaign about this. They pointed me to a post last year from Beyonce's mother, Tina Knowles, who posted that it was a lie and noted that it had been taken down as false information by Instagram at the time. Beyonce's own spokesperson told PolitiFact in November 2024 that this claim is, quote, "beyond ridiculous."

Now again, I did reach out to the White House about this to ask where the president got this claim not only that there was an $11 million payment, but that Democrats admit that there was. They certainly have not. They didn't respond. So I went looking to see what the president himself had said previously about this. It turns out he referenced it in February, and he spoke of his source in the vaguest possible terms.

He said, somebody just showed me something. So that's not much of anything. Now add one more thing, in this same social media post, the president asserted that it is, quote, "totally illegal" to pay someone for endorsements. It turns out that's not true either. So there's no evidence there was endorsement payments by the Harris campaign. They said they did not pay for endorsement, but there is no federal law that prohibits a hypothetical candidate from hypothetically paying some influencer, some celebrity to endorse them. Doesn't exist.

DEAN: All right. Always good to have you, Daniel, to do the fact-check for us and give us exactly what happened. Thank you so much. We appreciate it.

DALE: Thank you.

DEAN: President Trump has a growing problem with independents. We'll talk more about this.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:49:18]

DEAN: We know President Trump remains popular with Republicans, but new polling data suggests there's been a noticeable shift when it comes to independent voters. Here to run the numbers with us, CNN chief data analyst Harry Enten.

Hello, Harry.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: Hello.

DEAN: OK, so walk us through among Trump and his favorability among independents.

ENTEN: Oh, my goodness gracious. It's just awful. It's horrible. It's terrible. I mean, you know, we -- there was all this focus in the press about the Gallup poll that came out that showed him at basically his lowest rating ever among independents. But I want to note, it's not just Gallup, it's the average. What are we talking about? Trump's net approval rating among

independents, look at the average. In January, he was basically even, right, at about minus three points. Not too hot to trot, but not terrible. Look at where he is in July. Minus 29 points.

[18:50:02]

My goodness gracious. That's an over 25-point drop. And then I mentioned Gallup. They went from minus two to minus 35. That's a 33- point drop. So no matter which way you look at it, you look at the average, you look at Gallup, the drop has just been absolutely tremendous. And he is just in a horrific position when it comes to the center of electorate, where oftentimes elections are decided -- Jessica.

DEAN: Yes, put his standing in historical context for us.

ENTEN: OK. So we're going to look back at all the presidents I could possibly find at this point in their presidency. And, you know where Donald Trump ranks, Jessica Dean? He ranks at the bottom, all the way down in the basement. Worse than that, approval ratings ever six months in. Among independents, he's at minus 29 points as I mentioned the average. That beats the old record.

Who held the old record? Well, it was Donald Trump himself back in 2017. He was 23 points underwater. And that of course was the worst. And Donald Trump has somehow managed to beat even that. He is at the lowest of the low levels. You have to take an elevator all the way down. It's no longer on street level. It's about 30 stories under it, minus 29 points.

DEAN: And look, when you're talking about these numbers, I think the next question is why? So what appears to be the leading cause of this issue for him?

ENTEN: OK. You know, one of the big reasons that Donald Trump was reelected to the presidency was because folks did not like the way that Joe Biden and the Democratic Party was handling inflation. Let's go back through the time machine. We can take a look at net approval ratings on inflation. Again among independents back in 2024, Biden was 38 points underwater. Absolutely horrific on inflation.

But look at where Donald Trump is. He manages to go even lower. How low can you go, to quote Chubby Checker? Look at that, 45 points underwater. Oh, it's no wonder that his ratings overall among independents are so bad, because arguably the biggest issue of our day and age inflation in the minds of the American public, Donald Trump is absolutely failing when it comes to independent voters.

DEAN: OK, but Trump isn't alone in having issues with voters. Democrats have got their own issues.

ENTEN: Yes. So, you know, we have on the right side of the equation, you have Donald Trump. But on the left side of the equation, you have Democrats and the Democratic Party. And let's take a look at Dems and let's look at their net favorable ratings. Whoa, woof. I mean, my god, you know, we mentioned CNN. We had that poll come out a little while ago on their net favorable rating. They were 26 points underwater.

You think that's low enough? How about we go even lower? We'll go to this side of the screen. I'm going to walk over here. We go to the "Wall Street Journal," minus 30 points, 30 points underwater, their lowest on record. These polls have records going all the way back since the early 1990s. And when it comes to the Democratic Party's net favorable rating in both the "Wall Street Journal" poll and the CNN poll, the Democratic Party is breaking records in the way, Jessica Dean, you don't want to break records.

DEAN: Yes. You know, you don't want that. What about how they do among independents?

ENTEN: OK, so we're talking about overall here. But we started off this segment for the first three slides talking about independents. Why don't we talk about the Democratic Party's favorable rating among independents in our CNN-SSRS poll? Look at this. 19, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. 19 percent.

If I can count it, you know, it's low and it is extremely low when it comes to independents and the Democratic Party. Independents hate everybody. But that's one of the reasons why the election next year is going to be so interesting because when it comes to independent voters, the bloc, a group that actually decides elections, they hate everybody.

DEAN: They don't seem to be pleased. Yes, those numbers aren't great for anybody. All right. Interesting.

Harry Enten, always good to see you. Thank you so much.

ENTEN: Thank you.

DEAN: It was 40 years ago when some of the biggest names in rock and roll came together. Mick Jagger, Bono, David Bowie, Bob Geldof, they all led legendary concerts in Philadelphia and London to raise money to feed people suffering from starvation in Africa. And here's a preview of tonight's episode of the CNN Original Series "LIVE AID: WHEN ROCK AND ROLL TOOK ON THE WORLD."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The rule backstage towards the end and I do remember sort of Sting taking over the sort of head boy role. Geldof just planted a load of lyric sheets in his hands, saying, we're all going to go on at the end and sing "Feed the World."

(MUSIC)

BOB GELDOF, SINGER, LIVE AID ORGANIZER: It's hard to convey to you the sort of collegiate atmosphere, the fun of it, and the sense of what everyone was doing. I know that sounds really crap, like a Hollywood movie, but it's absolutely true.

[18:55:03] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was such a magical moment. I was one of the special people who were allowed to experience that day.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

DEAN: Tune in a new episode of "LIVE AID: WHEN ROCK AND ROLL TOOK ON THE WORLD" airs tonight at 9:00 Eastern and Pacific only here on CNN.

Still to come, after meeting with the head of the E.U. at his golf course in Scotland, President Trump says the two sides have reached a trade deal. We've got details.

You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)