Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

State Dept Says Americans May Want To Leave The Middle East; Gaza Hospital Warehouses Destroyed By Israeli Strike; Trump Threatens To Revive Anti-Weaponization Fund; Trump Threatens To Revive "Anti- Weaponization" Fund; DOJ Dropping Charges Against Former Olympian In Reflecting Pool Vandalization Case; FIFA Drops Controversial $20 Billion World Cup Investment Plan; NY Sues Kalshi For Running "Illegal Gambling Operation"; Bomb Explodes At Moscow Restaurant, Killing Two; Western Heat Dome To Bring Dangerous Temps To Tens Of Millions. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired August 01, 2026 - 18:00   ET

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

DR. GLADYS KALEMA-ZIKUSOKA, UGANDA'S FIRST WILDLIFE VETERINARIAN AND FOUNDER OF CONSERVATION THROUGH PUBLIC HEALTH: -- work. We found out that the coffee farmers were not getting a fair market price and were entering the force to poach, so then we started to sell the coffee. We give the man above market price and a donation from every bag goes to support community health, gorilla health and conservation education.

This is showing people that we care about not just the gorillas, but we also care about them.

Gorilla tourism has completely transformed the lives of the people here and engaging local communities is a way of making sure that gorillas are being protected.

I always get very excited when I hear the baby Martin gorilla has been born, and as long as the community see the gorillas as their future, the numbers are going to keep growing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN ABEL, CNN HOST: And to learn more about Gladys' work and to see more of those adorable baby gorillas, go to cnn.com/heroes.

The next hour of NEWSROOM starts right now.

[18:01:03]

ABEL: You are in the CNN NEWSROOM. I am Brian Abel in Atlanta.

Tonight, the State Department issuing a new warning cautioning Americans in the Middle East to consider leaving the region now, as the war with Iran threatens to escalate.

This comes as sources say the U.S. is planning fresh strikes on Iran as soon as this weekend. It is not clear where or what the scope of this new round of bombings might look like and officials say the strikes could still be called off. Let's bring in CNN's Julia Benbrook now with the latest from the administration and, Julia, what is President Trump saying about all of this right now?

JULIA BENBROOK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The United States is planning for another round of strikes against Iran, which could happen as soon as this weekend. President Donald Trump, he is spending the next couple of days here in New Jersey. He is at one of his nearby properties, and he is considering different options.

Now, the precise scope of these strikes and the potential targets the United States could go after are still unclear, and officials familiar with the planning who spoke with CNN emphasized that these strikes could be called off at any time.

Those officials did say that there was some planning around the option to target Iran's energy sites. The Trump administration has been wary of targeting Iran's energy infrastructure, in part due to concerns that Tehran could retaliate by targeting Gulf infrastructure, which could then shock global energy markets, which have already been under intense strain during this conflict.

It was just yesterday during a Cabinet meeting that took place at Camp David, that President Donald Trump previewed this possibility of another round of strikes. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We will be hitting them. We will be hitting them very hard. And, you know, at some point they are going to say, we just can't take it anymore.

We just want to win. We don't want to have them -- it is very simple -- they cannot have a nuclear weapon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BENBROOK: So we've heard him say that throughout this now five-month conflict that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, that has remained consistent.

We have seen him, though, go back and forth between threatening more military escalation like he is now, and expressing hope that there will be a diplomatic breakthrough.

It does seem, at least right now, at this exact moment, that he does not have a lot of hope for that diplomatic breakthrough any time soon. In fact, during those remarks, he said that he is losing faith in Iran's leadership, that they have really just been making him angry lately.

We did reach out to The White House for more specifics when it comes to these potential strikes that could take place at any point, and White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement, she said in part, "President trump is not going to stand by and allow this terrorist behavior to occur. Iran will continue to pay until they come to the table in what President Trump deems a meaningful way."

As he weighs his options recent polling, in fact, a lot of different recent surveys have shown that Americans are not happy with the way that Trump has handled this conflict in Iran. A recent CNN poll showed that just 28 percent approve of how he has handled this -- Brian.

ABEL: All right, Julia Benbrook, traveling for us in New Jersey.

Julia, thank you.

I want to bring in now CNN political and national security analyst and "New York Times" correspondent, David Sanger. And David, great to have you with us as always.

Let's start with this latest reporting that the State Department is warning U.S. citizens in the Middle East to consider leaving. What do you think that tells us about where this conflict is potentially headed?

DAVID SANGER, CNN POLITICAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, no surprise. There is probably going to be some additional form of military action. Not the first time we've seen this in recent months. Right? We saw the 38 days of bombing that began February 28th.

[18:05:10]

Then we saw a ceasefire and negotiation resulted in that 14-point plan that came out in the middle of June between the United States and Iran. And then when that broke down and the Iranians interpreted it, it was pretty vaguely worded to give them some renewed control over the Strait. We had another roughly two weeks of military action.

I think the question about this one, Brian, is what makes this different? I mean, if the previous two did not succeed in the goal of narrowing the differences on the nuclear program or getting the strait reopened, or fulfilling the goals that the President set in February, including the end of the Iranian missile program, what makes him think that this time will have a different result?

ABEL: And that is a great question. What could be different about these fresh attacks that we are seeing reports of that could happen as soon as this weekend on Iran.

From your reporting, David, what do you see as the most likely scenario for how President Trump moves forward?

SANGER: Well, if he does choose military action, he could go after one nuclear related site that they haven't really touched yet. Western Intelligence Agencies call it Pickaxe Mountain. It is not an operative nuclear site. It is relatively new, past five or six years, but we think it is just storing sophisticated centrifuges, but nothing is hooked up and producing nuclear material.

That would be largely symbolic. It would be another setback for them. He could choose to go after energy targets, but it has got two problems. One is that could free up the Iranians to do the same throughout their targets in the Gulf. And second, it could be a war crime if those are energy targets that are largely feeding civilians.

When we asked the President about whether or not he was concerned it could be a war crime, last week, he just said, I am not going to answer that question.

ABEL: Okay, and it looks like we just showed in the last hour Vladimir Putin and Russia's war against Ukraine doing just that.

SANGER That's right.

ABEL: If we do see this conflict spill over into other countries, David, could we see U.S. Middle Eastern alliances shift? How risky is all of this for the U.S.?

SANGER: Well, we've already seen it spill over, right? We've seen attacks in Saudi Arabia, in Qatar, in Jordan. We saw an attack that spread up to Egypt just in this past week. So there is no question that the Iranian strategy is to respond to American vertical escalation and more attacks on them by spreading this war out throughout the Middle East.

Over time, could that loosen the ties between the Saudis and the U.S.? That combined with the President walking back from the nuclear accord he was set to strike with them? Yes, it could. I think it creates an opening for the Chinese to come in with larger investment and say, we don't come with the issues, the Americans do.

ABEL: And, David, we have just about a minute left. I do want to get to this element here. We have new reporting that hackers have targeted water systems in several U.S. states. CNN is reporting that U.S. and state officials are treating Iran as one of the suspects behind the attacks, but have not made a formal determination of who is responsible.

Big picture here: Knowing Iran's cyber capabilities, are we about to see a new front unfold in this war?

SANGER: You know, the Iranians have used cyber activity against us before, not on this scale. They've even used it against water systems. There was an attack, oh, probably 10 years ago on a dam north of New York City that mostly seemed to be an experiment by Iranian hackers to see if they could take over and operate parts of the dam and they were able to, it didn't do any damage.

In this case, if this turns out to be Iranian and sometimes it takes a long time to get the attribution right, you are certainly seeing the Iranians send a message then that says, we may not be able to reach you with our missiles, but we certainly can reach it and cyber is the way to go do that.

ABEL: All right, David Sanger, always appreciate your expertise, sir. Thank you.

SANGER: Great to be with you.

[18:10:08] Israel's newest attack in Gaza leaves a huge crater at a hospital facility. Will this new plan, announced by President Trump to get both sides talking again still hold?

Plus, President Trump threatens to bring back his controversial anti- weaponization fund. That's the fund that's at the center of the holdup for the nomination of Todd Blanche for Attorney General.

And FIFA says it will stand down on a plan to sell private stakes in the World Cup. But will that be enough to save Gianni Infantino's job?

You're on the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:15:21]

ABEL: Overnight, Israel says it targeted Hamas' weapons storage facilities in strikes across Gaza. One strike destroying hospital warehouses leaving a huge crater in Central Gaza. CNN is unable to confirm that the structure was being used by Hamas, and when asked for evidence by CNN, an Israeli military source says they don't have any to provide, but that the strike was based on intelligence information.

Footage from the scene shows people attempting to salvage medical supplies like I.V. fluids, breathing tubes, surgical masks and cotton balls in the debris. Gaza hospitals are already facing critical shortages of medical supplies.

Former State Department and Middle East negotiator, Aaron David Miller is joining us now for all of this. Aaron, this comes just days after Trump announced Hamas and Israel had agreed to advance a ceasefire plan. So how did this happen?

AARON DAVID MILLER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: it happens because the Israelis have been operating in Gaza since the October 2025 ceasefire, as if there really were no ceasefire. There has been Hamas activity, there is no question Hamas is trying to resurge.

In this latest strike, it is hard to understand or rationalize, the Israelis clearly aren't talking. That may indicate that the targets that they wanted to hit may have been successful. They may not have been, but the cost to Israel's image, its brand, it seems to me is pretty devastating.

Hamas has been literally diminished to the point where financially, politically, even from a security point of view, they are probably weaker now than they have ever been, which is one of the reasons I think they've "agreed" to the issue of demilitarization and decommissioning of weapons.

And for an organization like that to do that, at least even rhetorically, is quite extraordinary. I just don't think, frankly, that Israel or Hamas are truly invested in this and it is going to be very difficult to make this 15-point plan work. ABEL: Well, given the picture that you just painted there, I think we might know the answer to the next question and I will ask it, nonetheless: How fragile are things, do you believe? Do you believe this deal is in jeopardy? Or maybe do you believe this deal ever really took place or can happen?

MILLER: Look again, I voted and work for Republicans and Democrats. I think the President needed a piece of good news, right? He is bogged down in a U.S. confrontation with Iran that shows no signs of abating, we are on the cusp of a major escalation, potentially with Iran, which probably won't change Iran's calculation and may drive energy prices up.

So I think distraction, another piece of news, potentially good news. Look, if you actually had two parties who were committed to doing this, the Israelis withdrawing and Hamas truly demilitarizing, giving up their heavy weapons, dismantling the tunnel infrastructure, which probably is about a third, maybe even a half of the New York length of the New York subway system, you could actually imagine a better future for Gaza.

I just don't see either the current Israeli government, particularly three months before an election, or Hamas, which is fighting for its political survival and wants to appear to be flexible, I don't see the Israelis withdrawing, and I don't see Hamas being willing to truly demilitarize. That's in essence, I think the problem.

ABEL: So do you think this is all theater then? That it all based on false intentions?

MILLER: Well, theater, I mean, you know, Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, under normal circumstances are excruciatingly painful. A lot of it is politics, some of it is performative. But again, I think if you had a Hamas that was truly committed to one gun, one authority, one negotiating position and was prepared to give up on the struggle, an armed struggle on carrying out acts of terror, like on October 7th, and would join the Palestinian National Movement on terms that could actually offer a reliable Palestinian partner committed to a Palestinian state, and you had an Israeli government that basically was committed to the same thing, you could see this as a potential pathway, a first step.

But the problem is you don't have that. You don't have leaders in this region and I would argue, again, having worked and voted for Republicans and Democrats, I don't think you have the kind of leadership in Washington that would truly be committed to finding a real pathway that would allow Israelis and Palestinians to extricate themselves from a conflict that has created deep trauma for both peoples.

[18:20:21]

And that, I think, is the essence of the problem. We are not going to change that. And if, in fact, the President makes good on his comments to actually escalate in Iran and attack any energy infrastructure, the Iranians are going to respond against Gulf infrastructure. If the President has invited and there are credible reports that the Israelis may well participate in this escalation, you're going to end up with an Israeli-Lebanese conflict again. The Iranians may strike Israel. Israel will strike Iran, the Houthis will ramp up their attacks on the second checkpoint, the Bab al-Mandab and pro-Iranian militias in Iraq will go at Americans or Jordanians or wherever they can find them.

So again, I don't see the region on the cusp of de-escalation, I am afraid it is moving in the -- tragically, in the opposite direction.

ABEL: You're showing us just how difficult the path to peace really is.

Aaron David Miller, appreciate you coming on. Thank you.

MILLER: Thanks for having me.

ABEL: And President Trump rejecting his own DOJ's conclusion and now doubling down on his assessment that vandals are behind the reflecting pool issues. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:26:14]

ABEL: President Trump says he will push to codify the controversial $1.8 billion so-called anti-weaponization fund through Congress. That's if he can't get enough support to confirm Todd Blanche as Attorney General. Trump saying, "I will keep Todd as Acting A.G. and push hard to get the anti-weaponization bill."

Republican Senators Thom Tillis of North Carolina and John Cornyn of Texas have both indicated they won't vote to support Blanche until they get written assurances the fund will not be resurrected, along with other commitments. The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a meeting on Tuesday for a possible vote on Blanche's nomination, and the initial vote was canceled earlier this week after the key Republican lawmakers voiced their concerns.

Joining me now is former federal prosecutor, Gene Rossi. And Gene, have we ever seen anything like this anti-weaponization fund? And for people who might not understand exactly what it is, why is it raising alarm bells for some lawmakers?

GENE ROSSI, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, I worked for the Department of Justice for many moons and during that time, under about eight or nine Attorney Generals acting and confirmed, I've never heard of a fund, and Brian, here is the punchline: The fund is going to give money to people who were convicted but got pardoned -- convicted then pardoned, and some of the individuals who were convicted and pardoned were very violent about 300 of them, about 1,300, maybe 1,200 were convicted.

But to answer your question, this is unprecedented.

ABEL: And does it -- is it kind of like winning the lottery twice for these convicted individuals to get that pardon? And then now this possibility?

ROSSI: Oh, absolutely. It is like getting that that lottery card, you write it off and then they go cash it in and they say, oh, it is not a million dollars, it is two million. The pardons themselves were a huge gift in addition to the clemencies.

But to not add insult to injury, but the reverse, they are getting a gift. Then they're getting what my father used to say, God bless him, is egg and your beer. They get the pardon, then they get the egg and the beer.

That doesn't sound very appealing, egg and beer, I can tell you that, Gene.

ROSSI: My father loved it.

ABEL: That's -- you know what? I will try it sometime, just for your father's sake.

So, you know, what is it exactly, though, about this weaponization fund that is rubbing these Republican lawmakers the wrong way? Is it because they were there on January 6th and experienced what happened there?

ROSSI: Brian, my view is this: On January 6th and God bless Lindsey Graham, he passed away, on January 6th, all of those senators and House of Representatives members, they saw how close it came to utter chaos and violence. They were running out of the Senate chamber. They were running out of the House chamber.

They were hiding in closets. It was really bad -- and they realized, we cannot reward those individuals who took part in that. And the other thing is this, two or three, maybe five police officers perished because of this riot and insurrection, and now, we are going to give them money after they are convicted and pardoned? That's just a bridge too far for Senators Cornyn, Tillis and others.

ABEL: Yes, and it seems like there is short memory of what that day truly was for some in D.C.

[18:30:10]

I do want to turn to another story, Gene. Yesterday, the Justice Department called the renovation of the Reflecting Pool hasty and botch.

ROSSI: Right.

ABEL: Adding that it was dropping the criminal case against former Olympian David Hearn, who was accused of vandalizing that landmark. Your reaction to this latest development? What does this tell you about the government's case?

ROSSI: All right, I worked in the U.S. Attorney's Office in 1996. I was on detail for Maine Justice, the tax division. So, I -- I prosecuted several felonies, had several felony trials. All I can say is this, they shot first, they aimed later, and even then, Brian, they missed. This is -- this is total chaos, it's a circus, and I feel sorry for the line AUSAs that aren't political.

The line AUSAs in that office, new and senior, that aren't political at all. They are feeling embarrassed and dispirited. What happened here was you had a narrative that President Trump and Secretary Burgum wanted to propound ...

ABEL: Yes.

ROSSI: ... and Jeanine Pirro was all in on that. And then, when they started investigating, they realized that we don't have the goods. But Brian, I got to say this, the -- because this was dismissed, and it's a -- it's just a disgraceful dismissal, the defendant has the right, Mr. Davey Hearn, has the right to seek what they call Hyde fees. Henry Hyde, former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, got the Hyde amendment passed.

If there's a indictment or charge that is brought in bad faith or is frivolous, and you have both here, the defendant gets attorney's fees. And Norm Eisen, Mary Dohrmann and Steve Levin, they will have the right to get attorney's fees. Plus, they have the worst judge they could possibly get. Former public defender, smart as heck, Yale and NYU Law School, they are facing a -- a angry court when this motion for Hyde fees is filed. So, it's not looking good for the U.S. Attorney's Office.

ABEL: Is it looking good for Hearn? Could they have a case against the government here?

ROSSI: Well, let me tell you this. If the Senate -- if the Senate and House change hands in January, you're going to see a flurry of subpoenas to the Department of Justice to find out if this was a political hatchet job, in a sense that it's a vindictive prosecution. They killed a fly with a bazooka by charging Davey Hearn, an Olympian -- an Olympian canoeist, with a felony.

And this is the worst part, Brian. When Jeanine Pirro and the president were talking about this case in Burgum, they were completely exaggerating the extent of what he did and they blamed vandals when it turns out that the paint was peeling within two days of the completion of the project. So, they're facing a lot of questions and a lot of inquiry, whether it's by the judge in the D.C. Superior Court or by the House and Senate, if, if, if the chambers change hands.

ABEL: Okay. All right, Gene Rossi, we have to leave it there. Really appreciate your expertise, sir. Thank you.

ROSSI: Thank you.

ABEL: Soccer's top governing body now backing away from a plan to bring private investment into the World Cup. But will this be the last time we hear about it? You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:38:42]

ABEL: FIFA President Gianni Infantino scrapping his controversial plan to pump private money into future World Cups. The proposal sparking global backlash, promises of boycotts, and prompting one of Infantino's closest advisors to resign. In a statement, Infantino says the project created division and as a result will no longer proceed.

But even after withdrawing it, he's still finding himself in hot water with European soccer's governing body. In a statement released this morning, UEFA says in part, quote, "The current FIFA leadership has not only lost UEFA's confidence, that of many other members of the football family." Joining me now to talk about all of this is Stefan Szymanski, Professor of Sports Management at the University of Michigan, also co-author of the book, "Soccernomics."

And Stefan, why do you believe UEFA and other governing bodies of soccer were so against this plan?

STEFAN SZYMANSKI, PROFESSOR OF SPORTS MANAGEMENT, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: Well, I think they were feeling -- felt that this was a corrupt scheme to enrich Infantino's friends and relatives, that effectively there was no transparency in the deal. No one knew who -- where the money would go, how it would be spent, who would control it.

[18:40:03]

And I think most people could see from the World Cup that we've just -- just gone that Infantino is not a very reliable figure in world football. And so that's why there was -- there's really no confidence that this was a credible route to raising finance for the game.

ABEL: Do -- do you believe that during the World Cup, President Trump's call to Infantino over a controversial red card played a factor in this when you're talking about the potential -- how close the relationships are with his friends?

SZYMANSKI: Well, there have been accusations of Infantino's corrupt for -- for many years, but the -- when Trump did everybody a favor by just manifesting how obvious it was by revealing that he made this phone call and that Infantino unilaterally took this decision to allow Balogun to play.

So yes, I think it was that -- that played a significant role. But I think it's also important to say that this is not something that's a one-off. It's not really a consequence of just this recent event. There has been a -- a standing fight between UEFA, the European governing body, and FIFA, the world governing body, for 50 years. And so in that sense, this is really the -- the chickens coming home to roost.

ABEL: What about his decision, Infantino's, to step back, to back away from the plan? Were you surprised by that at all?

SZYMANSKI: No, not -- not at all surprised, because it clear -- it was clear that he had no support. What is really quite -- quite surprising was that Infantino, who was up for re-election next year, looked like he was a shoo-in and looked like he'd already secured all of the votes. And now his position is really in danger. And that represents a -- a pretty seismic shift in the global governance of the game.

ABEL: What do you think Infantino has to do between now and -- and then when he's due to face this re-election effort in order to -- to regain these relationships?

SZYMANSKI: Well, resign, I think. I don't think there's anything Infantino can do that's going to restore his credibility. He has blown it, you know, so -- in -- in such a -- an obvious way in -- in -- over this World Cup, really. And, you know, it goes back to the Trump Peace Prize and, you know, all of this. It goes back to the treatment of the Iranian team in traveling to the United States, the treatment of the Somali referee. All of these things have outraged world football and not just -- not just Europeans, but so many constituencies in world football have been outraged by his conduct and the way that he has led the -- the World Cup. We -- that I don't really think there's anything he can do to repair it.

ABEL: So, you think he's a lame duck, that there -- there -- it's said and done. He will no longer be with FIFA after this.

SZYMANSKI: Yes, I think he's out. And I think the really interesting question now is who is going to be his successor. And there are a number -- that -- that's going to be much more difficult because there are -- there are competing power groups within FIFA. There's obviously UEFA is very powerful, but most other federations are quite suspicious of UEFA. There's the various Arab contingencies who have put a lot of money into football, global football in recent years. So, they're quite influential, but again, they're suspicious there.

Then, you know, there's -- there's -- there's so many different sort of moving parts here that that's the -- that's going to be the politics of interest for the next six months.

ABEL: Sounds like that might be another World Cup for us to watch as they all battle it out. You know, earlier this summer, you co-wrote an article for The Economist titled, "this may just be the last World Cup." We still have -- we have about 30 seconds left. Do you still believe that? And -- and why do you think that could be?

SZYMANSKI: UEFA threatened to quit the World Cup over this issue. Even though Infantino's backed down, UEFA still has a fundamental problem with the way that FIFA has tried to break its -- its -- its own competitions and the European position in the game. And that controversy is not going -- going to go away. So, I think it's still possible that this -- the -- the World Cup could -- could -- could finally break up.

ABEL: All right. Stefan Szymanski, thank you for joining us. Appreciate you.

SZYMANSKI: Thank you for having me.

ABEL: One of the biggest prediction markets now being sued by the state of New York. You're in the CNN Newsroom. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:49:19]

ABEL: The state of New York is suing Kalshi, the prediction market, alleging it's running an unlicensed, illegal gambling operation. New York Attorney General Letitia James says Kalshi did not obtain a state gambling license and did not pay related taxes. Kalshi, which denies wrongdoing, is part of this booming industry that lets people place up or down bets on almost anything from the Oscars to sports games. CNN Senior Reporter Marshall Cohen has been tracking this for us.

And Marshall, what can you tell us about this case here, this lawsuit against Kalshi?

MARSHALL COHEN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Hey, Brian, this is a big one. The state of New York announcing this yesterday after months of threats that they are suing Kalshi.

[18:50:01]

And they want not only to shut it down because they think that it is operating an unlicensed casino, but they're also asking for $36 billion, with a B, $36 billion in damages. Now, let me read for you a quote from Letitia James, the state attorney general, a Democrat explaining why, in her view, this was a necessary move.

She said, quote, "New York's gambling laws protect children from underage betting and help combat gambling addiction. No matter what they call themselves, prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple."

She's really zeroing in on the dispute here over whether this is gambling and regulated by the states or whether it is financial investing and a financial market that should be regulated by the federal government. Obviously, that's what Kalshi thinks should happen. Here's how they responded to the lawsuit.

A spokesperson said this yesterday, quote, "It's sad to see this type of political theater from the leadership in our own state. States can't just shut down a federally licensed exchange. This would also just hurt New Yorkers who would be driven offshore."

Brian, one more note. CNN does have a partnership with Kalshi. We use its data to cover major events, but editorial employees like you and me cannot trade on prediction market platforms.

ABEL: And even if I could, I would not, Marshall, but that's just me. So, you mentioned there Letitia James' statement. She says in it, prediction markets like Kalshi, but this lawsuit is against just Kalshi. So, what does this mean for the bigger nationwide battle over prediction markets?

COHEN: This is one of dozens, literally dozens of lawsuits playing out across the country over whether these prediction markets can continue to operate. They have exploded in popularity this year. They do billions of dollars in trading volume every single week, Kalshi and its biggest rival, Polymarket. This is a huge industry now.

But there are other states that have tried to do what New York is trying to do now, and they have actually prevailed. Take a look at this map. There are three states here where Kalshi has been shut down by a court order. You can see here, Michigan, Washington State, and Nevada, where the states have prevailed in getting a judge, at least for now, to shut down Kalshi. But this is only part of the picture. There are other places where Kalshi has emerged victorious in court.

Just a few days ago, they were successful in blocking Minnesota from enforcing its statewide ban, and they've also prevailed in New Jersey, in Arizona, and other places as well. So a lot more to come here, Brian.

ABEL: And I know you are all over this prediction market space with your reporting. Marshall Cohen, thank you as always.

COHEN: You bet.

ABEL: "Today's" show anchor, Savannah Guthrie, pleads for any information about her mother six months now after Nancy Guthrie's disappearance. You're on the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:57:47]

ABEL: This just in, a homemade bomb explodes at a popular restaurant in central Moscow, killing two people and injuring 21 others, according to Russian authorities. Also killed was a woman suspected of carrying the device, Russian media said, citing officials. The woman tried to enter the restaurant, reportedly targeting guests at a private event. The bomb went off before she entered, killing a security guard who stopped her and a customer.

It was also reportedly packed with metal bearings intended to increase casualties. An investigation now underway.

We are tracking an intense heat dome that is bringing dangerous temperatures to parts of the West. More than 55 million people are under heat alerts. On top of that, the Pacific Northwest faces extreme fire danger that could make a record wildfire season even worse. CNN meteorologist Chris Warren joins us now with more.

CHRIS WARREN, CNN METEOROLOGIST: The big story is in the West with the heat and the wildfire danger. See the hot temperatures well into the triple digits. Keep in mind, this is some of the hotter locations in the U.S. during the hottest time of the year. This is some significant, possibly record-breaking heat throughout parts of much of the West, especially in the Southwest and in Southern California. We're watching some storms throughout the day across much of the East, but it's the fire risk and the heat we're keeping a close eye on associated here with this heat dome.

Now, north of that, a system is moving through. That's the wind that can help fan and fuel wildfires. Well, this intense heat made that much worse by this persisted area of high pressure. So, throughout the weekend, several record high temperatures may be tied or broken throughout the Western United States. Here's the fire threat for Sunday. This now extends into parts of the Northern Plains and still remains for parts of Washington and Oregon.

Now, the smoke, you're getting a little bit of relief where it's been just so smoky for the past couple of weeks east of the Cascade Mountain Range here in Washington and Oregon, but that little bit of a break's not going to last too long. These are huge wildfires that are burning, and when things start to calm down a little bit or cool down a little bit, we'll see that smoke settle back in throughout parts of the Columbia Basin and a lot of the valleys here and much of the Eastern Oregon, the high desert.

[19:00:10]