Return to Transcripts main page

Inside Politics

Combs Guilty Of Prostitution, Acquitted Of Most Serious Charges; Sean "Diddy" Combs Found Not Guilty Of Most Serious Charges; Trump Meets With GOP Holdouts As House Works To Pass Mega Bill; House To Take Up Senate-Passed Version Of Trump Mega Bill. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired July 02, 2025 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Welcome to Inside Politics. I'm Dana Bash in Washington. And we are following breaking news. Sean 'Diddy' Combs found guilty of two counts of prostitution but was acquitted of the more severe charges of racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking. 12 New York jurors delivered the bombshell verdict after 13 hours of deliberations.

CNN's Laura Coates and Kara Scannell have been covering this case since the beginning. They are doing tremendous work, explaining all of this to us and giving us the sense of what it was like in the courtroom. So, Laura, I want to start with you. And I want you to just walk us through the verdict. What you think it means, and most importantly, because we're still kind of in it right now, what happens next for Combs?

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: This is a monumental moment, in many ways, this is this generation's OJ trial. You have right now, Sean 'Diddy' Combs, who is known as a icon in the music industry, who had quite the fall from grace following the release of the exclusive and retained video by CNN of that intercontinental savage assault on Cassie Ventura.

He was charged shortly thereafter with five felony counts, including Rico for conspiracy, a very complex case, one that involved, normally the mafia. It also included a count -- two counts on sex trafficking, one for Cassie Ventura's longtime girlfriend, and also artists who've been signed by his Bad Boy Records. Also, you had a pseudonym, person by the name of Jane, was also a sex trafficking case for her as well.

And then there were two counts for transportation to engage in prostitution. These are known as the Mann Act related charges. If you recall, President Trump had pardoned posthumously somebody who had had that conviction decades ago for that very charge. So that raises a question right now.

But I will tell you, he was not found guilty on the most severe, the Rico, which could carry a lifetime in prison. He was found not guilty on sex trafficking for either of the women, and he was found guilty on the prosecution. What this means is that prosecution charge can have about tap to 10 years in prison. It's not that mandatory minimum, and some people who are first time offenders can have as little as two years.

What happens right now is the judge is deciding where to go. He has asked both parties to tell him why Sean Combs should not walk out the front door behind us right now, because he is some not connected on those highest counts they have until 1pm.

Kara, that's 58 minutes from now. They have to tell this judge why he should not walk. And Kara, who is inside that courtroom and has been unbelievable reporting day in and day out on this particular trial and many others, she heard the moment that the judge asked a very important question, Dana, that we think may reveal a lot about how the judge might be leaning. Kara?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. The judge had asked the prosecutor to say what other examples exist of cases where someone has been convicted of a Mann count, a prostitution count, and has been detained prior to sentencing. That's going to signal some insight. We've watching this judge for the past eight weeks of how he thinks about things.

He wants to do this right. He wants to do this by the law. He's a relatively new judge. He's only been on the bench a few years. And so, he's asking the process -- the prosecution to give him what they think is the best evidence and examples that this has been done before and what circumstances it has been done before.

Of course, homestead is asking for him to be released today on a million-dollar bond, co-signed by any number of the family members that are inside the courtroom today. So, he can walk out the doors today until he is sentenced on the transportation for prostitution charges a few months from now.

COATES: And by the way, Dana, this we are watching -- right now, to my left, as you're talking, you might hear some backing up sounds. It is a van. It is like a big pickup truck, almost from the NYPD. Know what they've gotten there, nothing but these barricades. Barricades, as far as the actual truck, they're lining up. We've heard the family coming in. They're blocking off parts of the street.

[12:05:00]

Do they know something? We do not. The family was cheered as they walked in moments ago. His mother, Janice, coming out and waving to the crowds of people who were screaming and not only adoration, but also congratulations to her, knowing that her son has escaped life in prison, but still has these two other charges that are going to be sentenced.

BASH: That's a really interesting note about them moving, sort of getting ready and perhaps moving the traffic patterns outside. As, you know, any judge in this situation would probably want to prepare if, if, big if, he is thinking about letting, did he go. Today he wants to make sure that what's happening outside is under control. Kara, I do want to ask you about the moment when the verdict was read. Since you were in the courtroom, what was the response, particularly from the defendant.

SCANNELL: I mean, Dana, this was a moment where we knew there was a note, we knew there was a verdict. And when Combs was led out of the holding area, because he is in custody. He's not sitting freely in the courtroom. When he was let out, his lawyers' faces were so drawn. There were actual frowns on their faces. They were so tense, they were so nervous, and they sat down.

The judge said, he had that they had a verdict. He brought the jurors out. And then the courtroom deputy had gone to the foreman and went count by count and asked him about the counts. The first count, racketeering conspiracy. The foreman said, not guilty.

Now you heard yes from the family row. There are two rows that are sitting behind him, relief from his children, six adult children, three sons, three daughters, sitting in that row behind him, and then our colleagues. I'm sitting in the courtroom, but we have colleagues that are in a press room, which has a camera feed. And they were able to see Lauren del Valle and Nicki Brown.

They were able to see Combs nod, that he put his head in his hands after he that first count of not guilty. Then the second count, not guilty on sex trafficking. That we -- I saw from the galley that people in his crowd, someone had yelled, woo hoo. They were -- they were pumped up that this was a serious charge. That charge had a minimum sentence of 15 years in prison.

And that -- my colleague said that they saw Combs give a little fist pump of relief when he heard that charge, but afterwards, he was elated. His family was elated. His lawyers were crying, hugging each other. They were rejoicing in that courtroom because the stakes were so high for Combs. He could have faced life in prison. Dana?

BASH: Absolutely, OK. Thank you both. Please, obviously, raise your hand. Let us know if you hear that the judge has actually decided on that question of bail, and if we see somebody coming out of the courtroom. We'll get back to you both. Thank you very, very much.

And joining me here is former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Elie Honig, and former federal prosecutor, Elliot Williams. So, Elie, I'm going to start with you, the two counts that he was found guilty of there. As we've been saying, they're certainly not the most significant, serious charges that he was facing, but they're not nothing.

ELIE HONIG, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY: They're not nothing, but they're not much either. I mean, in the scheme of this case, the three counts where Sean Combs was found not guilty, the racketeering and the two forcible sex trafficking counts. Those were existential threats.

I mean, if Sean Combs had been convicted of either of them, he may well have spent the rest of his life behind bars. He definitely -- automatically would have spent at least 15 years behind bars. This -- there's no way to spin this other than a massive victory for Sean Combs and a massive setback for the Southern District of New York.

It's -- look, it's a good reminder. Juries surprise us all the time. Juries can be discerning. They went count by count here. They didn't just sort of sweep the table and say, all guilty, all not guilty. They made very fine distinctions between mere interstate prostitution, which they found him guilty of. And on the other hand, forcible sex trafficking, which they found him not guilty of. So, Sean Combs -- as Kara just said, Sean Combs, his legal team was exalting and celebrating. They deserve it. They pulled out a miraculous outcome for their client.

BASH: And Elliot, on those charges that he was acquitted of the most serious racketeering and sex trafficking, the racketeering conspiracy was the most difficult to prove. But on both generally, as somebody who has prosecuted cases, what was missing from their case?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Let's start to say what was missing. It's certainly what -- I think the jury had trouble with. Let's start with taking both separately. On the racketeering, prosecutors would have had to establish the existence of a criminal enterprise, even an informal one, not necessarily an incorporated business.

But certainly, something concrete that whereby this is the person who's the muscle, this is the person who gets the drugs. This is the person who beats people up, and this is how, you know, our acts, our acts -- our sex acts are protected here.

[12:10:00]

That's a big leap from isolated acts of whether they were sexual assault or isolated acts of prostitution, putting them under that big umbrella was just going to be hard. And much of the commentary, frankly, even from the two of us, since the beginning of this. As Laura Coates been saying this a lot on air as well. Much of the commentary has been -- it would have been quite challenging to establish that racketeering conspiracy.

On the sex trafficking, the biggest problem and this comes up in sexual assault and harassment cases all the time, is this question of the consent of the survivor of the victim. And those text messages that came up in court were not very good for the prosecution. By way of example, one of them, Jane, one of the -- one of the victims. Sean Combs' texters says, are we getting freaky tonight, referring to these freak offs. And she responds, yeah, ofc, of course.

Now, again, there's far more in the record than that, but what you have in a text electronic format is a victim consenting to a sex act with the defendant. You had that throughout the relationship. These were complex, fraught, ugly, violent relationships, but also ones in which, yes, they were consensual relationships, and I think the jury got hung up on them.

BASH: And Elie, let's talk about what we're waiting for right now, and again, it's 12:10 Eastern. The judge says that he will make a decision by one which is in the next 50 minutes or so. So, we're on pins and needles right now to see whether or not Sean 'Diddy' Combs is released on bail.

HONIG: Do not be surprised, if at some point this afternoon, we see Sean Combs walking out those doors right there. And here's why. Let's take the celebrity factor out of this. If this was not Sean Combs, if this was just some run of the mill, unknown New Yorker, who had only been convicted of what we call the Mann Act of non-forcible interstate prostitution. He would walk today because Sean Combs has been behind bars for nearly a year. He was arrested last summer, and he has been locked up since then without bail.

And so, the likely sentence the judge would calculate is going to be probably something in the realm of time served, meaning the year or so that he's already served. The judge may impose a little more than that, but the judge is going to be thinking, OK, the whole math here has now changed. The most serious offenses, the 15-year minimums, the Rico, the life max, they're off the table. And so, I would not -- I'm not going to make a prediction, but I am also -- my jaw is not, not going to be on the floor if Sean Combs walks out of that courthouse in a couple hours.

BASH: So, you think, and do you agree with this, that it is possible to take the bail question out, but when it comes to sentencing that he will only get time served?

WILLIAMS: He could only get time served because he's already been in for close to a year, if not, a little more to a year.

BASH: So, it's maximum 10, but is there a minimum?

WILLIAMS: Maximum 10. No, there's no mandatory minimum, like there would have been on the sex trafficking count. Now again, we got to get out of our minds this idea of 20 years in prison. That is, if you were to take, what the law says and stack both cases on top of each other. One, it's highly unlikely that a judge would do that. And two, virtually nobody gets the full statutory amount. And three, based on criminal history, the nature of the offense, and so on, it is just -- it is highly unlikely that someone would get even close to the statutory maximum.

Now, you know, he'll be sentenced in probably a few months. There's a complicated process whereby both parties submit what they think he should get, and it's really up to the judge. But you know, to be clear, and this is sort of what we were talking about a second ago. It's not -- he's not going to jail for a long time. He could certainly get some jail time, but it is highly unlikely, and again, not going to be 20 years, not, not.

BASH: And just quickly in both of your experience in the courtroom. How much does the judge take outside factors into? I know they're not supposed to, but they're human, and they also are people of the world. Outside factors, meaning the focus on this. You heard Laura saying, it's this generation's OJ trial. How much, and obviously, there are a lot of differences there. But just when it comes to a celebrity facing a lot of time in prison, at least before.

HONIG: Judges are not supposed to take those factors into account outside of the courtroom, they can, and they do, sometimes. But I want to say this, judges feel burned. When you over charge a case like this, as the prosecutors have. And when prosecutors have convinced you as a judge to lock this guy up pre-trial, and then you get busted on your trial verdict like this, the judges is not going to take that well.

WILLIAMS: One quick point, there are places where the judge is empowered to consider outside factors. For instance, if the person abuses a position of responsibility or trust, if the person abuses a vulnerable victim, there's any number of factors that aren't just specific to what the things they were charged with that a judge can and, quite frankly, should consider, and some of that may come in here.

Now, pre-trial publicity may not be the kind of thing, that was your question.

BASH: Yeah.

WILLIAMS: But no, there's other stuff that the judge will have in the back of his mind when administering the sentence.

BASH: I think we learned so much from both of you. Thank you so much. Do not go anywhere. We have a lot more ahead on the Sean 'Diddy' Combs' verdict, particularly, as we said, we are waiting to see if he's going to walk out of that courtroom on bail.

But we're also following a major story here in Washington, where President Trump is meeting with House Republican lawmakers whose votes will determine whether his massive spending and tax cut bill will become law or not. I'm going to speak with the chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, next.

[12:15:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BASH: We're going to get back to the Sean 'Diddy' Combs verdict in just a moment. But there's major political news here in Washington. The House is gearing up for a crucial vote that will make or break President Trump's entire legislative agenda. It is still unclear if skeptical Republicans will fall in line with the Senate version of his mega bill to drastically reshape this country. That's why multiple GOP holdouts are at the White House right now.

[12:20:00]

CNN is covering the story from all angles. CNN Lauren Fox -- CNN's Lauren Fox is on Capitol Hill, Kristen Holmes is at the White House. Lauren, I want to start with you. What are you hearing from Republican leadership sources about the chances of getting this done right now?

LAUREN FOX, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. It's a really interesting mood right outside of the House floor where I'm standing right now. Because, on the one hand, it feels like we are in this waiting pattern as several meetings are unfolding at the White House, both with more moderate members who have concerns about some of the Medicaid cuts in this bill and other changes, as well as conservatives who were leaving for the White House a few minutes ago. And made clear to me that there are substantial changes that they still want to see in this bill.

Representative Andy Harris, the Chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, is not going to the White House. But he told me, essentially, they think -- he thinks they need to go back to the drawing board. They need to continue buying this back and forth from the House and the Senate until they get it right.

But leadership is really trying to make it feel like there is a deadline on July 4, and that they are moving full steam ahead. And in part, that becomes a lobbying strategy, right? Because you want to make members feel like they need to make a decision quickly. You want to make them feel like there is actually a reason to be moving fast.

Otherwise, you start to lose momentum, and you really -- this doesn't get any easier, Dana, you know, the longer this bill hangs out from the Senate. So, I think that there's still this feeling from leadership. They want to get this done. They want to move quickly, despite the fact that there are so many problems right now among members who just aren't ready to vote yes.

BASH: And Kristen, what about the meeting that's happening in the White House with the president and some of those moderate Republicans in the House whose votes are so crucial?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, we are just trying to learn the details of how these conversations are going, Dana, because we had conversations with White House officials yesterday who seemed really confident that this was going to sail through.

Now, obviously, it doesn't seem as confident today, particularly as we've seen a real revolving door of these Republican lawmakers coming in and out of the White House. As you noted, the first group was the more centrist, moderates. They were coming through. They obviously have those concerns in the Senate bill about those changes to the social security or social safety nets, especially Medicaid.

And then we also saw the more conservative House members that just walked in. They have different concerns about this bill, the adding to the deficit. When I talked to these White House officials, I asked why they felt more confident about this bill. As they said, sailing through, because they had even told me yesterday that they thought that they could meet this July 4 deadline.

It's unclear how they're going to do that, but that's what they were saying. And they said that's because they've been courting the House and these House members for months, much longer than they were working with the senators. They also said at one point that they believed that the House was more in line with Donald Trump in getting this bill through, regardless of the changes. But obviously, as we're seeing here, we're hearing from Lauren and our reporters on the Hill, there are a lot of questions about this bill and whether or not it will get voted through.

BASH: OK. Thanks to you both. Appreciate it. Keep us posted on those meetings. Joining me now is the Chair of the House, Ways and Means Committee, the important tax writing committee, Jason Smith of Missouri. Thank you so much for being here, Mr. Chairman.

I want to start with the basic math. House Republicans can only afford to lose three votes to pass what the Senate passed last -- yesterday afternoon, their version of this bill. Do you have the votes to take that bill and pass it in the House right now?

REP. JASON SMITH (R-MO): Without a doubt, Dana, this bill will pass before July 4, and the president will sign into the law on July 4. I have not one doubt. People throughout the whole process has doubted whether we could ever pass a budget resolution. We did. They doubted whether we could pass it out of the House. We did. They doubted whether we could pass it out of the Senate. We did.

We're going through this process. It's a little bit of ups and downs. That's the nature of the 119th Congress. But this bill will pass the House of Representatives and be sent to President Trump's desk by July 4.

BASH: And that's in two days. I mean, that's a lot of confidence that you have there, even though there are only three votes that you can lose. Let's get into -- if you're considering the fact that you're so confident, let's get into some of the specifics of the version that the Senate passed. There are 17 million Americans who would lose health coverage. That's according to a couple of non-partisan estimates.

[12:25:00]

Your colleague from Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, ended up voting for the bill, but acknowledged these cuts, he put in a statement, quote, I will continue to do everything in my power to reverse future cuts to Medicaid. If Republicans want to be the party of the working class, we cannot cut health insurance for working people.

Now, I want you to listen to some of these stats. More than 1.2 million people in Missouri are enrolled in Medicaid, half of those are children. Two in seven of Missouri enrollees live in rural areas. 71 percent of Missouri adults enrolled in Medicaid already work. So, what is your message to those people? I know you only represent a portion of Missouri, but the people in your home state, many of whom are very worried, likely that they're going to lose their Medicaid coverage.

SMITH: So, what I would say to them, Dana, is to look what the Congressional Budget Office said. Of the 17 million that you just gave, they broke it down who's going to be losing. 4.8 million is able-bodied healthy adults with no kids, who simply just won't work. Once this work requirement takes an effect. You have 1.4 million that are legal immigrants. You have 1.3 million, according to the Congressional Budget Office, that just aren't qualified for Medicaid, but they're currently on the rolls.

So, if you look at the $5 million, I mean the five -- there's also 5 million people that are not going to have their premium tax credit. It's expiring at the end of this year. Nothing that's in this bill, nothing that we've touched, but they're adding that. And so that's what adds up to the 17 million. So, it's affecting able-bodied healthy adults with no kids. The children is not going to be affected. It's the able-bodied healthy adults.

BASH: So, people will be affected. And I know that, you know, President Trump promised no cuts to Medicaid. There will be some cuts to Medicaid funding. So, my question -- my question for you --

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: My question for you is, what do you say right now to Americans, to people in your district who may lose their coverage? Are you prepared to stand behind this when and if it becomes law, and they come to you as constituents extremely upset about losing their coverage.

SMITH: Dana, more than 80 percent of the people in my congressional district believe in Medicaid work requirements for able-bodied healthy adults. And that is, in fact, what this bill does and that is what we're delivering on. This is what the people of my congressional district want. And if you look at polling nationwide, 80 percent of Americans support work requirements for able-bodied healthy adults and that's what this bill is delivering on.

BASH: And what about -- does that include people who are caregivers?

SMITH: They're exempted.

BASH: They are exempted.

SMITH: Yeah.

BASH: OK. There is another big change in this bill to some of the people who need a lot of help or at least rely on help from the federal government. It's a program known as SNAP, which is lifeline for 42 million Americans, to be specific, to buy food. Senator Murkowski was given a carve out for Alaska and Hawaii for some of those changes, like cost sharing and work requirements. Congressman Chip Roy, your fellow Republican in the House, he said that carve out was a mistake. Do you agree?

SMITH: You know, I'm not an expert in SNAP. That's in the ag committee. I've been focused on all the tax and Medicare because that's within the Ways and Means Committee space. So, I can't go into the details as well as Chairman Thompson could in regards to SNAP.

But let's just say this, this bill is not perfect, Dana. It's absolutely not perfect, but it's a great bill. And we cannot allow perfection to stand in the way of having a great bill. Are we going to have to, like, work on other items as we move forward this Congress. Absolutely, whether it's trade, whether it's tax, whether it's healthcare. We're going to have to work on them, and also a farm bill. So, all of these things are still going to have to work. This is just one piece of the puzzle.

BASH: OK. So, you say that SNAP is not your purview, which I get, but what is your purview or taxes. That is literally what your committee does. And you've said that the bill prioritizes working families. The Budget Lab at Yale found that the bottom fifth of all earners would have their annual after-tax income decrease.

So, the people who make the least will have their incomes lower by 2.3 percent in the next 10 years. And those who are in the top fifth of income earners in America would see a 2.3 percent increase in their after-tax income. How is that prioritizing working families?