Return to Transcripts main page

Quest Means Business

Trump: Hard To Ask Israel To Stop Striking Iran; Israel: Haifa Among Several Places Hit By Missiles On Friday; IAEA Head Warns Of Disaster If Nuclear Sites Are Not Attacked; Donald Trump To Decide On Potential U.S. Strikes On Iran Within "Two Weeks"; Pope Calls On Silicon Valley To Prioritize Ethical A.I. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired June 20, 2025 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:10]

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN HOST: There it is. The closing bell, a flat Friday on Wall Street. The Dow finishing out the week slightly higher as traders

weigh the Fed's next moves. And conflict in the Middle East.

Those are the markets and these are the main events.

U.S. President Donald Trump says his own Intelligence chief is wrong about Iran.

The U.S. Federal. Reserve seems to be split on rate cuts, with one Fed governor pushing for cuts as soon as next month.

And Pope Leo is calling on tech leaders to make sure A.I. respects human dignity.

Live from New York. It is Friday, June 20th. I am Omar Jimenez, in for Richard Quest, and this is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

Good evening, everyone.

We are going to begin with breaking news. U.S. President Donald Trump spoke moments ago about Israel and Iran telling reporters it would be difficult

for him to ask Israel to stop its airstrikes in Iran even as he pursues diplomatic efforts. And he openly disputed U.S. Intelligence about Iran's

nuclear program.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: But Intelligence you have that Iran is building a nuclear weapon, your Intelligence Community has said they have no evidence that they are at

this point.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, then my Intelligence community is wrong. Who in the Intelligence community said

that?

REPORTER: Your Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

TRUMP: She is wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: I want to bring in Kevin Liptak at the White House.

I mean, look, we had seen signs in recent days that the President appeared, at least not confident in some of Tulsi Gabbard's previous assessments,

specifically that testimony that the reporter referenced in that question. But pretty striking to hear him just call her assessment flat out wrong.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, and I think it is striking for Tulsi Gabbard, who testified in March before Congress, that

Iran was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. This is now the second time in the span of a week that President Trump has openly and publicly

dismissed that testimony. But I think it is also striking just for the U.S. Intelligence Community.

The President openly disregarding their own assessment and saying that he believes essentially what Israel has been telling them, which is that

Tehran is now potentially weeks away from having the enough uranium to build a nuclear bomb. The President, clearly favoring that Intelligence in

public over that of his own Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard.

And so, you know, we had been hearing behind-the-scenes that the President was not putting as much stock in Gabbard's viewpoints and in Gabbard's

assessments. But now, clearly, that is being thrust into public view. I think it is also striking what the President said when he was asked whether

he would ask Israel to back off on some of these strikes because, as we have heard earlier today, the Iranian Foreign Minister, as part of this

effort to bring the negotiations and bring the diplomacy back into the fold in this two-week window, the Iranians have said that that would require

Israel to stop its bombardments.

President Trump, making very clear that, in his words, that would be very hard for him to ask Israel to do, because in his telling, Israel is winning

all of this. And he says that it would be difficult to ask them, as they have the upper hand, to back off now.

And so I think it leaves open the question of how exactly he hopes to bring the Iranians back to the negotiating table if he isn't willing to ask and

put pressure on Netanyahu to ease up.

He was also asked about the European efforts that are underway in Geneva today. The Foreign Ministers from Britain, France and Germany meeting with

the Iranian Foreign Minister to try and get these negotiations back on track. President Trump essentially dismissed that out of hand, saying that

the Iranians didn't want to talk to the Europeans, that they wanted to talk to him, which I think at the end of the day is probably true.

But the Europeans, I think, are trying to create an environment for those negotiations to occur, but President Trump essentially writing that off as

essentially useless.

And so some interesting comments from the President there. The one other thing that I think was important from the president was when he was asked

about the prospect of potential ground invasion of Iran by the United States, putting ground troops there. He ruled that out, which I don't think

is a surprise. This is something that he said he would pretty much never do when he was a candidate. But he is saying that ground troops is something

you never want to do. So essentially ruling that option out, even as he continues very publicly to weigh this decision of whether to strike Iran's

nuclear sites.

JIMENEZ: And, of course, the fear over any strike, at least from the U.S. perspective, is that it would drag the country potentially into a larger

conflict that, for the most part, militarily, has just stayed between Israel and Iran in this latest iteration.

[16:05:15]

I want to pick up on that last point because prior to today, President Trump had set sort of this two-week window of sorts to weigh obviously,

that decision, but also weigh if there is a diplomatic path forward, do we have any sense as to why this was the moment that the President decided,

okay, now we need to see if there are further diplomatic actions and if there has been any further progress on that front.

LIPTAK: Yes, and I think there are a couple of components that went in to that decision, and we should note that President Trump, in that gaggle just

now, said it was a maximum of two weeks, leaving open the possibility that he could make a decision before that 14-day deadline.

One of them was to allow for this diplomacy to proceed. We know that the President's foreign envoy, Steve Witkoff, has been in communication with

the Iranians. It has been sort of halting, but the President, clearly believing that there is a possibility that diplomacy could prove successful

here, and wanting to give that an opportunity.

There is also just the logistical aspects of this as the U.S. builds up its military assets in the region, this two-week window provides them more

opportunity to get positioned in case the President decides to go ahead. They want to have the sort of required, you know, ships and assets there

and able to support whatever the President decides to do.

And then I think that there is the aspect that the President hasn't necessarily been able to make up his mind. You know, this two-week period

is something that he has relied on in the past to sort of put off a decision. We've seen it again and again and again, whether it is on

tariffs, whether it is on Ukraine and Russia, this is sort of a tell that the President is having trouble making up his mind.

And so in this case, I think what the President is weighing is whether one a strike, an American strike on the nuclear facility at Fordow would be

enough to completely destroy it. He has heard from officials behind the scenes who have, I think, sort of varying assessments of what it would take

to completely get rid of that facility. He has also been asking whether this would drag the U.S. into conflict, what we were just talking about,

whether or not it if the President decides to give the go ahead, whether the U.S. is going to be a participant now in a prolonged war with Iran, and

I don't know that any official at the Pentagon or any official at the White House has necessarily been able to provide a satisfactory answer on that

front.

It is a predictive assessment, so they don't necessarily know what precisely would happen. And I think that could be giving the President some

pause here. As we heard him say there, he doesn't want U.S. troops to be involved on the ground. He doesn't want to become a President who is

overseeing another foreign conflict.

So I think all of those coming together are part of what gave the President a reason to put off a decision, but as he is saying here, he is not going

to necessarily wait until the end of that two-week window to give the go ahead or to say, no, I am going to hold off, it could happen at any point

in between now and then.

JIMENEZ: Two-week maximum. Kevin Liptak, really appreciate the reporting and analysis. Thanks for being here.

Meanwhile, the President's comments come as the Israeli military says it has destroyed half of Iran's missile launchers and dealt significant blows

to its senior military command. Iran has been striking back, though. Dozens were injured in an Iranian missile attack on Haifa, some of the aftermath

here, where witnesses describe feeling a blast wave and seeing people bleeding in the streets.

Jeremy Diamond is in Tel Aviv for us.

Jeremy, obviously you have been there and seen firsthand the effects of these Iranian missiles coming into various portions of Israel to this

point. What is the latest you have seen on the ground? What is the reaction you've been hearing from folks on the ground there?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Well, Omar, once again today, more evidence of the destructive power of those Iranian ballistic missiles

with the most significant strike having taken place in Haifa, right near the port of that city, which is both an important strategic and economic

target for Iran. But the Iranians didn't actually strike the port itself. They struck not far away, damaging a civilian area and causing dozens of

injuries.

What we have seen, though, is that even as Iran fired more than 20 ballistic missiles, striking not only Haifa but also a site in the southern

Israeli city of Beersheba, is that Israelis have been going into those bomb shelters and that has reduced the number of serious casualties and

fatalities, even as Iran is clearly aiming to cause maximum damage with those ballistic missiles.

The question now for the Israelis as they prepare for what the Israeli military's chief-of-staff described as a prolonged conflict with Iran, is,

at what point do the Israelis make a decision about whether or not they have to go at it on their own to destroy that Fordow nuclear site, given

the uncertainty about exactly how long President Trump will take to make a decision about whether or not to carry out a U.S. strike or not.

[16:10:27]

We know, of course, that right now the President is indeed saying, a maximum of two weeks, but we have seen (AUDIO GAP) as those deadlines have

frequently slipped when the President is unsure of what decision to make, and the enormous implications of that decision that President Trump has to

make, because it is not so simple as just carrying out this strike on the Fordow facility. It is also a question of what happens next? What happens

when Iran retaliates against U.S. troops stationed much closer to Iran than Israel is right now, with a range of other missiles that it can use? If

there are casualties, does the U.S. then retaliate again? And could that sink the United States into some kind of Middle East quagmire that

President Trump has vowed to avoid?

What I can tell you from the Israeli perspective is certainly that they are hoping that the United States chooses to carry out that strike in Iran, but

they are, of course, preparing for a range of other scenarios as the Israeli Prime Minister tries to avoid overly pressuring President Trump,

saying publicly instead that he trusts the President's decision making -- Omar.

JIMENEZ: Jeremy Diamond really appreciate the reporting.

Iran's Foreign Minister, meanwhile, says his country supports further talks with Europe. The Foreign Minister spoke after meeting with European

officials. He said that Iran's defense capabilities are, "not negotiable."

I want to bring in Matthew Chance, who is in Geneva for us.

So, Matthew, what have you seen there on the ground? What was the sense from officials that you got in regards to how the talks went today?

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, I mean, it has been pretty -- it has been pretty hectic today and the talks went on

for many hours, maybe up to nearly four hours, in fact. And that was partly, you know, kind of direct talks between these European officials and

their Iranian counterparts and partly consultations at the various delegations had on their own separately.

But look, I've spoken to a couple of diplomats, both Iranian and Western that were inside the talks, and they sort of give you a pretty good sort of

perspective and picture of how these negotiations unfolded.

I mean, look, first of all, both sides say they were very tense, certainly at the beginning, because there was allegation and counter-allegation

thrown at each other about how the last nuclear deal broke up and Iran's right to enrich uranium and things like that.

And so after, you know, that tension passed, there was a break. They came back and the talks were characterized as much more positive. But look, the

takeaway from Western officials is that, look, there was a direct message delivered by European negotiators and officials to the Iranians, a direct

message from the United States, twofold. First of all, that there will be no deal with the U.S. if Iran insists on continuing its uranium enrichment.

So zero enrichment is the sort of new red line or the red line that President Trump and the Trump administration is absolutely clear on. That

was communicated, I am told, by diplomats in the talks directly to the Iranians.

You know, that's a problem in itself because the idea of uranium enrichment has been traditionally a red line for Iran and continues to be so.

The other message that was passed directly to the Iranians via the Europeans from Washington, is the idea that Washington wants direct talks

with Iran to do a deal. That's something the Iranians also rejected, saying they wouldn't consider sitting down with the Americans while Israel

continued its bombing campaign of Iran's nuclear installations and its missiles and its nuclear scientists and things like that, and so that was

another sort of sticking point.

But on the positive side, both sides agreed to go away, talk to -- the Europeans to talk to Washington about whether they could organize a pause

with the Israelis, difficult. You know, President Trump himself has come out in the last few minutes and said that would be hard, given that the

Israelis are doing so well, to paraphrase him, and the Iranians going back to their senior leadership and seeing if there could be a pause on their

strikes on Israel, which have been intensifying over the course of the past week, of course.

If that's possible, and it is a big if, then there is a possibility that the United States and Iran will be able to meet for direct negotiations.

So, you know, expectations are still very low, but the window of opportunity, the breathing space, however you want to characterize it,

created by President Trump in his sort of like two-week pause before a decision is made on U.S. military intervention. You know, it is still --

there is still something that could come out of that.

And so I suppose if you want to be optimistic, that's something you can take from it.

[16:15:07]

JIMENEZ: Optimistic is hard to come by in many cases, but at least here, it seems further talks could be a possibility, at least on the European front.

Matthew Chance really appreciate the reporting.

Meanwhile, the head of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog is warning against any strike on Iran's only working nuclear power plant. Rafael Grossi said an

attack on the Bushehr plant could cause a reactor meltdown, and he told the U.N. Security Council that radioactive material could spread for hundreds

of kilometers.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAFAEL GROSSI, DIRECTOR GENERAL, IAEA: Armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place and could result in radioactive releases with grave

consequences within and beyond the boundaries of the state, which has been attacked.

I therefore again call on maximum restraint.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: Daryl Kimball is the executive director of the Arms Control Association, a nonpartisan membership organization for promoting public

understanding of and support for effective arms control policies. Thank you for being here.

Look, we've heard from Iranian officials that they would only meet with the U.S. for nuclear talks if Israel agrees to stop striking the country, and

that it might just take a phone call from the U.S. to make that happen.

We just heard from President Trump, it would be difficult for him to request Israel stop its airstrikes because they are winning as he put it.

What is your reaction to that posturing from Trump? And do you believe that it will have an impact on any ongoing negotiations among the key countries

here?

DARYL KIMBALL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ARMS CONTROL ASSOCIATION: Well, we are at a very difficult and interesting moment in this crisis.

You know, President Trump said it is hard to ask Israel to stop its strikes. I can understand why President Trump wants to see Israel destroy

more of Iran's nuclear capabilities. It would improve the United States' position at the negotiating table if there are further negotiations. But

the problem is that those strikes not only risk disaster for instance, as the Director General just said, if Israel strikes the Bushehr nuclear power

reactor. But it is really preventing the Iranians from negotiating at all with the United States on its program.

President Trump has more leverage than he did 10 days ago. He was close, I think, to reaching some sort of agreement with the Iranians then. He has

got to be very careful that he does not press his luck too far, or else what is going to happen is there will be no agreement with the Iranians.

The President may be tempted to try to destroy the Fordow underground facility, but as your reporting just said, that would not be the end of the

conflict. It would lead to a wider conflict. U.S. troops would be at risk, U.S. civilians in the region, and it would not destroy Iran's program,

which would probably go literally and figuratively underground.

So I think it is very important that President Trump do what he says is difficult, to put pressure on Mr. Netanyahu to halt his strikes, to create

a better atmosphere, the conditions for real negotiations. And he can, I think, tell the Iranians from a practical standpoint, your uranium

enrichment program has been halted. I mean, the centrifuges are not spinning, so we should have a freeze of Iran's activities and we need to

get the IAEA back into these facilities to find out where exactly the nuclear material has gone, what the status of these facilities are.

I would just note that the Iranians have already said, as they threatened, they would do if their facilities are struck, they will move their highly

enriched material, the 60 percent enriched material to a secret site.

So right now, we don't know where that is and that is the material that could be used in the future to amass, to build 10 to 12 nuclear bombs at

some point down the line.

JIMENEZ: And you mentioned that IAEA, and to this point, they've said Iran has amassed enough uranium enriched at levels just below weapons grade to

potentially make -- their assessment was at least nine nuclear bombs -- but in terms of making an actionable weapon, it is not that simple, right? It

is not just about the materials themselves, there is a further timeline to an actionable weapon deployed to potential targets, right?

KIMBALL: Exactly, Omar. I mean, so to be exact, the Iranians have 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium to 60 percent. It would take a

relatively short amount of time to enrich that further, to bomb grade 90 percent, but that only means that you have bomb grade material. It would

have to be further fashioned into a device.

[16:20:03]

The U.S. Intelligence community and the Israelis and independent experts like us would estimate that that would take at least several months to put

together, a crude device. To make a deliverable device, one that is small enough, light enough to be delivered on a ballistic missile. It would

probably take over a year.

So there is time to deal with this issue, not to rush forward with military action. That would be, I think, disastrous for the region, for energy

supplies, for civilians. There is time to engage in diplomacy that can I think, block Iran's pathways to the bomb. And the President, I would add,

is being extremely irresponsible by dismissing the findings of the combined U.S. Intelligence community assets that have warned that Iran has the

capabilities to produce this material relatively quickly, but they have not made yet a decision to weaponize it.

So he should not be dismissing those assessments, which are based upon the IAEA's information and exquisite U.S. Intelligence about the Iranian

program.

JIMENEZ: Daryl Kimball, we could talk for ten, 20 more minutes, but I've got to leave it there. I really appreciate the time and insight. Thanks for

being here.

KIMBALL: Thank you.

JIMENEZ: All right, meanwhile, at least one U.S. Federal Reserve official thinks it is time to start lowering rates again. Christopher Waller stopped

well short of calling for the jumbo cut President Trump wants. We are going to explain his reasoning after the break. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIMENEZ: Welcome back, everyone.

A big legal victory for detained Palestinian activist, Mahmoud Khalil. A federal judge ordered he be released on bail today from an ICE detention

center in Louisiana, that could happen at any moment now so we are continuing to monitor that.

The Columbia University graduate student and leader of student protests against the war in Gaza was arrested more than three months ago in New

York. He missed his graduation and the birth of his first child.

The judge said his detention could constitute an unlawful retaliation against free speech.

I want to bring in Mark Morales, who joins me now.

Mark, can you just explain what we have heard from this judge? And do we have a timeline on when Khalil could actually be released?

MARK MORALES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT REPORTER: Well, we don't exactly have a clear timeline, but we do have an idea as to what we could expect as far as

when he will be released.

[16:25:10]

So there is a lot going on after the judge's ruling has issued that he can be released, and a lot of this is somewhat procedural, so they have to do

the processing. He has got to make sure everything is on the up and up, but part of this is also what lawyers on both sides are doing. They are both

haggling for things like his passport, his green card and what they've decided was this. There are going to be some travel restrictions, so he is

limited to states -- New York, New Jersey, Michigan, parts of D.C., Louisiana as well and he is going to get what they were calling a certified

copy of his passport, which means he won't be able to travel internationally, but he will be able to use that to board a flight from

Louisiana back to New York City.

Now, he is currently at an ICE detention center in Louisiana. He is with his lawyer. There is another lawyer that's on their way to meet up with

them. It should take roughly about an hour and a half before that other lawyer meets up with both of them, and then by the time they actually do

the passport surrender, make the certified copy, we are looking at anywhere between 7:00 Eastern Time, give or take any number of minutes, because, as

we've said, this process takes time.

And this is all because the judge held a hearing today where he determined that Khalil should not be held in custody, and he pointed to a couple of

very notable things that he wasn't a danger, that he wasn't a flight risk, that nothing in his history indicated that he was any of those things.

And because of that, he said that it was highly unusual that they continued to detain Khalil. The other aspect of this, of course, is that the judge

wanted to address bigger issues, such as the First Amendment issues that we've been seeing in this case, because, as we know, Khalil was very

outspoken, especially at those Columbia University protests.

So the lawyers for the government made the argument that this could potentially open the door to what they call people using magic words. In

essence, using the First Amendment as a shield to get out of trouble. The judge pushed back on that and said, it is very clear here that Khalil was

outspoken before he was taken into custody, and he plans to be outspoken afterwards. So at least in his case, they are not magic words -- Omar.

JIMENEZ: And it follows the trend of what we've seen of other prominent activists under this field who were taken into custody and then it has

taken a judge order for them to be released. We are going to continue to monitor to see when Khalil actually makes it out.

Mark Morales, really appreciate the reporting and insight.

Meanwhile, a member of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors is calling for a rate cut as soon as next month. Christopher Waller told CNBC that the

Fed shouldn't fixate on tariffs. He says they will likely result in just a one-time increase in inflation.

Now, Waller also noted that the labor market is starting to soften, he argues it is important for the Fed to move fast.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRISTOPHER WALLER, U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE GOVERNOR: And so, in my view, if you're starting to worry about the downside risk to labor market, move now,

don't wait. People love to talk about long and variable lags. Why do we want to wait until we actually see a crash before we start cutting rates?

So I am all in favor of saying maybe we should start thinking about cutting the policy rate at the next meeting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: Waller also rejected President Trump's call for a jumbo rate cut. Instead, he said the Fed should start slow and pause if needed.

Vanessa Yurkevich is in New York for us.

So, Vanessa, can you just explain sort of what we are hearing from the Fed in general in regards to this one member in particular, and why it is so

significant?

VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, Christopher Waller represents one of 12 members that get to vote every

single time the Federal Reserve meets on deciding where interest rates sit. In the meeting they just had, they decided to keep rates still, steady, not

making any changes. That's the fourth time that they've sort of pressed pause on moving rates.

You have Christopher Waller now saying to his colleagues, essentially, guys, we've waited long enough. The data looks good, the economy looks

strong. Tariffs are not having the impact that we suspected. We need to start cutting rates and we need to do it soon.

Listen to more of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WALLER: The data the last few months has been showing that trend inflation is looking pretty good, even on a 12-month basis. So I labeled these good

news rate cuts when if inflation comes down to target, we can actually bring rates down. I've been saying this since about November of 2023.

So I think we are in that position that we could do this and as early as July.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YURKEVICH: Now, there are some of his colleagues on that board that agree with him, that say that there should be rate cuts sometime this year, but

it has to be a majority vote in order to make those decisions.

[16:30:03]

Now, the president, President Trump, would probably be very happy with a rate cut come July, as he has been advocating for many, many months now and

consumers, Americans will be happy, Omar, if there is a rate cut, because when the Fed lowers interest rates, that affects mortgage rates. So we

could see relief on mortgage rates, on interest rates on car loans, student loans and credit cards.

So the July meeting coming next month will be very closely watched -- Omar.

JIMENEZ: And Vanessa, why I've got you, I want to ask you about something else, because Trump posted on Juneteenth, saying U.S. has too many public

holidays, claiming it costs the economy billions of dollars.

Is that really the case? I mean, I guess I should ask, what is the effect of federal holidays on the economy?

YURKEVICH: Yes, he's partly right, but there's a little bit of a caveat to that. Essentially, there are 11 federal holidays that many, many workers

get off. You can see him there saying he's calling them sort of frivolous, saying that it costs the economy billions of dollars.

Well, yes, actually, one estimate says that it costs about $200 million every single day of a federal holiday that falls on a weekday, totaling

$2.2 billion a year in losses in productivity, specifically, and especially, really in the manufacturing sector. So, he is right there.

But I will say, though, that when people are on holiday, they spend they go to restaurants, they spend at retailers, they spend on airfare, traveling,

hotels. So, there is money being put back into the economy.

There's also a lot of people still working on federal holidays, people who work in health care, in restaurants, in hotels, in agriculture, in law

enforcement.

And we've also heard, Omar, from employers that they actually like when their employees take time off, because 81 percent of employers believe that

taking time off is extremely important or very important, and time off actually reduces the chances of people quitting by 35 percent.

And for every 10 extra hours of vacation, they saw that employees performance actually improved by eight percent and other studies go on to

suggest that if productivity is lost on those days that people are off for federal holidays, they often do make it up on other days.

And Omar, I'll just add this, that employers and studies time and time again have said that when people do take time off, they're actually much

happier, and they're much happier at work.

And Omar, I just have to say, really, can you really put a price on that, happiness at work?

JIMENEZ: Yes, trying to put a price on happiness, like that is the million trillion dollar idea, and I will take as many holidays as they will give

me. Vanessa Yurkevich, really appreciate you being here.

YURKEVICH: Thanks.

JIMENEZ: All right, we got a lot of stories we're following, including a top official in Iran's presidency says President Trump could end the

conflict with Israel with just one phone call.

At the moment, though, it doesn't seem President Trump is racing to make that call. We're going to go to the Middle East after this. After the

break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:36:13]

JIMENEZ: Hi, everyone. I'm Omar Jimenez. There's more QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in a moment when an official with the Iranian presidency speaks to CNN,

you're going to hear that conversation. Before that, the headlines this hour:

European and Iranian officials met today for talks in Switzerland. It was a last ditch diplomatic push to keep the Iran-Israel conflict from spiraling

into a wider regional war.

Now, an Iranian source says the discussions were very tense at first, but became much more positive after the parties took a break.

A U.S. federal judge is ordering Mahmoud Khalil be released on bail from an immigration detention center. The pro-Palestinian activist was arrested in

March and has been detained ever since.

The Trump administration accused him of being pro-Hamas and said he omitted key details on his application to become a legal permanent resident of the

United States.

In granting release, the judge said Khalil did not pose a threat or a flight risk.

And Pope Leo is worried about A.I.'s ethics, yes, artificial intelligence. At a meeting with top tech companies and Vatican officials, he emphasized

the need for A.I. to respect human dignity. He noted the dangers it poses to children and potential usage for selfish gain.

Now in the last hour, U.S. President Donald Trump standing by his two week timeline maximum for a decision on U.S. military involvement in Iran,

speaking to reporters, Trump indicated he could make up his mind even sooner.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Just a time to see whether or not people come to their senses. Giving them a period of time, we're going

to see what that period of time is, but I'm giving them a period of time, and I would say two weeks would be the maximum.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: Now, a top official in Iran's presidency says the United States could end the conflict with just a phone call from President Donald Trump

to the Israelis.

Fred Pleitgen spoke with Iran's Majid Farahani.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAJID FARAHANI, OFFICIAL WITH THE IRANIAN PRESIDENCY: I think that Israeli thought that they can be win, for example, in two or three days. But now

you see that the control is with Iran, and in every attack to Iran will be -- there is some missiles to Israel against.

And as I know, Iran announced that, until these attack has continued, the missiles will continue.

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What about President Trump? President Trump says he wants to give diplomacy a chance.

What diplomacy do you think can happen now?

FARAHANI: The United States President Trump can easily stop the war by only one telephone to Israel. But I don't know why he didn't do that.

We believe to all parts of diplomacy. So, I think if Mr. Trump ordered to Netanyahu to stop the attack, the diplomacy can be started again easily.

PLEITGEN: Do you think Iran is willing to speak directly to the Trump administration now?

FARAHANI: Directly or undirectly is not important. The importance is that Iran believe to civilian dialog.

PLEITGEN: The U.S. has talked about using a gigantic bomb called a bunker buster against the installation in Fordow. What would happen if America

bombed Iranian nuclear sites?

FARAHANI: America involved to the war, Iran predicted all choices, and we are not hand backed, and there are so many options. And as I know, all

these options are on the tables.

[16:40:10]

PLEITGEN: So, you think that American military bases, for instance, would be under threat that Iran will use its military.

FARAHANI: There are so many options, not only these -- it isn't only one option. There are so many options, and all options has been planned very

carefully.

PLEITGEN: Do you think that Iran would be willing to give up enrichment, and, for instance, join a consortium?

FARAHANI: No, no, no. Iran announced that so many times the enrichment -- we will do the enrichment, and we don't accept the supplement of

enrichment. Maybe the enrichment can be lower, but we don't stop it anymore.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JIMENEZ: And I want to bring in H.A. Hellyer, as we've been listening to that conversation there, he's a Senior Associate Fellow at the Royal United

Services Institute for Defense and Security Studies. He joins us from Cairo.

I want to pick up there, because clearly Iran has said no enrichment is a red line essentially here, that is not something they would agree to here.

Also, as we've heard that it would take a simple phone call from the U.S. to Israel to stop the strikes, President Trump is saying that he is not

willing to make that call right now at this point.

What is your reaction to that posturing from Trump, and what effect do you believe is going to have on the negotiations among the key countries here?

H.A. HELLYER, SENIOR ASSOCIATE FELLOW, ROYAL UNITED SERVICES INSTITUTE: I want to thank you for inviting me onto the program. Always a pleasure to be

here.

So, the public posturing that I think you're seeing right now, I think we need to take it into the context of the fact that there's been a lot of

discussions publicly. There's been a lot of discussions privately.

So, right now, the president -- the U.S. president is saying he's not going to make that call. I don't know if that's going to be the case a few days

from now, a week from now, and actually, we've seen over just the past 10 days that the posture in D.C. vis-a-vis Iran has changed quite dramatically

on more than one occasion.

So, I think we have to hope that there will be further discussions, particularly via the European route, in order to come to some sort of de-

escalation where Israel stops bombing the Iranians, hold their fire here and a return to negotiations where we were a week ago.

It comes back into play, because this is a -- this is a situation that is spiraling. The region has already seen 20 months of horrific war on Gaza,

invasion in Lebanon, occupation of Syrian territory. It's -- I don't think the region needs any more tension. I think you see that including from even

opponents of the Iranian regime within the region, particularly in the Gulf, where they are extremely cynical about the Iranian regime, for very

good reason, and they also don't want to see any escalation take place on the country. I think they're quite horrified at this turn of events, with

regards to Israel launching a war in Iran.

JIMENEZ: And you know, on that point or that worry of wider escalation, President Trump has set this sort of two week maximum or so negotiating

window before deciding on participating in strikes on Iran.

Even if, let's just say, American bunker buster bombs crippled the underground nuclear facility at Fordow to levels acceptable by Israel and

the United States. What do you believe would happen next?

HELLYER: So, I appreciate you're saying, you know, let's take that as just a scenario, but it's a very difficult scenario to imagine, because leaving

aside the illegalities, OK, because there has been no resolution by the United Nations Security Council that would authorize this, and as a result,

it would be illegal.

But putting that to one side, just for the sake of argument, it wouldn't necessarily just be -- in fact, it would necessarily would not just be one

bomb. There would have to probably be several rounds, several bombs that would be dropped onto that installation. And it would reduce, it would

severely damage Iran's capacity and capability, but I don't think it would eradicate it.

Which brings us back to where we were, right, where we have a regime that people are concerned about in the region, that people are concerned about

internationally, and we're trying to come to some sort of diplomatic solution where a bomb is never imagined as a possibility. It's important to

note that the IAEA said that they didn't see evidence for a bomb under construction. Tulsi Gabbard, the Director of National Intelligence United

States, also testified to that effect early on in the year.

[16:45:07]

So, I think we have to be very cautious about thinking that if this were to take place, that there wouldn't be massive repercussions. I don't like to

think what the Iranians might do in response, in terms of targeting American assets in the region, I think that would be an expected outcome,

which would again, just lead us into a deeper spiral of more war and more escalation in the region.

JIMENEZ: Not an outcome anybody wants to get to at this point. H.A. Hellyer, again, keep the conversation going for a while. I got to leave it

there. Really appreciate you taking time in being here.

HELLYER: Thank you.

JIMENEZ: Of course. And meanwhile, Pope Leo warns that A.I. could negatively impact children. He's calling for Silicon Valley to focus on

ethics as it develops the technology, that's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIMENEZ: This week on Call to Earth, we're heading out to the Great Barrier Reef, following the work of marine biologist Emma Camp and her Coral

Nurture Program.

Today, we join them at a site where they're using so called Super Coral species to restore parts of the world's largest marine habitat as part of

the Rolex Perpetual Planet initiative.

(CALL TO EARTH)

[16:51:55]

JIMENEZ: To see more from the Great Barrier Reef, tune in this weekend for the full documentary, Call to Earth, Searching for Super Coral only on CNN,

we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JIMENEZ: Welcome back, everyone. Pope Leo is calling on tech leaders to make sure A.I. respects human dignity. He warns that artificial

intelligence could be especially harmful to children.

Now, the message was directed to a meeting of Vatican officials, researchers and some of Silicon Valley's top companies.

The Pope highlighted the potential misuse for selfish gain as well, or, to, "Foment conflict and aggression."

[16:55:06]

Leo is following in the footsteps of Pope Francis, who called for an international treaty to regulate A.I.

Clare Duffy is here in New York. Can you just talk about just the significance of what we're hearing from the Pope and why someone like the

pope may feel the need to actually come out and take position -- take a position on artificial intelligence?

CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS WRITER: Hi, Omar. Yes, this is really interesting. And as you said, Leo is really following in the footsteps of

his predecessor Pope Francis here in pushing the Vatican to take an active role in shaping A.I. policy.

Of course, the Vatican doesn't have direct regulatory control over this technology. But this comes at a time when the United States, where many of

these A.I. companies are based, is really pulling back on regulating the big tech companies, and so the Vatican having a voice here certainly has

the potential to be impactful.

This is the second annual gathering of academics, Vatican officials and tech leaders at the Vatican to discuss the social and ethical applications

of A.I. This event today was attended by representatives of Google, OpenAI, Anthropic, IBM, Meta, Palantir, some of the biggest executives in this

space.

And I don't think we need to remind anyone that this is sort of a fraught moment for A.I. development. Of course, there is so much promise for this

technology, but there are also major risks that range from A.I. taking people's jobs to A.I. creating even more powerful weapons in this time of

really intense global conflict.

And so, Leo said that he would like to see these tech leaders create an ethical framework for developing and deploying A.I. technology that would

respect human dignity, human work, and especially children.

And something else, he said that I thought was really interesting and sort of potentially an admonishment of some of what we've heard from tech

leaders talking about how A.I. will soon be smarter than humans. He says access to data, however extensive, must not be confused with intelligence.

And what's really at issue here is A.I. governance, how these companies are managing and balancing the need to turn a profit, the need to provide for

their shareholders, with the need to not create more harm in the world. And that is really what Pope Leo wants these leaders focused on, Omar.

JIMENEZ: Clare Duffy, really appreciate the reporting.

All right, U.S. markets closed mixed today as investors watch for developments in the Middle East, let's take a quick look. The Dow closed up

35 points. It began the day higher after a top fed official came out in favor of lowering interest rates.

Also as well, we are looking at some of the components I believe, that were available. Some individual companies, Apple closed up two percent, Home

Depot up one but that is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS .for today, I'm Omar Jimenez. "THE LEAD" with Jake Tapper starts now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

END