Return to Transcripts main page
Quest Means Business
Trump Arrives In Netherlands For NATO Summit; Israel And Iran Claim Historic Victory After Conflict; NTSB Blames Boeing, FAA For Terrifying Door-Plug Blowout; Sean "Diddy" Combs' Defense Team Rests Its Case; Jerome Powell Tells U.S. Lawmakers Fed Can Wait To Cut Rates; Markets Rally As Iran-Israel Ceasefire Takes Hold; NYC Democratic Mayoral Primary Contest Underway. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired June 24, 2025 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:00:09]
MAX FOSTER, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A rally on Wall Street, the Dow closing up more than 500 points. Those are the markets. We will explain.
These are the main events: President trump arriving at the NATO Summit in the Netherlands as sources tell CNN that U.S. strikes on Iran failed to
destroy its nuclear facilities.
Safety investigators say both Boeing and the FAA are to blame for the blown door plug on an Alaska Airlines flight.
And Fed Chair Jay Powell pushes back on calls for rate cuts as early as July.
Live from London, it is Tuesday, June the 24th. I am Max Foster in for Richard Quest and this is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.
Tonight, U.S. President Donald Trump has arrived at the NATO Summit, fresh off a diplomatic victory. President Trump landing in the Netherlands
earlier after securing a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. That conflict will be just one of the many pressing topics on NATO's agenda.
Meanwhile, CNN has learned that the U.S. airstrikes on Iran didn't destroy the core components of Tehran's nuclear program and early intel assessments
suggest the program was likely only set back by a few months.
Jeff Zeleny in Washington, this really does contradict what the President has been saying.
JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It certainly does, Max. And again, an early assessment and the intelligence is ongoing. But
this is from the Defense Intelligence Agency, the intelligence arm of the pentagon and it certainly speaks to a question that has been really looming
large ever since the strikes on early Sunday morning. And the question is, was obliteration the accurate word?
President Trump, of course, has said the sites were obliterated. He said the nuclear program was destroyed, but these early indications are that
that simply is not the case. Our reporting suggests that the program was potentially just debilitated for a number of months, or setback for a
number of months. So that could explain some of the defensiveness around the President's view of this. He has been very defensive and pushing back
very hard on people who are saying, we should wait and see what the Battle Damage Assessment is.
So, look, this is an ongoing intelligence estimate, but this is a significant setback should this intelligence prove true. And again, it is
an ongoing thing. They are still collecting more information. But the White House of course is pushing back very hard on this idea. Still suggesting
that the nuclear sites that Fordow and all the rest were destroyed.
Let's take a look at this statement from the White House Press Secretary. It said: "This alleged assessment is flat out wrong and was classified as
top secret, but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous low level loser in the intelligence community." The White House Press Secretary goes on to
say, "The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a
perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran's nuclear program." "Everyone knows," she said, "... what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound
bombs perfectly on their targets: Total obliteration."
So, Max, again using the words total obliteration, but that has never been used by the Pentagon officials and it certainly has not been used by other
governments as well. So we will see going forward here. But this is an early assessment that certainly, you know, does not necessarily change the
idea of the fragile ceasefire that's underway at the moment, but it could explain why Iran was looking for an off ramp to all of this so quickly if
some of the nuclear program is still intact -- Max.
FOSTER: The dismissing it as a low level loser, but we've actually got multiple sources, haven't we? We've cross-referenced them, and no one is
denying that this report actually exists. But a lot of people on Donald Trump's side dismissing it because they say it is too early to say what the
assessment is.
But, you know, you could counter that, saying, well, Donald Trump doesn't even know yet, but he is saying it is obliterated.
ZELENY: Sure, it is early. I mean, and the reality is there was a successful military mission in terms of getting the B-2s over there without
being detected and leaving Iranian airspace without being shot down. So it was a successful mission on that front. But in terms of the actually
obliterating in the President's words, the nuclear program and the sites, that's unclear. It is very much unclear.
Some of the nuclear uranium -- the uranium, excuse me is not the located, the Vice President just yesterday was sort of a dismissing questions about
the location exactly of some of the uranium.
[16:05:10]
We saw that there was a cargo of vehicles going into the site late last week at Fordow before the strikes. So look, many, many questions are still
to be resolved by this. The White House is eager to move on. The President is eager to move on, strike this up as a win and go from there. But look,
much has to happen before then. But again, this early assessment that were learning from, from a variety of sources, from the Defense Intelligence
Agency, the Pentagon's own intelligence arm is suggesting that obliteration is not the word at all, despite what the White House may say -- Max.
FOSTER: Jeff, thank you very much.
Let's get the view from Iran then. Fred is there.
Fred, this reporting that we are getting that there wasn't as much damage done to the Iranian sites as had been claimed by Donald Trump. Does that
match up with anything you're hearing from the Iranian side?
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Iranians have essentially been saying three things about these strikes.
First of all, they've been saying that it doesn't really set back their nuclear program that much, maybe a little bit. But they're also saying the
nuclear program will continue.
There were sort of three things that the Iranians kept saying. On the one hand, there was the head of the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization who came
out and said, look, those sites, especially the Fordow sites, have been cleared out of anything significant a long time ago, meaning, of course,
probably the centrifuges, but then also some of that material, the highly enriched uranium as well, saying that all of that had been in preparation,
cleared out a while ago. And so therefore there was nothing of significance to be destroyed in any of those sites, whether we are talking about Natanz,
Esfahan or Fordow, which, of course is the most fortified of those sites, because it is inside a mountain.
There was also an adviser to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Command who came out and said, look, a site like Fordow simply can't be destroyed
in one military attack simply because it is so fortified. It is inside a mountain. And of course, the gravel there is very thick. The rock there
above that Fordow site is so thick that the Iranians don't believe that it can be destroyed.
There hasn't really been a Battle Damage Assessment yet on the part of the Iranians. One of the things that we have to keep in mind about those sites
is they are, of course, highly secretive, a lot of them are within military installations. So most probably we are not going to hear very much in the
way of a battle assessment from the Iranians, but one thing that they also said is that even if these sites were to be destroyed, even if there was
significant damage there, and a lot of the centrifuges and other things that are in there would be damaged, that the knowledge is still very much
there, that the nuclear program can continue, and that is something that we've heard from various government officials here in Iran.
The President of Iran has said that they believe that nuclear enrichment is Iran's right. It is something that they're going to stand up for. That, of
course, is something that the talks between Steve Witkoff, the adviser or the negotiator for President Trump and the Iranians had been about. The
U.S. has said they want Iran to stop enriching uranium completely, but the Iranians are saying it is a right that they have, and certainly not one
that they're willing to back away from, though the Iranians are saying that that nuclear program is going to continue, that it is their right.
And the vibes that we've been getting here on the ground from officials is that they say that if anything, the nuclear program hasn't been set back
that much, especially in light of the fact that, of course, they have gained a lot of knowledge as far as the nuclear program is concerned. That
is still very much there, despite the fact that, of course, there have been some pretty heavy attacks, not just on these nuclear sites, but of course,
one thing we have to keep in mind as well, Max, is that a lot of Iranian senior nuclear scientists have been killed in the past couple of days by
the Israelis, as well -- Max.
FOSTER: The language coming from Tehran seems to be very similar to what it was before any of these attacks. So you do wonder where the compromise will
be if the U.S. goes into negotiations with Iran? You know, what are the experts saying there? You know, where do they see compromise on either
side?
PLEITGEN: Well, first of all, I think right now negotiations are still pretty far away. There were senior Iranian officials who say that they
believe that as long as long as this confrontation is going on, that there aren't going to be any direct or indirect negotiations with the United
States in the not too distant future. So they're going to have to wait and see how that plays out in the first place.
But you're absolutely right, it is going to be very difficult, the Iranians acknowledge, to find any sort of common language. One of the things that we
kept hearing and keep hearing again and again, not just from the presidency here in Iran, but also from the Foreign Ministry as well, is that they say
that nuclear enrichment is a red line for Iran, that the Iranians are not going to back away from that.
I spoke to the Deputy Vice President here a couple of days ago and he said, look, the Iranians would be willing to enrich at a much lower level, much,
much lower levels than they have in the past, but enrichment needs to stay here.
[16:10:00]
And of course, Max, one of the things that was floated at some point was a sort of consortium that could be built involving Iran, but then also
involving other Middle Eastern countries, possibly also the international atomic energy agency. That was all before Israel's bombing campaign took
place.
That, of course, right now appears to be completely out of the question also, because one of the things that has almost completely been ruptured,
it seems, is Iran's relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency, where the Iranians right now are assessing whether or not to even work
together with that agency in the future, and going forward, which, of course, means that inspections in sort of any nuclear facilities is
something that really is still very much up in the air, whether or not that's going to take place in the future.
So right now, all of this obviously, and one of the things that we have to keep in mind is that it is only less than 24 hours since the bombing
campaign here stopped and since these strikes, tit-for-tat strikes between the Iranians and the Israelis have stopped, so it is still all very fresh.
But right now, very difficult to see where a compromise can be reached, but the Iranians still very much very bullish in their language, saying that
for them, it is absolutely an unalienable right that they have to have a nuclear program and also to enrich uranium with centrifuges that are their
own -- Max.
FOSTER: Fred in Tehran, thank you.
CNN military analyst, Cedric Leighton joining me to try to bring all of this together.
Cedric, thank you so much for joining us. I just want to go to this reporting that we've had to get your sense from it about the early
intelligence assessment, at least being that Donald Trump was wrong, that the sites that the U.S. attacked in Iran weren't obliterated.
But, you know, does anyone really know at this early stage?
COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: The answer, Max, is they do not know at this early stage. And I think we have to, in essence, take a
step back because this, you know, as you mentioned, is an early assessment. It is from one of the intelligence agencies. Now, caveat that a little bit,
they are supposed to be getting information from a variety of sources, including other military Department of Defense intelligence agencies, and
put that in a fused intelligence report that is from all different sources.
So this is one part of it. It is -- actually, I am not surprised by the conclusion at this stage of the game, but in order to have a full blown
assessment, it would require a lot more analysis to determine whether or not the Massive Ordnance Penetrator actually went as far as we thought it
would, you know, down the various shafts at Fordow, for example and that is going to become, I think, a key element here in essence. It may require --
to get a full assessment, may require actually being on the ground there. But that is a really hard thing to do because in essence, Iran is obviously
a denied area to U.S. Intelligence and so we may never know the exact impact of this.
But I think the proof in the pudding will be when and if the Iranians restart their nuclear program and we would have to be prepared for them to
do so in one form or another, regardless of what the results of the battle damage -- bomb damage assessments are.
FOSTER: We are getting sourcing from Defense Intelligence in the U.S. How reliable are they in your experience? Obviously, intelligence is a very big
community and we are just talking about one part of it here.
LEIGHTON: Right. That's correct. They are fairly reliable. I used to work for them in, you know, in one -- during one of my assignments on the Joint
Staff that was connected to the DIA. They have a very robust analytical component, and it is a global organization. They take a look at all kinds
of areas that are of interest to the United States and its allies, and Iran, of course, is always pretty much at the top of the list. So they've
been studying the Iran problem for a very long time and have a great deal of expertise in that area.
But, you know, having said that, there is always a possibility that they've missed something. They've missed a key indicator. And as you know, as we've
noted, it is a preliminary report. Often these Battle Damage Assessment reports take several weeks to put together, sometimes longer.
FOSTER: Okay, Cedric, as ever, thank you so much for joining us.
Israel's Prime Minister is celebrating the country's operation against Iran. Earlier, Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel had achieved an historic
victory that would stand for generations. He claimed Iran's nuclear program has been destroyed and said Israel would act with the same determination if
Tehran tried to revive it.
Clarissa is in Tel Aviv for us. Any reaction there to this intelligence leak that we've had, Clarissa?
[16:15:00]
CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, no, Max, we haven't had any official reaction yet, but certainly a little bit
embarrassing, possibly, given that this report was leaked first to CNN just moments after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave this sort of
bombastic, mission accomplished speech, which I should say was primarily intended for an Israeli audience.
And interestingly, we saw the same from Iran's President giving a sort of victory speech to the Iranian public. Perhaps the one positive that can be
taken from this right now is that the ceasefire is holding, and the fact that both the Iranian leadership and the Israeli leadership are delivering
kind of speeches of victory to their people gives an indication that, for now, both sides intend to adhere to that ceasefire.
I will say that while Netanyahu did talk about how effectively Iran's nuclear program has been laid to waste, he didn't draw on any specific
timeline in terms of how many months or years it has been set back.
Obviously, this leaked report suggesting it is just months previously, we've heard from the IDF that they believed it was years. But what's
becoming increasingly clear to all is that it will take some time to fully and coherently assess the full scale of the damage.
The IDF says it is now focusing its efforts no longer on Iran, and the sort of 12 days of conflict that it has been engaged in with Iran, but now wants
to shift focus to Gaza, saying that the forces will be fully refocused to toppling Hamas and retrieving the 50 hostages, 20 of whom are believed to
be alive.
And we did hear as well today, Max, I think interestingly, from the Missing Family Hostage Forum, who basically were imploring Israel's leadership to
include Gaza as part of this Israel-Iran ceasefire, and worth noting as well to our viewers around the world that while this has been playing out
over the last 12 days, more than 860 people killed in Gaza, more than 70 in just the last 24 hours. The U.N. continuing to warn of a man-made famine
looming as the disastrous humanitarian situation continues to unfold -- Max.
So potentially now, the hope is in some quarters at least, that this ceasefire, which is holding tentatively, could create space to pivot back
to Gaza and efforts to negotiate a ceasefire there.
FOSTER: Okay, Clarissa, thanks for joining us from Tel Aviv with that.
Still to come, investigators are pointing the finger at Boeing and the FAA for a terrifying incident aboard that Alaska Airlines flight you'll
remember?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:20:31]
FOSTER: Returning to our top story, U.S. President Donald Trump has arrived at the NATO Summit in the Netherlands as questions arise over the success
of his airstrikes against Iran.
Sources telling CNN that early intelligence suggests the strikes didn't destroy the core components of Iran's nuclear program. Despite Mr. Trump's
claims, it appears the program was likely only set back by a few months. Meanwhile, the President is taking credit for the ceasefire between Israel
and Iran.
Kristen Holmes is in the Netherlands.
I mean, he can claim credit for that current ceasefire, at least, can't he? But this idea that, you know, the nuclear program was obliterated might not
be true. That's what we are hearing from early assessments, at least.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and this is one assessment and this is an early intelligence assessment and it is from the Defense
Intelligence Agency, which is part of the Pentagon, it is their arm, and we know that this is still ongoing, that anything could change. There could be
new developments. But it is interesting that the first intelligence assessments that we are seeing, according to these sources who were briefed
on them, are saying that there was not as much damage as President Trump is saying there was.
I mean, of course, even after -- I mean, moments after those planes left Iranian airspace, President Trump was saying that the entire nuclear
program had been obliterated. And we, you know, carefully couched after speaking to experts and officials that there was no way to tell what the
damage was at that moment. And this is still going to be an ongoing process.
But I do want to say what the what the White House came back with, because they did not say that it didn't exist. They actually acknowledged that this
assessment happened, but they say it is wrong and this is a statement from Karoline Leavitt, the Press Secretary. She says, "This alleged assessment
is flat out wrong and was classified as, 'top secret,' but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous low level loser in the intelligence community.
The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a
perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran's nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on
their targets: Total obliteration."
Now, a couple of things to note here. This is a particularly sensitive topic for the White House and for President Trump because as we reported,
up until those strikes, one of the deciding factors that President Trump -- that played into President Trump's decision to actually launch these bombs
was the fact that he was asking his advisers and allies and aides and military officials if these bombs were going to take out Iran's nuclear
program. He didn't want to just kind of send-off these bombs and not have a bigger result.
And this clearly shows, and again, this is early, we will see other intelligence assessments. But this would show if we just went off of this
one that that didn't actually happen and that was what he had wanted.
The other part of this, and just to note in Karoline Leavitt's statement there, they continue to bring in these fighter pilots to say that any kind
of questioning of the damage that the bombs did is news outlets or intelligence agencies questioning the efficacy of the pilots, and those
things are not the same.
Just to be very clear, these pilots, these fighter pilots could have executed the mission flawlessly. This is just about what kind of damage
those bombs did, given the capacity that these Iranian nuclear facilities had. We know that they were very, very locked down underground. But I just
want to -- I want to note that as well.
Now, the other concern, and this is the concern for the administration officials that I have talked to, is how this could potentially affect an
Iranian nuclear deal. Just remember, that's President Trump's end game here is to bring Iran to the table to come up with this new nuclear deal and how
if this intelligence is correct, that they weren't really obliterated, that they still only set them back a couple of months, is that going to change
the terms, potentially, that Iran would have going into a deal with the United States and going into a nuclear deal, and we just simply don't know
the answer.
And we know that this, again, is just one of many intelligence reports that we are waiting to get more information. The Israelis are going to do their
own intelligence reports. There is going to be international intelligence reports as well. But this would certainly anger President Trump for a
number of reasons. And one of them being that he has claimed that these nuclear facilities were completely obliterated.
[16:25:00]
FOSTER: Kristen, thank you so much for joining us there from the Netherlands.
President Trump sharing a text message whilst he was there, sent to him from the head of NATO. Mark Rutte wrote that "... all NATO members had
committed to spending five percent of their GDP on defense." Rutte said, "Europe will pay in a big way, as they should." The NATO chief also told
the President that it was his win.
Ivo Daalder is a former U.S. Ambassador to NATO. He is now CEO of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.
I mean, it is an extraordinary situation, isn't it, when you see these texts, the fact the text has been released and how fawning the head of NATO
was. But how do you think that's going to go down with the other leaders?
IVO DAALDER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Oh, I think the other leaders want Mr. Trump to come to The Hague, have dinner, have the meeting
tomorrow, and leave without blowing up the alliance. And so if that takes a little fawning over a text message and even the leak of that text message,
that's okay. That is the fundamental reason they are there. They are committing to spend 3.5 percent on real defense, and then another 1.5
percent on defense-related activities, first and foremost, because there is a real threat that they face, a threat that, by the way, President Trump
continues to deny exists from Putin's Russia. And secondly, and importantly, because they no longer have full confidence in the United
States.
Europe is prepared to do more on defense because they realize that they no longer can count on the United States in the way that they have long been
able to do. This is not a question of burden sharing, it is a question of burden shifting, shifting the burden from all allies onto the shoulders of
the Europeans. That is the reality. That is what has changed.
And you know, in some ways, we are a better alliance for having stronger European participation, but it still depends on President Trump being
willing and able to continue to bear the American part of the burden, which I sincerely hope he will.
FOSTER: The NATO chief is saying that the President had a big win with this increase in funding from the European side. Is that fair, do you think?
Because, you know, there are two ways of looking at this and you just pointed them out, either Donald Trump told them to do it and they did it,
or they just realized that they had to do it because he wasn't going to keep funding them. So whose win is this?
DAALDER: Well, ultimately it is a win probably for European security because Europeans spending more on defense and being more able to defend
themselves and being less reliant on the United States are likely to be able to deter a growing Russian military threat better than they otherwise
would be. So in that sense, it is a win for European security. If Donald Trump wants to take the win home and therefore say, I am going to be not
just a friend, but a real ally, I will continue the United States' mission within NATO and its leadership in NATO, that would be fantastic, and
something that I think all leaders in Europe would want and frankly, a vast majority of Americans would want.
But just in case Donald Trump decides that that is not something he wants to do and to continue to denigrate the alliance and alliance where he is
putting massive trade tariffs on for National Security reasons and other reasons on, having more capability on the European side is a good and
necessary thing.
FOSTER: What happens if the U.S. expects everyone else to pay five percent and doesn't pay five percent itself on the basis that it has been
overpaying for years already?
DAALDER: Yes, well, that's what the President Trump has said. We've done so much for so long, it is time for us not to do more, but for you to do more.
Again, it is a -- it goes to the core of what this alliance is about. There is a difference now on the threat because President Trump does not believe
that President Putin poses a threat. He thinks that NATO expansion in Ukraine started the war, contrary to all evidence. And there is now also a
difference over the fundamental core nature of the alliance, which is that security and the alliance is indivisible.
Apparently, Mr. Trump believes that it can be divided, that you can have something, that Europe can take care of its own security, and the United
States can do what it needs to do. And indeed, that is what the message has been from the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, from the Secretary of
State Marco Rubio, that the stark reality, as Pete Hegseth put it, is that the United States can no longer take primary responsibility for European
defense.
It has interests elsewhere, and that Europe needs to take responsibility for its own defense. That is a fundamental change in the nature of this
alliance, and I think the European leaders are recognizing it, they are stepping up as a result by paying more for their own defense. But it also
means American influence and indeed, American leadership power and leverage over the alliance and through the alliance will have been significantly
diminished over time.
FOSTER: It has been fascinating to see Europe coming together because of all this. There has been so much of a shift.
Ivo Daalder, thank you so much for explaining it to us.
Still to come, defense attorneys for Sean "Diddy" Combs have rested their case after calling no witnesses. We will have the latest from his sex
trafficking trial, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:30:28]
FOSTER: Hello, I'm Max Foster. More QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in just a moment when we'll look at the new government report on the Alaska Airlines' door
plug blowout. Defense attorneys for Sean "Diddy" Combs rest their case without calling a single witness. Before that, though, the headlines this
hour.
Both Israel and Iran are claiming victory after their 12-day war ended with a ceasefire. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says Iran's nuclear
program was -- has been thwarted, warning that if Iran tries to rebuild it, Israel will act with the same determination to foil it again.
Democratic voters in New York City are choosing their candidate for the mayor's race. There are 11 people on the ballot. The frontrunners are
former governor Andrew Cuomo and Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani. The winner will face incumbent Eric Adams, who's running as an independent.
A brutal heat wave is peaking on the U.S. East Coast. Nearly 160 million people are under heat alerts. Temperatures in New York City are expected to
reach 100 degrees Fahrenheit or 37 degrees Celsius for the first time in June since 1966.
Investigators are blaming both Boeing and the FAA for a terrifying incident last year aboard an Alaska Airlines flight.
[16:35:02]
The door plug blew out. The blowout took place whilst the plane was actually at altitude, nearly 5,000 meters. It raised new questions about
the quality and safety of Boeing's commercial aircraft. Preliminary findings showed four bolts that were supposed to hold the door plug in
place were actually missing. The chairwoman of the National Transportation Safety Board said at a hearing today that there were multiple system
failures.
Pete Muntean joins me now.
I'm not an aviation expert. I'm not an engineer. But I think I probably could have told you about some engineering failures.
PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: No doubt some engineering failures here. And we got some compelling new details here, Max. On the 177
people on board Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 last January 5th, 2024, there were three lap infants on board being held by their parents without their
own seat. There were four unaccompanied minors being children flying on their own, including a 6-year-old boy who had just celebrated his birthday
flying on a commercial flight for the very first time.
So much of this investigation has centered on the door plug, and we knew from the preliminary findings from the National Transportation Safety Board
that the door plug was removed at Boeing's Renton, Washington, factory and reinstalled by Boeing workers without the four critical bolts that held the
door plug in place. But the NTSB said definitively today that those Boeing workers doing that work were inexperienced. They were doing work that was
undocumented and unstructured, the NTSB said.
I want you to listen now to NTSB chair Jennifer Homendy, who said it was a miracle that nobody was killed on Alaska Flight 1282.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JENNIFER HOMENDY, CHAIR, NTSB: This is a problem within Boeing on procedures that really relied on a single point of failure. And so we have
looked at the process, the systemic issues that contributed to this, to make some recommendations in the process to prevent it from happening
again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MUNTEAN: Now, the NTSB issued 19 new safety recommendations as a result of the probable cause of this incident that it found today, came down pretty
hard on Boeing. The NTSB said there needed to be a design change in the door plug so this does not happen again. That includes planes coming off
the factory line. Also, 737 MAXs that are out there already calling for a retrofit to existing airplanes.
The NTSB also came down hard on the Federal Aviation Administration, saying that it needs to step up its oversight of manufacturers like Boeing, saying
that the FAAs oversight was deficient, according to the NTSB. The FAA says in a new statement that it takes the NTSB's recommendations seriously, but
that it already has brought up a harder line with Boeing as its making changes.
FOSTER: Yes, Pete Muntean, thank you. I mean, people desperately wanted to know what was going to come out of that.
Now, the defense team in Sean "Diddy" Combs' criminal trial has rested its case, calling no witnesses. Earlier, the music mogul confirmed he wouldn't
testify in his defense. Combs has pleaded not guilty to charges of sex trafficking and racketeering.
Elizabeth Wagmeister joins me now.
You must have been surprised by this move.
ELIZABETH WAGMEISTER, CNN ENTERTAINMENT CORRESPONDENT: Yes. I mean, the defense, really their case, Max, has been throughout cross-examination
because they really had no case at all. In fact, their case was less than 30 minutes. As you said, they called zero witnesses. Instead just
submitting some additional exhibits into evidence that the jury will have handy in that deliberation room.
Now, deliberations can begin as early as Friday, but prosecutors indicated it will likely be Monday of next week. Closing arguments are set to begin
on Thursday. Those will likely take two days, so Thursday and Friday again. The jury getting the case on Monday most likely.
Now, as you said, Combs did not testify and will not be testifying. I had reported that yesterday. I had a source familiar with the case tell me that
Combs had been wrestling this and weighing this with his defense, but ultimately came to the conclusion that he wouldn't testify.
Well, today, when the judge asked Combs in the courtroom if he understood his rights, that it was his choice to testify or not, Combs said that he
understood his rights. He said that he had spoken with his defense at length, and that he opted not to.
Now, an interesting moment in court today, Max. The judge also asked Combs, how are you feeling? And I want to read you exactly what he said to the
judge. He said, quote, "I'm doing great, your honor. I've been wanting to tell you. Thank you."
[16:40:05]
He went on to say, "You're doing an excellent job." Well, the judge chuckled and said, "Thank you. I appreciate it."
So again, this case going to the jury as soon as the end of this week, and it looks like the judge will get his wish that this case could come to an
ultimate close with a verdict before the July 4th holiday here in New York.
FOSTER: OK, Elizabeth, thank you so much. Not much longer, it seems.
Jerome Powell saying rate cuts can wait as the Fed learns more about the impact tariffs are having on the economy. More on the Fed chair's Capitol
Hill testimony and why he says politics won't impact monetary policy.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
FOSTER: Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell says the central bank is well- positioned amid the uncertainty of tariffs. He told U.S. lawmakers that rate cuts can wait until the scope of tariffs are better understood, as
well as their effect on inflation.
President Trump has criticized Powell's leadership and called for a sharply lower rate. Powell said the central bank has to block out politics, remain
independent.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEROME POWELL, CHAIR, U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE: At the end of the day, we do what we think is the right thing, when we think it's the right thing to do.
We don't, we don't take into consideration political factors. If we start doing that, I don't know where that stops. Once you start considering
elections and stuff like that, where does it stop?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Vanessa Yurkevich is in New York.
It's pretty incredible that he has to remind everyone of that, really, isn't it?
VANESSA YURKEVICH, CNN BUSINESS AND POLITICS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, certainly. And he has to remind everyone because President Trump has been trying to
direct the chair of the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates. And Jerome Powell has really been very steadfast in the fact that he does not believe
that the Federal Reserve needs to cut interest rates right now.
They have not for the past four meetings. And he's signaling on Capitol Hill today that probably they're not going to do it in the July meeting as
well, because he says that despite the fact that the economy looks strong, the data is good, there is still so much uncertainty about whether or not
the tariffs are going to have an impact on the economy.
He said that he does believe that inflation is going to tick up in the near future, but certainly there are voting members in the Federal Reserve Board
that disagree with Jerome Powell, that believe that there should be an interest rate cut as soon as July. Christopher Wallace is one of those
voting members who said, why wait until things get really bad to make a cut?
[16:45:06]
But Jerome Powell saying that they need to balance things and make sure that in fact the tariffs show up and make an impact on the economy as they
are expected to do. Listen to more about how Jerome Powell talked to Congress about other members in this voting committee, and how they feel
about interest rate cuts.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
POWELL: But a significant majority feels it will be appropriate to reduce rates later this year. And what that means is that each of those persons
who wrote down a cut in rates later this year, they think that there's some state of the world where inflation doesn't prove to be as high, or the
labor market weakens where -- or some combination of those two things that it will turn out to be more likely than not appropriate to reduce policy
rates subject to great uncertainty.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
YURKEVICH: So he went on to say there that maybe towards the end of the year, there could be a rate cut coming, but, Max, 80 percent of investors
on Wall Street believe that the Federal Reserve will hold rates steady in July and for everyday Americans, average consumers, when the Federal
Reserve decides to hold rates steady or raise interest rates or lower interest rates, interest rates that we have on things like credit cards or
student loans or car loans are directly impacted, as well as mortgage rates.
Mortgage rates here in the United States have been tracking upwards close to 7 percent. So many Americans, along with President Trump, wishing that
maybe the Federal Reserve will start to cut interest rates. Markets -- and you can see there the Federal Funds Rate actually rising after COVID. And
we've kind of hung on towards the beginning of this year at the same level for months and months and months now.
But Jerome Powell saying we might have to hang on a little bit longer, really wanting to see if in fact these tariffs that so many economists had
predicted would show up in the economy, Max, actually do.
FOSTER: Vanessa Yurkevich, thank you so much for that.
Sticking with markets, global markets rallying on hopes the ceasefire between Iran and Israel actually does hold. Oil prices falling pretty
sharply. They're now at the same levels as before the conflict in fact. And Wall Street also reacting positively. The Dow, S&P 500, the Nasdaq all much
higher.
Obviously they have to try to look into the future, Anna, and see what's happening. But they're taking a risk, aren't they, investors?
ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Possibly a small risk. But there was this really pivotal moment over 24 hours ago, which was actually when Iran
targeted a U.S. base in Qatar. Now, most people would think, hey, that's escalation. That's going to see oil prices rise. But actually what didn't
happen was Iran didn't target energy. We didn't see the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which we have been talking about now for more than a
week, I think, Max.
We didn't see some of the worst-case scenarios. And at this stage there's a big de-escalation in terms of energy. So I think for oil investors, they
see that there is much less risk in the market at this stage. And if anything, you could be seeing more oil coming onto the market. Not only are
OPEC Plus reducing some of the cuts that they already had and putting more oil on the market, but also we've had President Trump signaling there might
be sanctions relief for China buying Iran's oil.
China is pretty much the only customer for Iranian oil. So what we're seeing is actually more oil potentially being on the market and maybe not
much demand given we're looking at a global economy suffering with tariffs in the months ahead.
FOSTER: What's the feeling that Donald Trump is taking into account the markets when he makes these decisions?
STEWART: I think it is anyone's guess what is going through the president's head when he makes these decisions. But we have seen several moments where,
we call it the TACO trade, Trump always chickens out, there have been moments, I think, where the market potentially has influenced him. I'm not
sure if this is one of them, to be perfectly honest. We know he does want oil prices to be lower and they are much, much lower today.
At the beginning of this week, $80 a barrel. If we bring those prices up again, we are looking at well under $70 a barrel. I think actually we are
now below the point at which we were when the conflict between Israel and Iran began.
FOSTER: It's fascinating, isn't it, to see how that has moved, reacted?
Anna, as ever, thank you very much.
We'll be back in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:51:45]
FOSTER: Now, voters in New York, New York City are choosing the Democratic candidate for the mayoral election. Former governor Andrew Cuomo and
newcomer Zohran Mamdani are leading in the polls. The ranked choice election could indicate where the Democratic Party is heading after a
stinging loss in the last presidential race.
The oppressive heat could weigh on voter turnout. Temperatures forecast to reach a massive 38 degree Celsius there. Would you believe?
Gloria Pazmino is in New York.
We should remind people around the world that this is possibly the most- high profile political role after the presidency, isn't it? Or am I overstating it?
GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: No, you're absolutely correct, Max. And that is why this race here today in New York City is so important. New York
City is the biggest city in the United States. And what happens in New York City in terms of who is running it usually has national implications.
Now we have an incumbent mayor that served one term, four years, and he's had a lot of controversy in the last several months. And there are a slew
of challengers, 11 of them in total, who are challenging him for the Democratic nomination.
Now, among those two candidates, you mentioned it, is former governor Andrew Cuomo. He served as governor of the state of New York for 10 years,
and he was forced to resign in 2021 after being accused of sexual harassment. And he is now attempting a political comeback.
Now, Max, what's interesting about this race is that a few months ago, when you talked to people in New York City politics, they might have told you
that Andrew Cuomo was likely going to be the winner, that he was definitely the favorite. But in the last few weeks, Andrew Cuomo's campaign has really
been challenged by this newcomer, State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani.
He is a relatively new young legislator that has put together a very energetic campaign with very left-leaning liberal proposals. He identifies
himself as a Democratic socialist, and it's gotten a lot of attention, especially among young voters here in New York City.
So in many ways, this race is a proxy battle for what we are seeing in the larger Democratic Party, certainly at the national level, a struggle
between the establishment and the more liberal, younger wing of the party that really wants to put ahead candidates that are different from what
Democrats have been putting forth in recent years.
I've been talking to voters here in New York City for the past several days, and I can tell you that they are all concerned about the cost of
living, the cost of housing, specifically in a place like New York City. They're also concerned about public safety. Take a listen to what some of
the voters told me here today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PAZMINO: What's your biggest issue as a voter?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The MTA. I think that they waste a lot of money.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm very concerned about affordability.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Education.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Getting Trump out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PAZMINO: So that voter that I was just speaking to there, she talked about how one of her concerns is having a mayor that can sort of put up and fight
against the Trump administration.
[16:55:05]
And we've seen just how critical city mayors are when it comes to the presidential -- and whoever is in the White House here in the United States
because specifically with this administration, we've seen just how much the Trump administration has targeted big cities, especially blue cities like
New York, which are run by Democrats.
So it's going to be an interesting one for sure, Max. Another key factor that you mentioned, it is historically hot in New York City today. We got
lucky today. We're inside a polling location that is air conditioned, but that's rare for most polling places around the city. So it's going to be a
question over the next several hours until the polls close of whether these hot temperatures keep people away or whether it does not discourage them
from turning out to vote in this really important election, Max.
FOSTER: Yes. Just quickly, when do you expect the result or could it drag on if it's very close?
PAZMINO: So if any of the candidates break 50 percent of the votes tonight, we'll know the result tonight. However, it seems that that is extremely
unlikely given how tight the polls are. You mentioned this is a ranked choice election, which means that voters can rank their candidates in order
of preference. So if no one breaks the 50 percent threshold tonight, we're not going to get a winner.
It will be a few more days until they can start doing those rounds of counting of the ballots, and it might be a little bit over a week before we
have a final result here.
FOSTER: OK. Drink lots of water, Gloria Pazmino. Thank you so much for joining us from New York.
Wall Street rallying for a second straight day after President Trump announced that ceasefire between Iran and Israel. The Dow gaining 507
points, rising after Jerome Powell spoke to Congress about interest rates. He told lawmakers that rate cuts could wait until the impacts of President
Trump's tariffs are better understood. Trump has been pushing for the Fed chair to lower its benchmark rate.
Of course a quick look at the Dow components. Chevron down 2.2 percent as the price of oil moderates. Salesforce up nearly 3 percent after announcing
a plan with PepsiCo to deploy Agent Force, its digital labor A.I. platform. And Amex and Visa both higher after the Fed chair said that the interest
rates won't be cut in a rush.
That is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Max Foster. "THE LEAD WITH JAKE" is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
