Return to Transcripts main page
Quest Means Business
U.S., Iran Exchange Biggest Strikes in Weeks Amid Ceasefire; OECD: Prolonged Conflict Will Weigh Heavily on Growth; President Trump Takes Questions from the Oval Office; Interview with Portugal's Foreign Minister Paulo Rangel; CBS News Fires "60 Minutes" Correspondent Scott Pelley; A.I. Dominates Discussions at Conference of Fintechs and Banks; Applied Aerospace and Defense Debuts on the NYSE. Aired 4-5p ET
Aired June 03, 2026 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[16:00:18]
RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Closing bell ringing on Wall Street. Those of a nervous disposition probably should look
away at this moment as I show you how the Dow has trundled its way towards the end. We are at the low of the session, down over one percent and the
triple stack shows as we will show you later in the program. The three down, there we show you now, why not. The NASDAQ is off. Not as much, but
it is still all rather grim and gloomy and the -- we have a one and a two and a one, two, three. I missed the closing gavels. They weren't terribly
exciting either.
The markets all betwixt and between. Those are the markets and the main events.
Kuwait is blaming Iran for a deadly air strike on its international airport.
The Trump administration has found a new way to impose tariffs on a host of trading partners, including the E.U. It is article -- it is Section 301,
and I will be talking to the Portuguese Foreign Minister about that.
And Scott Pelley, the veteran anchor, is fired from CBS News after his scathing remarks about the new leadership at "60 Minutes" and CBS.
We are live in New York, middle of the week. Wednesday, June the 3rd. I am Richard Quest, midweek, any week. I mean, business.
Good evening.
It was a heavy exchange of strikes between the United States and Iran that is absolutely testing the limits of their ceasefire. One of the Iranian
strikes caused major damage to Kuwait's international airport. The officials there say a person was killed and 60 more injured.
Iran denied responsibility and says it targeted U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain. U.S. military, disabled an oil tanker heading towards an Iranian
port, it says, and struck a military target in the Strait of Hormuz. A U.S. official says one of the sticking points in negotiations is monetary
compensation for Iran.
President Trump is eager to strike a deal that's viewed as superior to the one the JCPOA that President Obama had.
Melissa Bell is in Paris.
If this is a cease fire, well, I mean, goodness knows this doesn't bode well, does it? But it is what was been expected, and I guess it is how you
keep the lid on it.
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It is, Richard. I think the fact that it has spread now overnight back into the Gulf,
remember that these are countries, Kuwait and Bahrain that were hit overnight that had been hit, of course, at the beginning of the war, but
this is the biggest escalation in and around the Gulf States since the ceasefire was announced.
It had been more than fragile along the Israeli-Lebanese border. That again, of course, flared up again this week, with Israel threatening to
bomb Hezbollah into its Beirut strongholds. Tehran insisting that that would be a trigger. Any further strikes on Beirut, a trigger for a return
to large scale hostilities.
So there had already been that rising rhetoric. What's happened overnight in the Gulf certainly leaves the question of where exactly this ceasefire
is holding -- Richard.
QUEST: Okay, so I mean, it is barely holding, and certainly a return to full-scale warfare would be much more dramatic. But it is absolutely not
clear what is the sticking point, whether it is the monetary compensation, whether -- in terms of getting a deal -- whether it is the nuclear dust, as
President Trump calls it, the promises to be made. And I don't see how you put together even a short-term agreement, let alone try to rebuild the
JCPOA.
BELL: It is very difficult to see from here how any deal should it happen would be any better than what it existed before. We know, of course, the
Iranians are emboldened by what is happening in the Strait of Hormuz and their ability to disrupt the global economy.
And of course, these latest escalations of violence in both regions, Richard, do not add to any sense of trust between the two parties. In fact,
we've been hearing from Tehran that they've suspended talks altogether, and there will be no more back and forth about this.
They will only, they say, return to the negotiating table if a number of conditions are met, not least that the war in Lebanon ends and there is no
sign of that happening yet.
QUEST: I am grateful, Melissa Bell, this evening.
The OECD is warning the war will have severe economic consequences if it goes on through this year. It says a prolonged disruption -- those are the
words -- to energy flows would slow growth to around -- to 2.1 percent this year, and 1.8 percent next year. Those rates are extremely low outside of
major crises, and the organizations warning such a slowdown would leave a lasting mark on many countries, particularly in Asia, where we are already
seeing some very strained economic circumstances because of energy shortages.
[16:05:10]
Growth is projected at only 2.8 percent if the war is resolved more quickly and that's --
Anna Cooban is with me.
There is a sort of feeling, Anna, tell me something I didn't know, but I guess the significance is when somebody like the OECD puts the stamp of
authority on saying this is no longer suspicion, this will become fact.
ANNA COOBAN, CNN BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS REPORTER: Yes. And it also is quite stark, Richard, when an organization of this caliber is making statements
like, you know, we might see global growth go back down to the levels we last saw during the COVID-19 pandemic and the global financial crisis in
2008. So it is really saying -- and the emphasis here is on this being prolonged, this disruption of oil not coming out of the Strait of Hormuz
well into 2027.
But behind all of these stats that we are seeing in this report, the reality, Richard, for people around the world is fuel shortages, jet fuel
shortages for airlines in parts of Europe, fertilizer not getting out of the Strait of Hormuz, with the OECD even saying that we could see an
escalation in wheat prices.
So the emphasis here is that if this continues, we are going to see an already difficult situation become dire.
QUEST: Okay. But let's move from sort of possibility to prognosis. What do they say? I mean, we just don't know, I guess is the point, which is a
very, very unhelpful way of putting it.
COOBAN: Yes, well, we don't know. We don't have a crystal ball as to what the global economy is going to look like a year from now. I mean, the only
thing that we can say is that this needs to end as soon as possible. But I do want to highlight something really intriguing in this report, Richard.
A.I. -- this has been the sort of success story in this global economic disaster that's been this U.S.-Iran-Israel War, and what the OECD is saying
is that this industry, we might start to see a weakening of investment if this becomes prolonged. Because remember, this is an energy guzzling
industry.
So despite the fact that A.I. investments soaring, it has been pushing the stock market up to record highs in recent weeks, we actually might start to
see this crisis really start to impact that part of the economy.
QUEST: Okay. So, it is one thing to warn us about it, it is another thing to tell us what to do about it. We've had warnings from the -- the IMF
warned, the World Bank has warned; now, we've got EBRD, we've had the OECD, but short of this blanket, bring it to an end fast, what else are they
suggesting?
COOBAN: Well, I mean, I think the sort of bottom line of all of these organizations and, you know, I am being a broken record here, but it really
is we need to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, and what a lot of these organizations have tried to do is also emphasize the importance of drawing
on Strategic Petroleum Reserves, drawing on oil reserves.
But we have seen over the past six weeks, actually that great six-week decline in the U.S.' stockpile of oil and these are reserves, they are
finite and if no more oil is getting out the Strait of Hormuz, it is going to be very difficult for other parts -- some parts of the world to actually
replenish these stores.
Again, it really is about getting ships moving through that Strait.
QUEST: That's the way it is seen from the OECD. Anna, thank you very much indeed.
I want to go now to Beata Javorcik, who is the chief economist at the EBRD joining me from Zurich.
You were listening there to what Anna, and you've heard, obviously, the OECD stuff. Yes, but now the EBRD, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, you've also been lowering the growth forecast. You're projecting 3.1 percent in your regions this year, down half a percent from
February.
And you say the wedge between gas prices in Europe and those in the U.S. widened, exceeding a factor of five and weighed on European
competitiveness.
Now, the issue becomes, Beata, what to do about it. And I mean, obviously, yes, peace in our time and a ceasefire is what you want. But in the absence
of that, what do you do?
BEATA JAVORCIK, CHIEF ECONOMIST, EUROPEAN BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT: Well, Richard, you are absolutely right that we cannot
influence what is happening in the world, but we can focus on what we can do ourselves.
Now, the problem with the energy shock that Europe is going through is that it cannot be fixed very fast, but we can embark on the path to alleviate
this -- its implications.
So, for instance, we can continue our investments in renewable energy. And actually now prices of electricity in Europe are lower than they were in
2022 when the war in Ukraine started, because now we have a higher share of renewables in the mix and that has made us more resilient.
[16:10:10]
QUEST: Right. Do you see possibilities of outright recession? I know the numbers don't suggest it at the moment, but if this continues where de
facto in parts of Europe, you've got stagflation, then surely recession or even technical recession can't be far behind.
JAVORCIK: Well, I can see this possibility in Western Europe should the conflict last for a very long time. You know, things have not been rosy in
Europe for a while. This is our second energy shock after, um, the 2022 when the war in Ukraine meant that Europe started relying on imports of
natural gas through LNG, rather than gas piped from Russia and that already raised the ratio of prices in Europe to those in the U.S. making Europe
less competitive.
Also, Europe has been hit by the wave of U.S. tariffs, and that's an important market for European countries, particularly for Germany.
So the situation has not been rosy, the momentum in manufacturing was weak when the conflict in the Middle East started.
QUEST: On that tariff point, we know there is another 10 to 12.5 percent coming Europe's way as a result of President Trump's 301, which we will
talk about -- we will talk about the political side of that after the next break.
But on the economic side, I suppose one of the achievements is the way in which the E.U. and the European economy has weathered the storm, but will
find it more difficult with these extra tariff.
JAVORCIK: Well, you know, weathering the storm has been relative, right? So as we show in the report, in Europe, we have seen a big decline in output
of energy intensive industries and that's the result of high prices of natural gas and electricity we have in Europe relative to those prices in
the U.S.
Europe is also facing increasing competition from China. Exports of China are becoming more and more similar to what Europe is exporting. And at the
same time, China is importing less of what we are producing here.
So pressure points come from multiple sites.
QUEST: Right. You know, when it gets as complicated as this, and I think you'd agree that the scenario is pretty complex at the moment, I often find
it is best to go back to the gut feeling, because you can always find a number to bolster one thought or the other.
So your gut feeling, is Europe's economy in trouble?
JAVORCIK: Well, the situation is not rosy. Things could be better, but in many ways we have been resilient, particularly when you look at emerging
Europe. So countries that have done better are countries that are more diversified --
QUEST: Will you forgive me? Will you forgive me if I interrupt you? Please forgive me. The president, Donald Trump, is taking questions in the Oval
Office. We need to listen in. I apologize.
Let's go to The White House.
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: ... for a different reason. They were -- we took a strong action for a different
reason. So they were reciprocating it.
REPORTER: Mr. President, can you explain why --
TRUMP: The negotiation itself has gone very well, actually. Very well.
REPORTER: Mr. President --
TRUMP: It could happen -- I mean, if it happens, it might not happen, you know, who knows? But if it happens, it could happen like over the weekend.
REPORTER: Mr. President, how do you define a ceasefire? Sir, how do you define a ceasefire?
TRUMP: Pretty much the way it is. It is a different part of the world. You know, I'd say, that part of the world, ceasefires when you're shooting in a
more moderate manner.
REPORTER: Mr. President, yesterday you signed -- Mr. President --
TRUMP: It is not dead. That's true. I mean, a ceasefire there is much different than a ceasefire in other parts of the world, yes.
REPORTER: Mr. President, can you explain why you decided to drop the Anti- Weaponization Fund?
TRUMP: So I love it. I think it is so important. People were -- there is a victim right here, but not only a victim, he was also a student of it.
What happened to great people, great American people, the way they were victimized, the way they went bankrupt, they were weaponized by the Biden
administration by a bunch of thugs, including Obama people. And like, nobody has probably ever been.
I mean, I can think of maybe two instances in this country where they've had it to somewhere that extent. I am not even sure if it was so much.
They were put in jail for long periods of time.
[16:15:10]
They were accused of things that never happened. They had prosecutors that were radical lunatics and their lives were destroyed.
And frankly, we had a lawsuit against us on the -- you know, on the weaponization where the judge, a radical left judge, ruled against it, and
we will see how that all works out. But a radical left judge ruled against it. But these people, their lives have been destroyed. Their families have
been destroyed. Many of them -- not just -- I am not just talking about a few people.
Their families have been destroyed, many of them, I am not just talking about a few people, many of them, I am one of them. Look, they raided my
house, Mar-a-Lago. That never happened. Nobody ever thought of a thing like that. It turned out that it was a total fake. Everything about it was fake
and corrupt.
We have all the information, you know, the good advantage sitting here is we can get information that you wouldn't get by what we have and what we
are going to be showing over the coming weeks and months. You're not even going to believe -- some of you will believe it, like CNN will believe it
because they knew what was going on. They are crooked as hell.
Yes, CNN is a very corrupt organization, but with a corrupt reporter standing right there, never smiles. You never see her smile. A young,
beautiful woman, never smiles. I never see a smile off her face. I see her standing there with hatred in her eyes like she has hatred, because we have
borders, because we have a strong military, because we cut our taxes, because we do things that everybody wanted. And then we win our election in
a massive landslide.
We win 87 percent of the counties in this country. Nobody has ever heard of a thing like that, and that's because we are doing the right job. And we
took a detour down to Iran because we can't let Iran have a nuclear weapon under any circumstances. We can't let that happen.
So the reporters should be happy, they shouldn't be unhappy. They should be very happy. Because, you know what we are doing? We are saving our country.
REPORTER: Mr. President. Yes, two questions. One on Iran and then one on your birthday, I am sure you will like.
The first one is are you concerned at all that the IRGC could sabotage any potential deal? And then the second one is, you have a birthday coming up.
I won't say which number, but it is a big birthday. So you're going to blow out a candle. You're going to blow out some candles on a cake, what are
your wishes that you would like to see accomplished for the next year for the United States and your presidency?
TRUMP: Well, I go, in your order. Anything can happen, you know, when you're dealing with Iran. But when you're dealing with other countries, but
that's a very volatile part of the world, probably the most volatile part of the world. It is very -- the people are volatile, the leadership, you
see what is going on.
We've gone through three teams of leadership. It has been -- you know, the military -- there has never been a military like what we have. We could go
another two, three weeks and just wipe everybody out. I'd rather not do that. Very easy to do. They're ready to do. They want to do it. They want
to do it.
But if we can get something down in writing, which will accomplish the same thing without killing everybody, I'd like to do that. Most of my people, I
think, would like to do that, some people wouldn't, but most of them would. But we had to take a detour as far as wishes for -- and I am very proud of
that detour, you know.
By the way, just to finish off on that, we had the strongest stock market in history. And I said, we have no choice. We have to do it. I knew it
would affect it, but I was, very happily surprised when I saw that today we had another stock market high. I mean, we have the highest stock market in
history with a military conflict going on or war. Some people call it war, some people call it a military -- it is not a big thing for us.
We have a great military, it is not a big thing for us. But if I didn't do that, I spoke to people like Peter, great financial people, Scott and
Howard and lots of others. I said, you know, we just hit the greatest stock market in history. Everyone's 401 (k)s are the highest they've ever been.
Everybody is making a lot of money.
Costs are coming down. You know, we took over the highest costs and the highest inflation in the history of our country. Costs are coming down.
Everything is good and I hate to tell you this, but we've got to take a little detour and go down to a place called the Islamic Republic of Iran
and we are going to have to stop them from having a nuclear weapon. That's what we've done.
And they've agreed to that, by the way, they -- I mean, if they sign the agreement, they will have agreed to, we will have a nuclear weapon or bomb.
We will not (AUDIO ISSUES).
We've actually -- in theory, they are pretty close to signing a paper. We've actually gotten along with them very well, and you know what you saw
for the last few nights?
[16:20:10]
It takes two to tango. You understand that? We hit them very hard on something else, unrelated. And so they were responding, but and not, you
know, not very strongly.
As far as birthdays, as far as wishes. I want to just say, you know, we have a phrase, I think it goes down, I would think, in the history of our
country, maybe the history of the world is the greatest slogan or phrase ever, Make America Great Again. That's all I want. I want to make America
great again. I think we've come a long way.
I think we are the most respected country in the world right now, by far, the most respected. President Xi told me, I was talking about -- he is a
friend of mine. He is a good man. I hate to say it because the press goes and they say, oh, he called him a good man. He is good. He is China, I am
for the USA, you know, it is like one of those things -- but we do very well now with China.
When I came here, we were not doing well with China. My first term, when I inherited that, it was like what China was doing to us was, I don't blame
China. They took advantage of stupid people, really stupid people. So, we are doing great.
But the phrase, Make America Great Again, that's all I want, a very simple phrase to think of, and I think it is the greatest in the history. I would
say that's probably the greatest phrase in the history of the world, not only here. There has never been anything like it, Make America Great Again.
That's what I've done and we've made it great.
In fact, in a way, I want to use it because I would never give it up. MAGA is too good, it is too good. It is too good. It really is the Republican
Party. That's why we are doing so well. That's why we -- you know, if you look at the Republican Party from before I came until now, it is a much
different party. It is a much bigger party.
We have many, many more people. And I think the thought, the mind, the thought is much different than it was 10 years ago. It has been -- it is
amazing, a much more powerful party, a much different party and a much more impactful party. Thank you very much.
REPORTER: Two questions on Iran, sir, first, you said last week that the U.S. would go in and dig out the buried nuclear material --
TRUMP: With them.
REPORTER: With them.
TRUMP: Right. It is possible.
REPORTER: Did Iran actually agree to that?
TRUMP: Well, it depends on what day you're talking about. They did agree, and then sometimes they agreed.
Well, that's what I am saying. That's one of the things we talk about. It is very overrated. I am the one that overrated it. I thought, to me, it was
important, to other people, it is not important because those beautiful B-2 right here, the B-2 bombers, they obliterated -- you know, when CNN said
maybe it wasn't obliteration. They knew.
I mean, before the pilots even came back home, before anybody saw the site, but then, the Atomic Energy Commission, when they said it was obliterated,
that stuff is buried underneath a mountain that virtually collapses. It is very, very hard to get it.
But one of the -- but nevertheless, I want to get it. We are the only ones -- us and probably China are the only two countries that have the equipment
where you can do that. So yes, I want to get it. We have, at different times had different -- I mean, they've changed their mind a couple of
times, but as it stands now, we will go in sometime in the not too distant future. It is very safe down there. You know, we have -- with Space Force,
we have cameras, every angle of that -- those three sites are being watched at all times.
If anybody went there, we will see exactly what is happening, and we will blow it up a little bit further. But as far as getting it, it is very --
the B-2 bombers did a job like nobody has ever seen.
In the night with no moon, dead darkness at 1:00 in the morning or so, they dropped those bombs, the biggest, just about as big a bomb as you can ever
find and it hit -- it went down air chutes. Hard to believe that they can do the technology.
It followed a beam right into the air chutes, right, exploded. Very hard to get that material. But I still nevertheless want it. And I don't want to do
it if we are in conflict, I don't want to put men in that kind of danger.
I remember Jimmy Carter had some bad problems in Iran with the hostages. I don't want to ever put our people in that kind of danger. But when it is
over, as of this moment, it is agreed that we will go in with them, we will get it, and we will destroy it. It will be destroyed.
REPORTER: Mr. President, whether to go in and do that or to open up the Strait of Hormuz without seeing an Israeli cessation of their hostilities
in Lebanon, given what Iran has told --
TRUMP: We are trying to separate, as you know --
REPORTER: The cessation of their hostilities in Lebanon.
TRUMP: I think it would, we are trying to separate it. I mean, you know, it is a very different kind of a thing. We actually spoke with Hezbollah for
the first time, ever. We didn't know they spoke and they agreed yesterday, they are not going to shoot.
[16:25:10]
Israel is not going to shoot. We are just going to see. But I'd like to separate it. I'd like to have it a separate thing because it is separate.
But Israel, hey, look, they've been a great partner. Bibi Netanyahu has been for me a great partner; for other people, not so good. For me, he has
been very good. We were very effective, what we have done.
They needed us, they couldn't have done it without us, couldn't have even come close and they needed us and they got us to help them with a real
problem because Iran was a real problem, a big problem, a worldwide problem, because they wouldn't have stopped with Israel, they would have
blown up the Middle East.
And you saw that by the rockets -- all of those rockets that went to the five, mostly for the most part, the five countries outside of Israel, those
rockets were (AUDIO ISSUES) when I get when I -- in the first term, when I terminated the Iran nuclear deal in the first term, when I terminated the
Iran nuclear deal penned by Barack Hussein Obama, it was one of the dumbest deals I've ever seen and this has no relationship.
I like these morons, these Dumocrats, D-U-M -- Dumocrats that go on television and say, oh, well, this is just like what Obama did. This is the
exact opposite.
This is no path to a nuclear weapon. That was an absolute path to a nuclear weapon that you couldn't have done anything about. This is the exact
opposite.
They gave billions and billions of dollars to Iran, including $1.7 billion put into a Boeing 757 with the seats taken out because there wasn't enough
room if you left the seats, with $1.7 billion in cash taken from the banks in D.C., Maryland and Virginia and flown to Iran, 1.7 in green cash, and
then tens of billions of dollars given to Iran by our government.
Frankly, they picked the wrong country, but maybe we are going to be getting along. We are going to find out. You know, there is a good
possibility, I think, because without the bombing, that would have worked, without the blockade. The blockade is the most powerful thing. I think the
blockade maybe has more impact than the bombing has.
But the blockade that we have, the naval blockade is incredible. Not one ship has gotten through unless we wanted it to. And people respect it a
lot. And we will see. But, you know, there is a chance if this really worked out, they could rebuild. You know -- it used to be a very, very good
nation. You go back -- I have friends that used to -- old timers, they used to go there and they used to do well. They used to build Iran.
They built apartment houses and they built office buildings in Iran, hard to believe, right? But there is a chance that maybe that comes back. But
whether it comes back or not, I think we have a very powerful deal that we are negotiating, the exact opposite as the Obama deal.
The Obama deal was a disgrace. It gave them a nuclear weapon. We do the exact thing. We -- under our deal, they will never, ever have a nuclear
weapon. One of the other things that happens, and this is important, but there is nothing more important than taking away the capability of a
nuclear weapon from Iran.
REPORTER: Mr. President --
TRUMP: But one of the other things that's important and very important is that immediately upon signing the Memorandum of Understanding, the Hormuz
Strait will open and it will open up quickly, and we have already had our minesweepers there. You know, were sweeping, as you probably have heard,
and these are underwater minesweepers, a great, amazing technology. They are underwater because usually when you're looking for mines, that usually
means you have some dangerous characters out there.
That's why -- so we are underwater, but we've swept mines and we've gotten most of them, we think so -- but the Hormuz Strait will open immediately
upon signing.
Now, that is subject to a couple of areas being cleaned out also of mines, which we don't think there are any. So, it will happen very quickly and we
will take the southern route anyway.
But immediately upon signing, we open up the Hormuz Strait.
REPORTER: Just to just to clarify on what you said. Excuse me, Mr. President, just to clarify on what you were asked earlier, is the $1.8
billion DOJ fund dead or is it on hold?
TRUMP: It is -- I would have to ask the lawyers, I don't know.
I know one thing, the weaponization. Are you talking about the Weaponization Fund?
REPORTER: Yeah. What's your decision?
TRUMP: The weaponization fund, as far as I am concerned, was a beautiful thing. It was something I was. I didn't make it, but I was -- I heard that,
I thought that was the greatest thing because people like you have abused our people so badly. The fake news like CNN, like "The New York Times" and
like others, have abused our people.
REPORTER: Well --
TRUMP: Wait a minute. Be quiet -- have abused our people so badly, and you should be ashamed of yourself. You used to be a conservative. She was a
conservative from Alabama. Can you believe it?
But CNN in particular, CNN does such false reporting, but now they have new ownership, so maybe it will straighten it out. I doubt it, but it is hard
to straighten garbage out.
[16:30:21]
But CNN has abused and others have abused so badly people. These are people that are great people, that would destroy -- their families have been
destroyed. Many suicides. They committed suicide. People that went there to -- with love. They went there with love. You know, when I made that speech
earlier in the day, tremendous crowd. I hate to say it because they'll say, oh, I was wrong on the number, but I believe it's the largest crowd I've
ever spoken to by twice.
The biggest crowd I think. Bigger than the inaugurations, bigger than anything. And there was so much love and friendship. It was the most
amazing thing. People were crying. They were like -- wait a minute, let me finish, let me finish, let me finish. And those people have been abused by
you and by others and by the politicians, by the Democrats. They're dumb people. They want to have open borders. They want to have transgender
mutilization of your children. They want to have men playing in women's sports.
They want to have high taxes. They turn down -- you know, they fought us on the tax bill and they fought us because they want people to pay high taxes
because they're crazy. There's something wrong with them. There's something wrong with you. It's a shame. Yes. Go ahead, please.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Mr. President, thank you so much. On communism today, you have some --
RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: I know I believe the president, who it's difficult to work out what he was saying in terms of the
improvement, but the negotiations are going well. And he believes deals are possible and possibly at the weekend. He says he knew it would affect the
stock market, what he calls the detour or the diversion into Iran. But he decided to do it anyway.
The Portuguese foreign minister, Paulo Rangel, is with me now.
Listening to that, Minister, what do you make of it? I mean, we don't seem to be any closer to receiving cease -- well, we've got a ceasefire of
sorts, but we don't seem to be any closer to a longer term agreement. But what did you make of what, besides the abuse he decided to throw at my
network and my colleagues. What did you make of what he had to say?
PAULO RANGEL, PORTUGUESE FOREIGN MINISTER: Well, let me thank you for this invitation and to tell you that there's two main points, two main topics
where we really agree. There are two fundamental issues that have to be solved in order to have a long standing agreement. And one is the
elimination of the military nuclear capabilities. And this is of course a really red line.
And the second one that is probably even a bit more important for all the world is the freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. And so, I
really agree that without solving these two issues, it's impossible to have a long standing agreement. I believe that after there is a convergence in
these two points, it will be possible to have a conversation in other domains.
QUEST: Right.
RANGEL: Like sanctions and others, and also to design a new order for the Gulf region because of course --
QUEST: The difficulty is of course for Europe and the E.U. is that the things that you agree with, you know, on never getting a nuclear weapon,
but it was the complete lack of consultation or indeed methods now being used that creates the problem for you in terms of how you support the
administration's aims and goals. But at the same time, no one has invited you or asked you.
RANGEL: Well, what I have to say in this respect is that now we have this situation and we have to solve the situation that we have so we don't have
to discuss what happened before. This can be something to elaborate on the future. But today we have this conflict, and the conflict has its own
terms.
QUEST: Right.
RANGEL: And so we have to solve it in a very pragmatic way for two reasons. One, because it is true that if the Iran has the capacity to develop
nuclear weapons, this will be a major factor of instability and adventure and a threat to all the world, but especially to the region.
QUEST: Right.
RANGEL: And second point is that the freedom of navigation is very important, not only for the purpose of I say stabilizing the energy costs.
[16:35:05]
Now we see, and this is a major concern for the African continent, for instance. The issue of food security.
QUEST: OK.
RANGEL: And so, we should look at the conflict now as it is and try to, within the framework that we have now, try to have the best solution
possible. And this is something that I think that is very important.
QUEST: Can I just finally ask you, you're in New York, of course. And there was the vote at the U.N., and you and Austria are taking the European's
regional seats in a sense. What is it you expect to bring? What do you think Portugal does bring to the U.N. or will bring to the Security Council
in the future as the deliberations?
RANGEL: Well, I have to say that for us, this is, I'd say a huge victory in terms of international diplomacy because it's our fourth time in the
Security Council. But this time we won at the first round and with the best result of all the candidates. And so this is for us something that is very
special. But at the same time, our project is naturally to defend the multilateralism. That is very important, the multilateral order, the U.N.
charter. But in this respect, to have this probably could be a motto not to have first and second tier conflicts.
QUEST: All right.
RANGEL: What we see today is that the Gulf conflict, the Israeli- Palestinian, Lebanon and Ukraine, they are very much on the spot. But if you look at Sudan or Eastern Congo or Haiti or Myanmar, this is a bit
overshadowed. And so for a country like Portugal that is a middle sized country, that has a huge tradition of diplomatic relations with all the
countries of the world, as this vote has shown, naturally we want to grant to every country that they are not humanitarian crises of first tier or
first class and humanitarian crisis of second class. This will be for sure one of the lines that we are going to take in our presence in the Security
Council.
QUEST: Minister, I'm grateful. Thank you. I wish you a safe journey back to Lisbon. Thank you, sir.
RANGEL: Thank you very much. It is a pleasure.
QUEST: Thank you.
Now, that's the path that he chose. It's what the editor-in-chief of CBS News says about the firing of "60 Minutes" veteran Scott Pelley. An
eventful week in the CBS newsrooms. We'll discuss.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:40:20]
QUEST: The editor-in-chief of CBS News, Bari Weiss, is defending her decision to fire the veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent Scott Pelley. He
was fired on Tuesday evening after a heated staff meeting the day before. Scott Pelley pressed the show's new executive producer about recent
firings, pretty much of the whole top echelon of producers and correspondents on the program. Mr. Pelley also accused Weiss of murdering,
his word, "60 Minutes."
She told staff today in an editorial meeting that she tried to mend relations with Pelley before his termination. However, Scott Pelley says to
"The New York Times" Bari Weiss knows what she said is not true.
Vivian Schiller is the executive director of Aspen Digital, also the former president and CEO of NPR. And if that's not enough, CNN's former head of
Documentary and Long Form Divisions. Vivian joins me now from Washington.
And I'm truly -- it's a difficult one this. And I need to get your perspective because on the one hand, after Pelley did say what he did and
apparently did not seem to want to sort of either kiss or make up or follow leadership, then surely management has the right and duty to manage. And
therefore he had to go. But at the same time, newsrooms are newsrooms, and there has to be a sort of a free style and a free view available. So square
that circle, Vivian.
VIVIAN SCHILLER, FORMER PRESIDENT AND CEO, NPR: Yes, it is a very, very tough one. First of all, if you don't mind, I just think it's important for
everybody because maybe not all of your viewers completely know what "60 Minutes" means in the world of journalism and in American television news.
It is sort of the pinnacle of investigative broadcast television. So that's why people care about this so much.
And the concern, of course, is with the new ownership of CBS News, which may ultimately be also the owners of CNN, not for nothing, about some
political influence on the news programing. So this is a very big deal when it comes to making sure that people get quality information. I think that's
why there's so much passion and heat and why this has become a story beyond just those of us that are obsessed with going on with media.
QUEST: Right.
SCHILLER: But you are right. News -- first of all, newsrooms, I know it, you know it, are very tough places and investigative reporters are the
toughest of the toughest. And so it didn't surprise me at all that Scott Pelley said what he did. And, you know, I'm sure he comes by it honestly.
That said, I'm a little troubled by the fact that he was asked by management to have several -- several times to have a conversation. He
refused to talk to them and waited until he was in a public setting.
QUEST: Right. You see, that's --
SCHILLER: Yes.
QUEST: You see, that's really -- you see the point, I mean, we're a business program, so we obviously have to put it through a lens of that to
a certain extent. At the end of the day, Scott Pelley, the journalist, even here at CNN, I don't own it. I mean, I may not like the owners or may like
them or not ever, but I don't like them. They are the shareholders that own it. And if they have said Barry Weiss and Nick Bilton should run it, that -
- am I being too capitalist here?
SCHILLER: Well, it's not even being capitalist or not capitalist, just the reality. And, you know, in my long career, I've been, well, you too, for
your long career at CNN, there have been many owners. Owners get to make the decisions. And so, no, I mean the -- what he said, it doesn't surprise
me that he was fired. I think he put them in that position. He must have known that. I mean, this is not a stupid man.
QUEST: Right.
SCHILLER: He knew perfectly well that by saying you are murdering CBS, he was going to put them in a position where they really had no choice. And
particularly they tried to speak to him the next day and he refused. So this was bound to happen.
QUEST: On the bigger question, because I was just reading some very interpretations, people are saying, look, their methods may be wrong, Weiss
and Bilton, but at the end of the day, they are addressing something that legacy television simply isn't being watched. And it has to reform, and it
has to shift to the middle. And, you know, I mean, we're doing the same. We've got the same sort of arguments here, as you know.
And to that extent, old lags like me who sort of say, well, I remember the typewriters and people sort of ripping scripts. People turn around and say,
you know, that was then, this is now. Grow up. I don't know. It's very difficult, Vivian.
SCHILLER: No, no, you're absolutely right. But there's a big but coming. You're absolutely right. Audiences are declining.
[16:45:00]
The audiences who are left are older than you and I are. So, you know, that tells you something. And of course, things have to change.
Here's the issue. New management, Bari Weiss, has not really articulated a vision for where she wants to go. She says this isn't -- she says the
things aren't working, but she has yet to say, other than in sort of very broad sense of we have to be more digital, we need to be more, you know,
less formal, those kind of things, she hasn't really articulated a vision. I mean, maybe now that Nick Bilton is there, he will.
But there is a vacuum right now that I think is part of the consternation that you're getting in CBS. If there was a compelling path forward of what
to do to bring CBS, keep its editorial standards, but bring it into the digital age and the way people consume media now, that would be a whole
different thing.
QUEST: I am so grateful, Vivian. Thank you very much for joining us. Much appreciated. Thank you.
To Amsterdam now, where investors and industry leaders are gathering at the exclusive conference Money 20/20. They are grappling with what's been a
very volatile year.
CNN's Eleni Giokos is there to ask them what new technologies are benefiting consumers in a moment.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ELENI GIOKOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Money 2020 is one of Europe's largest gatherings of fintechs and traditional banks, and they're here to discuss
what is going to disrupt the industry next. And importantly, the innovation behind it all. Hands down, I have to say, A.I. seems to be the talk of the
town.
And when you look at companies like eToro, which is one of the world's largest retail trading platforms, really known for shadow trading or copy
trading, it's now integrating A.I. in a really interesting way, basically taking user trading experience to the next level.
YONI ASSIA, CEO, ETORO: So we launched two years ago originally Tori, which is our A.I. analyst, she got like a big boost, a big upgrade to become an
A.I. agent. We signed a deal with Grok recently, which is now going public very soon. SpaceX, xAI. So we've been really immersed in providing
different types of customers on eToro, different tools.
We actually built an A.I. studio to our pro-investors where they can actually build apps on eToro. One of those apps is POTUS.etoro.app, which
scans Truth Social and every time Trump tweets creates in a second a strategy that can automatically trade in your account.
GIOKOS: No way.
ASSIA: Yes.
GIOKOS: Oh, my goodness. So, I mean, your A.I. model can even just scan what's happening on social media that could affect the markets.
ASSIA: Exactly.
GIOKOS: Because frankly, anything that anybody says on social media right now is affecting oil, is affecting markets.
ASSIA: Especially Trump.
GIOKOS: Especially Trump. How much traction is that gaining?
ASSIA: So we're seeing --
GIOKOS: I mean, is it a pilot thing?
ASSIA: -- very, very high growth in our A.I. usage. And just internally eToro, we saw an increase of 1500 percent in A.I. usage for eToro
employees. On eToro customers, relatively the same sort of TenX. So when you see things TenX, you realize, OK, there's real traction and real value
to customers here.
GIOKOS: And eToro listed on the Nasdaq last year. It's one of many fintechs that are exploring going public. As you're starting to see the sector
maturing, you're also seeing an increase in merger and acquisition activity as companies are looking to scale. And also the lines between fintechs and
traditional banks are starting to blur as both are chasing innovation.
Eleni Giokos, CNN, Amsterdam.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[16:51:05]
QUEST: The breaking business news, Elon Musk's SpaceX has unveiled plans for its $75 billion IPO. The share price is set at $135 a share. At a deal
as a blockbuster, it makes Musk already the world's richest person. He would be the first ever trillionaire, personal trillionaire.
Applied Aerospace and Defense celebrated its IPO today. The shares fell nearly 5 percent on the first day, just below the $20 offering price. The
company says it raised nearly $650 million through the IPO. Applied Aerospace specializes in building products for space and defense firms
including Lockheed, Northrop, Blue Origin and SpaceX itself. It's going public at a time of booming demand for defense technology, of course driven
by all sorts of issues, including the war.
Trip Ferguson is the CEO of Applied Aerospace, joins me now.
Sir, you were unlucky today. The whole market was down. I do not hold it against you that your closing price is below the strike in the open. It's
just one of those days. Not particularly pleasant, but there it is. Longer term, defense and the businesses you are in is where all the action is,
isn't it?
TRIP FERGUSON, CEO, APPLIED AEROSPACE AND DEFENSE: Absolutely. So number one, it was an amazing day for the Applied Aerospace and Defense team, for
our customers and for our team members. And we take a long term approach to everything we do. And so we feel incredibly well positioned to really
tackle the generation demand in both space and defense.
QUEST: When you look at SpaceX's price that I was just talking about, you may have heard me say, you obviously do business with them as well, the
whole ecosystem of defense and space is on fire in a good way. And I just wonder, where do you think we are in that pipeline?
FERGUSON: So I really believe that a flight aerospace defense, we are really in the early innings of tackling that pipeline. We see the total
addressable market of space. It really is enormous. You know, I know SpaceX has their views, but we feel like we'll contribute, you know. And then from
a defense perspective, needing to replenish the arsenal. But even prior to that, to just tackle the new threat environments and just really support
these next generation capabilities. We have a long ways to go and we're really excited to be able to support. The flight is all about people in
mission. So we're excited.
QUEST: The replenishment of the arsenal, which is what you're talking about, it's being been depleted of course the U.S. arsenal and indeed
others. It's been depleted both because of Ukraine and the war in Iran. The sort of things you're building can't be built more quickly, can they?
There's only -- there's a roof to how quickly you can do all this stuff. How quickly can you replenish, do you think?
FERGUSON: Well, Applied is really well positioned. We talk about embedded capacity. It's where we plan ahead of demand signal. So we have already
forward invested in many of the critical programs, we have available capacity that we're starting to see demand signal for today and preparing.
I have a lot of faith in our industrial supply base and in our end customers, and we're all coming together in partnership to tackle this
problem. Clearly we need to move faster and Applied will be here to help do that.
QUEST: Is there a, I mean, a risk that peace breaks out and I say that somewhat facetiously, because obviously that would be a good thing in terms
of the individual wars that we are facing, but that the concept of peace breaks out and that defense, once again, does not become the flavor du
jour?
FERGUSON: So, you know, I think we all hope for peace, truly, but what I would say, one of the things that's changed from just a generational demand
perspective is the fact that, you know, the threat environment has changed.
[16:55:06]
We will need new types of capabilities to tackle these new challenges. And I think that's what we're hearing from the Department of War and from the
administration and companies like Applied are aligned to that mission need. And so yes, we see a strong demand signal and we don't see that slowing
down anytime soon.
QUEST: And when we look, for example, I noticed in the last few days, the AUKUS agreement between, as you know, the U.K., Australia and the United
States, they are planning to put more money into that. Well, it's not just nuclear submarines, but a whole raft of new defense mechanisms.
Do you see good potential growth across all of these different alliances, agreements and partners?
FERGUSON: I absolutely do. You know, we are projecting significant growth across our core market areas of space, defense aviation, C5ISR and
precision strike, but as you look at adjacent markets, the collaboration across nation states and different industry partners is critical. And so we
fully expect continued growth. And it's going to require decision velocity and teamwork to make -- to really fill that need.
QUEST: Well, congratulations on your IPO today, sir. And I have little doubt that that price, which as I say, you were just -- it was unfortunate
today that the market tripped over its own shoelaces. But I'm grateful for you, sir. Thank you for joining us.
We will take a "Profitable Moment" after the break. QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. Good evening to you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: Tonight's "Profitable Moment," there are no winners in the CBS "60 Minutes," Scott Pelley firing. And it creates all sorts of internal
conflicts for most of us. For instance, on the one hand, you know, Scott Pelley as a journalist has to sit down and ask really nasty questions of
very nasty people in many cases, and you don't suddenly become a pussycat just because you're talking to your bosses.
And on the other hand, though, being rude to your bosses, they have a right to manage and therefore they're entitled to say, do -- are you with us on
this journey and the way we think so? And if you're not, there's the door, go and use it. But as Vivian Schiller said tonight, the problem here is
Bari Weiss has not articulated that vision. The journalist can decide.
Finally, you know, many times I've had to say and think about my own bosses and think to myself, you can't expect me to ask CEOs and prime ministers,
excuse me, sir, are you mad and a dictator or whatever, and then just ignore what I might be seeing in my own company. And I think that that's
the truism that goes to the heart of this case. Just because you're talking about your own company doesn't mean you suddenly become a pussycat.
And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for tonight. I'm Richard Quest in New York. Whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, I hope it's profitable. I've now
got a conference with my boss.
END
