Return to Transcripts main page
The Brief with Jim Sciutto
CNN International: Musk and Trump Trade Public Insults; Tesla Shares Fall Amid Trump-Musk Spat; Israel Strikes Hezbollah in Lebanon; Trump's New Travel Ban. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired June 05, 2025 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00]
JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. And you're watching
"The Brief."
Just ahead this hour, Donald Trump and Elon Musk's relationship explodes as the two trade public insults. Governments across the world scramble to
understand Trump's newest travel ban on people coming to the U.S. from 19 countries around the world. And Israel launches airstrikes on southern
suburbs of Beirut saying it was targeting Hezbollah drone facilities We have all that and more coming up.
We begin with just an extraordinary day in politics in this country as the feud between President Trump and Elon Musk, you see them there, goes
nuclear. The one-time fast friends seemingly on their way to becoming fierce political enemies now, this over Musk's opposition to Trump's
massive tax cuts and spending bill. Their fallout escalating sharply today with Trump now claiming Musk was fully on board with the bill just last
week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know well anymore. I was surprised because you were here, everybody in this
room practically was here as we had a wonderful sendoff. He said wonderful things about me. You couldn't have nicer, said the best things. And he
hasn't said bad about me personally, but I'm sure that'll be next. But I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Soon after those comments Trump posted on his Truth Social, Elon was, quote, "wearing thin." And then he claimed, I asked him to leave. I
took away his EV mandate that forced everyone to buy electric cars that nobody else wanted, and he just went crazy. Lots of things to fact check in
that tweet.
Musk got increasingly personal as well. He posted an avalanche of anti- Trump posts on his social media platform, X, saying in one of them, quote, "Without me, Trump would've lost the election." Musk also said Democrats
would've won the House and Senate as well.
Musk is now floating the idea of establishing an entirely new political party. He suggested that Trump was involved in the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
He did not offer any evidence.
Tesla investors grow increasingly alarmed by this growing feud. Shares of the company plunge more than 14 percent. That meant the company lost $150
billion in market capitalization. Just a couple of hours. Trump warn on Truth Social that the easiest way for the U.S. now to save money is to cut
all of the federal contracts that Musk's companies enjoy. Musk responded that he'll then decommission the Dragon spacecraft. That's the one that
takes soldiers to and from the International Space Station.
Joining us now is Ron Brownstein. And you know, Ron, obviously the personal aspect of this is explosive. I want to focus on the political impact of
this, starting with Trump's big beautiful bill. Does it sink or at least reduce the chances of it getting passed given that Musk is now quite openly
lobbying against it?
RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, first of all, I, this has to be the most vituperative political breakup since JFK and Frank
Sinatra in '62. I was trying to rack my brains to think of another case quite like this. I think in the end, the bill will pass, Jim, because
that's what Republicans do when there's a Republican president in their first year, Ronald Reagan in '81, Bush in oh '01, Trump in '17. Ultimately,
they will pass a tax cut, but it certainly complicates it and it pushes it in a direction that is going to be, I think, politically challenging for
Republicans.
[18:05:00]
I mean, you know, Musk's argument is that the bill increases the federal debt too much, and there are a lot of people who with that. But his
solution is to cut spending even more rather than to reconsider the $3.75 trillion price tag of the tax cuts in the bill.
And basically, he is pushing, he is reinforcing those on the right, like Rand Paul and Ron Johnson, who are basically saying Republicans have to cut
even more from programs that benefit the middle class and working class like Medicaid and SNAP in order to fund those tax cuts. And as we've talked
about many times, that has been a hard argument for them to win. When Democrats can say that they are cutting programs that benefit the middle
class to fund tax cuts to the rich, Musk is asking them to double down.
SCIUTTO: What does this mean for the next elections? Well, both the midterms and even if we look all the way out to 2028 because GOP lawmakers
were enjoying the idea that Musk would come to fund their campaigns in these coming cycles. And now, he seems not only like he might not open
their check -- his checkbook for them, but that he might be financing their opponents perhaps for a third party.
BROWNSTEIN: Yes. Or primary challenges to push them further to the right. I mean, you know, for -- the biggest impact I think is what I noted before,
which is that Democrats view this bill as probably their biggest central argument in the 2026 election. You know, especially in House elections that
in essence Republicans are cutting programs for the middle class to fund tax cuts for the rich. And as I said, if Musk succeeds in pushing it
further in that direction, I think he's more likely to increase their vulnerability than reduce it.
But this is obviously a wildcard. It takes away the cavalry that Republicans thought that they were going to have in terms of his ability
to, you know, fund their campaigns. He was already a lightning rod. I mean, it was -- you know, the Wisconsin State Supreme Court election was a sign
that Democrats were succeeding in mobilizing their voters around the idea of Musk having too much influence.
But I think it is just another headache. And maybe even more fundamentally, another source of centrifugal pressure in the Republican Party where the
incentive is to move right rather than center even in districts that are politically competitive.
SCIUTTO: Elon Musk is not the first person, by any means, to say that the country needs a third party to represent the vast American voting public
that's in the middle. What he does have that those others have not -- does not is limitless funding, right? Not to mention a giant platform that he
owns, X, and 220 million followers. Could he be the guy who finally starts a viable third party?
BROWNSTEIN: It's a good question. He has the resources, but I think the experience in modern times is that the party develops -- if there is a
third party movement, it is more likely to develop from a charismatic presidential candidate, which he can't be, than from the bottom up. Maybe
he can play that role as a non-candidate. Obviously, not eligible to run for president.
But you know, like Ross Perot built for a while the Reform Party into a force because he was able to command national attention. That's more the
way it works than funding district by district. But then, again, we haven't had someone with the resources and the ability to command the media that
Musk does. So, maybe he could do it.
I suspect in the end that's going to be more than -- that's biting off a little more than he can chew, given the kind of struggles his business are
going through. And think about Tesla now. I mean, Tesla is getting hit on both ends of the swinging door where I don't think this break with Trump is
going to heal Musk's decline among his natural consumer audience of left to center urban people. And any hope of kind of offsetting that with MAGA
inroads is now going up in smoke.
I mean, Tesla could face some serious challenge. And I -- and really underscores the questions of where was the board when Musk was bringing it
into all of this very choppy political water?
SCIUTTO: Yes, no question. And what does Trump do with that Tesla that he bought at the White House the other day? Ron Brownstein, thanks so much for
joining.
BROWNSTEIN: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Well, speaking of Tesla, longtime Tesla investor, Ross Gerber joins me now. He's the CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment
Management. Good to have you on, sir. Thanks so much for joining.
ROSS GERBER, CEO, GERBER KAWASAKI WEALTH AND INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: So, listen, not a good day for Tesla, right? Not just on the market, but I mean, it already had the headwinds of, you know, sort of this
buyer's revolt in this country, in Europe, and more competition, let's be frank, particularly from cheaper Chinese models. But now, his friendship
with the most powerful man in the world has blown up. Where does Tesla go from here?
GERBER: Lower. I mean, I don't see any other path with this kind of disastrous, you know, strategic planning for the company. I mean, it was
bad enough that there was a -- as you mentioned, a buyer strike, and I've been talking about this risk for well over a year since he fell in love
with MAGA, that, you know, this was turning off the core consumers and then with Musk's, you know, turn to the hard right.
[18:10:00]
I don't know why anybody would think he would be an independent, you know, middle road voter when he's clearly hard right-wing. So, I don't know what
party he's thinking about starting. He needs to get back to working at Tesla. And instead of getting back to working at Tesla, now he started a
fight.
Obviously, Elon thinks he's the most powerful person in the world, and it looks like Trump's going to show him that that's not true.
SCIUTTO: How about his other companies? Because of course he has SpaceX, and SpaceX is enormous. He's got Starlink as well. Trump is threatening to
cancel or reduce his contracts. We were looking this up. Since 2008, SpaceX has received $20 billion in federal contracts. I mean, when I speak to
folks in the defense in industry, I mean, they depend on SpaceX to get military satellites, intelligence satellites up into space. Can Trump
really target his other businesses?
GERBER: Yes. And in fact, I would argue that the value of a SpaceX just dropped by 50 percent, even though it's a privately held stock, it trades
at something like 20 times revenue. And you know, there's no need for us to go to Mars, for example. This is Elon's quest. And there are many, many
contracts that the United States does, you know, in space that SpaceX benefits from, some of which we need and some of which we don't need.
So, I think, you know, it's been a symbiotic relationship in a positive way for a long time. And now, that might turn south. And once again, it's much
more detrimental to SpaceX than it is, you know, to anybody else to the U.S. government because, you know, there's other people that could do
space. I mean, SpaceX is the best at it.
But that said, you know, Trump is pretty vindictive and he'll do whatever he can to hurt Elon. If Elon's going to work against Trump, Trump's going
to work against Elon, and SpaceX is certainly an easy target.
SCIUTTO: I have a bigger question just about the future of electric vehicles in this country, right? Because they already had the headwinds of
a Republican Party who just is trying to undermine them, right? I mean, removing, you know, the tax breaks, trying to attack California's EV
mandate a number of years down the road. There were some folks who said, well, listen, at least you got Elon close to Trump who might be able to
rescue, right? What is, we should note, a thriving business in other countries right now. Is this bad for EVs in general in this country?
GERBER: Well, certainly taking away the benefits for going to clean energy is probably one of the shortsighted stupid things that we could do. And
sadly, Elon is responsible for this. He enabled Trump and supported Trump in taking away these EV mandates, knowing it would hurt Tesla. And now,
he's saying, oh, OK, whatever. But this is not good for the EV industry.
Now, the truth of the matter is consumers get that EVs are just better cars. They don't want to spend money on gas when they don't have to. And
just the technology in these cars and the quality of these cars has improved so much in the last five years. It's insane.
So, if you look at the actual statistics, people are buying EVs all across the world in record numbers, and that will continue with or without
subsidies and/or whether or not people like Musk, there are lots of EV choices. But EVs are critically important to dealing with climate change,
which is the biggest issue all of us face globally, and I think consumers get this. And factually, they're just better vehicles than gas powered
cars.
So. I'm not too worried about the EV industry as a whole. I'm more worried about Tesla as a Tesla shareholder and the fact that Elon is now going to
be targeted by the Trump administration and therefore, Tesla.
SCIUTTO: No question. Well, Ross, good to have you on. Can't think of a better day to have big Tesla investor on. Thanks so much for joining.
GERBER: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Well, the German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, visited the White House today, perhaps on any other day this would be the top story, urging
the United States to help end the war in Ukraine. The two leaders spoke about a trade deal as well between the U.S. and the European Union. The
president has threatened the block with a 50 percent tariff. On the question of Ukraine, the chancellor spoke about tomorrow's D-Day
anniversary as a perfect and meaningful time to take action. President Trump, however, could not resist making well an undiplomatic comment about
that anniversary. Have a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FRIEDRICH MERZ, GERMAN CHANCELLOR: May I remind you that we are having June 6th tomorrow, this is D-Day anniversary when the Americans once ended
a war in Europe, and I think this is in your hand in specific in ours.
[18:15:00]
TRUMP: That was not a pleasant day for you.
MERZ: No, that was not a pleasant -- well --
TRUMP: This is not a great day.
MERZ: -- in the long run, Mr. President, this was the liberation of my country from Nazi dictatorship.
TRUMP: That's true. That's true.
MERZ: And we know what -- we owe you, but this is the reason why I'm saying that America is, again, in a very strong position to do something on
this war and ending this war.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Quite a moment there, but watching the German chancellor there handle it diplomatically. Well, the Israeli military says it is now
attacking Hezbollah targets in the southern suburbs of Beirut. Earlier it warned residents it would carry out airstrikes against what it identified
as drone production facilities. A Lebanese news agency says the announcement triggered mass evacuations and panic.
Joining me now is Jasmine El-Gamal, former Middle East adviser for the Pentagon. Thanks so much, Jasmine, for coming back on the air.
JASMINE EL-GAMAL, FORMER PENTAGON MIDDLE EAST ADVISER AND MIDDLE EAST ANALYST: Good to be with you, Jim.
SCIUTTO: First question is, what is the state of Hezbollah in Lebanon right now? The perception is following Israeli strikes, the ground invasion
of Southern Lebanon as well as the pager attacks on Hezbollah leadership, that it is decimated. Is that true? I mean, is there still a Hezbollah of
substance and size for Israel to attack there?
EL-GAMAL: Of course there is still a presence. I mean, Hezbollah has definitely been decimated as an organization. It is in a form that is
unrecognizable to its own members. Everything from leadership structure, intelligence capabilities, military capabilities, all of those things have
been severely degraded by Israel over the last few months.
And since the ceasefire agreement was signed between Israel and Lebanon in late 2024, I believe it was November 27, 2024, the Lebanese Armed Forces
has also really stepped up, deploying to the South and starting to go after Hezbollah and really any non-state weapons, weapons outside of state
control. That was part of the ceasefire agreement, was to have the LAF, the Lebanese Armed Forces, deploy 10,000 soldiers eventually to the south of
Lebanon to start really taking control over weapons and over the security of the state and to ensure that there were no attacks launched against
Israel from Southern Lebanon.
SCIUTTO: We reported just a couple of weeks ago that the U.S. has assessed that Israel is making preparations now to strike -- potentially strike
Iranian nuclear facilities. How likely do you see an Israeli attack on those facilities, particularly in light of ongoing U.S. Iranian nuclear
negotiations?
EL-GAMAL: Well, this, of course, is an important question, Jim. And it actually goes to, I think, the broader question, which I think I want to
get to in a minute about Israel's strategy in the region for its own security and the relationship and the kind of relationship that it wants to
have with its neighbors.
Now, we obviously know that this question of Iran has been high on the top of President Trump's agenda, and that he has very clearly decided that he
wants to take the diplomatic route with Iran and try to get to a deal to avoid any kind of conflict in the Middle East that drags the U.S. in. And
of course, we know that Israel can't strike Iran and can't carry out sustained attacks and defend itself from any Iranian response without the
U.S. being heavily involved.
And that Benjamin Netanyahu's calculation, according to some people familiar with his thinking and his past behavior, is that he might want to
decide to do it anyway, even if he doesn't have the explicit approval of the U.S., knowing that the U.S. would be forced to go in and defend Israel.
Now, in terms of the larger strategic view, if we look at the way Israel has been dealing with its borders, with its neighbors in Syria and Lebanon,
and again with the Iranian question, including the strikes against the -- in the suburbs of Beirut tonight, we're really looking at a choice here
between diplomacy, between negotiations, and between unilateral cross border actions.
And we've seen Israel in the last few months' time and again, prefer the latter, which is really undermining these two governments in Syria and in
Lebanon, that for the first time in decades, Jim, actually want to coordinate with the Israelis and work with the Israelis on their mutual
security.
So, it seems like a great missed opportunity on the part of the Israeli government to miss out on coordinating with the Lebanese and Syrian
governments who have shown that proclivity to do so. And instead, continue to undermine them through these unilateral cross-border attacks.
SCIUTTO: Jasmine El-Gamal, thanks so much for joining.
EL-GAMAL: Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: And we will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." U.S. stocks finish lower across the board Thursday led by a sharp drop in tech stocks, and in particular, a 14
percent plunge in shares in Tesla. Stocks fell as Donald Trump and Elon Musk escalated their very public feud over President Trump's tax and
spending bill. The dispute raised more uncertainty over whether the bill can pass in its current form, as well as how it'll affect all of Musk's
companies. Musk today criticized Trump's tariffs as well, saying he believes they will call -- cause the U.S. to fall into a recession later
this year.
The stunning turn of events overshadowed what China and the U.S. both called a positive phone conversation today between presidents Trump and Xi.
The two sides who have accused each other of violating their recent trade truce said the call went well, though they did not go into specifics
publicly.
Tariff uncertainties continue to weigh on corporate America. Consumer products giant Proctor and Gamble announced it will cut 7,000 jobs, 6
percent of its workforce, partly due to the impact of tariffs. New data today also shows that U.S. jobless claims rose to their highest level in
seven months. Big report coming out tomorrow as well.
One of the fastest growing economies in the world right now is India. Recent numbers show the country's economy growing at a rate of almost 7.5
percent annually. It could -- soon could clinch a trade agreement with the U.S., there's been a lot of talk about that. But despite its rapid rise,
India's long-term success is far from certain as Richard Quest explains.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE AND CNN ANCHOR, QUEST MEANS BUSINESS (voice-over): In the crowded streets of Delhi and the towering
offices of Mumbai, the transformation is well underway. India's economy is growing fast, shedding a reputation for cheap offshore labor, now powered
by more than 500 million workers. India produces cars, pharmaceuticals, and refined metals.
Even the phone in your pocket might have been assembled right here. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon are all expanding their footholds in the country. There
is no lack of ambition here.
[18:25:00]
QUEST: And maybe 20 years since I first came to India, but the country never fails to impress and make me over overall with everything that is
here, from the mortal (ph) architecture of the Red Force, to the blistering traffic that somehow keeps moving, to the vibrancy of the economy that
moves into the digital age. Juxtapose the modern with the traditional, and you have what makes India tick.
QUEST (voice-over): The prime minister, Narendra Modi, says India will be a developed economy by 2047.
PATU KESWANI, CHAIR, LEMON TREE HOTELS: Look at the U.S., '83 to the golden years, 4 percent plus growth. Look at China, 12 percent growth. I
think India is on that path finally.
QUEST (voice-over): Striking a trade deal with the U.S. will be crucial. All throughout this economy, India's leaving profits on the table. About
half of the workforce is employed in farming. And agriculture is just a small portion of the overall GDP. Millions of workers enter the workforce
each year, but only about half of the working age population is actually employed.
Tensions with Pakistan next door have also raised concerns for investors. The terror attack in Kashmir took the lives of 26 people this spring. India
said Pakistan was to blame, which Islamabad denies. The two nations traded strikes for weeks.
Maintaining the ceasefire could be the key for India to maintain its strong growth. The country now has the world's fifth largest economy and is
projected to soon surpass Japan, becoming the fourth.
AMITABH KANT, INDIAN G20 SHERPA: Our ambition is that by the time we become a hundred in 2047 we should be close to a $30 plus trillion economy.
QUEST (voice-over): Foreign investment is hitting record highs. If India can harness its potential, it could become a defining economic story of the
21st century. Otherwise, it could risk squandering the moment completely.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCIUTTO: Our Richard Quest there reporting from India. Well, lots of questions right now about the countries affected by President Trump's new
travel ban. Democrats call it discriminatory. We're going to discuss the law and the impact coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:30:00]
SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. Here are more international headlines we're watching today.
Simmering tensions between President Donald Trump and billionaire Elon Musk have boiled over two days after Musk slammed a tax and spending bill as a
disgusting abomination. Today, President Trump suggested he may terminate U.S. government contracts with Musk's companies, saying that's the easiest
way to save money.
President Trump is also suspending international visas for students at Harvard University. The White House accuses Harvard of having, quote,
"foreign ties and radicalism." The Ivy League school says that President Trump's proclamation is yet another example of illegal retaliation.
The judge in the Sean Diddy Combs trial has threatened to throw him out of court if he continues to interact with the jury in court after he said he
saw Combs looking at jury members and nodding during testimony by one of the witnesses, Bryana Bongolan, a friend of Combs' longtime ex-girlfriend,
Cassie Ventura. Combs denies sex trafficking and racketeering charges as the trial continues.
Returning now to the German chancellor's visit to the White House today. Friedrich Merz urged President Donald Trump to help end the war in Ukraine.
Jeffrey Rathke is a former U.S. diplomat who served in Berlin. He is now president of the American German Institute at Johns Hopkins University here
in D.C. Good to have you on. Thanks so much for joining.
JEFFREY RATHKE, FORMER U.S. DIPLOMAT AND FORMER DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE NATO SECRETARY GENERAL: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: So, first, I want to begin with a moment we played earlier in this broadcast, and that is when Merz referenced the June 6th anniversary
of the D-Day landings tomorrow, Trump seemingly couldn't resist himself to say, oh, that was a tough day for you, Germany. But Merz, to his credit,
rolled over it and made the point that, well, it's the day that the U.S. helped liberate Germany from a Nazi dictatorship.
How do you see the chancellor having conducted himself there, calmly responding to what was, well, a deeply un diplomatic comment?
RATHKE: Well, you know, it was 40 years ago when then-German president Richard von Weizsacker coined this phrase that D-Day was the start of the
liberation of Germany. And that the German defeat in World War II was Germany's actual liberation. So, in that sense, Friedrich Merz was saying
something that has been accepted wisdom in Germany for four decades.
And the way he handled that moment I think was deft. He got his point across without trying to turn it into an argument. So, I think that was
emblematic of how Merz has conducted the entire visit today.
SCIUTTO: It also might be the template for handling Trump in the Oval Office. It reminded me a bit of the Canadian Prime Minister Carney's
response when Trump was pushing the 51st State thing again, which of course, Canada rejects, and he calmly rejected it, but did so in a way that
was cool and collected as opposed to inflammatory.
RATHKE: Yes, that's right. I think, you know, Merz did not come to Washington looking for a fight. He came here with the top goal of
preserving the constructive Transatlantic relationship to the extent he is able because Germany has so much at stake in the international order that
the United States' built and that Germany integrated itself into over the last 80 years.
SCIUTTO: OK. So, let's talk about Ukraine, because Merz deliberately -- and this is, again, part of the strategy, right, to say to Trump, you're
very important to this, to this process here. Does Europe increasingly believe however that Trump will walk away from Ukraine? I mean, his
comments in that meeting saying that, well, you might have to let Ukraine and Russia fight as if they were children in the backyard, which is, you
know, again, a deeply disrespectful way to describe a quite a bloody war. What is Europe's best bet as to what Trump does next?
[18:35:00]
RATHKE: Well, Donald Trump has put a lot of his own personal prestige on the line in calling for an end to the fighting and in stating so many times
that he would be able to make it happen without too much effort.
Now, the Europeans have been stalwart in supporting Ukraine and President Zelenskyy and even stepping up their commitments of financial and military
support. And I think one of the main points Friedrich Merz made today is that the United States also has a stake here. It would be an embarrassment
for the United States if after, you know, the kinds of statements Donald Trump has made, the United States were simply to walk away.
So, I think it is not a resolution of the problem, but it is an effort by the Europeans consistently to try to hold Donald Trump to his commitment to
try to bring about peace.
SCIUTTO: I spoke to a Ukrainian lawmaker yesterday who said it seems like Trump is giving a green light to Putin to retaliate against Ukraine for
Ukraine's drone attack on Russia. And today, again in the Oval Office Trump said he was not happy about that attack, even though Ukraine was striking
bombers that had been repeatedly striking Ukraine for years, including Ukrainian civilian targets. Do you believe that Putin reads weakness in
Trump's response?
RATHKE: Well, I think, you know, as you also noticed in that Oval Office meeting, Friedrich Merz tried to remind Trump and everyone watching that
there is a difference in how Ukraine is fighting this war and defending itself and the way Russia is targeting civilians and civilian
infrastructure and so forth. So, that is an important message he tried to get across.
But to your question, I think Putin certainly sees it as either weakness or an indication that Trump is willing to go along with his characterization
of this conflict, even though it doesn't correspond to the facts and the development of the war and Russia's policy toward Ukraine since at least
2014.
SCIUTTO: What if Trump doesn't just walk away from the peace talks in Ukraine, but walks away from Ukraine and stops intelligence sharing and
other means of military assistance? What position would that leave Ukraine in?
RATHKE: Well, that would leave Ukraine in a very difficult position, of course, because it is still trying to expand its own production. Europeans
are trying to ramp up their defense industry as fast as they can, but they have two different objectives. One is to support Ukraine, but the second is
to build up their own stocks so that they are in a better position to defend themselves. So, there's no question about it that would be difficult
for Ukraine.
But there's another aspect to this, Jim, and that is if the United States abandons Ukraine, the United States also loses any influence over how
Ukraine conducts the war. And so, the United States wants two things. They -- you know, even the Trump administration, they perhaps want to diminish
the resource commitments, but they also want to retain influence over the decisions Ukraine makes. And walking away completely means you sacrifice
that second objective.
SCIUTTO: Jeffrey Rathke, thanks so much for walking us through it all.
RATHKE: Pleasure.
SCIUTTO: You are watching "The Brief." Please do stay with us. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:40:00]
SCIUTTO: The U.S. could add more countries to the list of 19 nations now affected by full or partial travel bans. In a White House video, President
Trump said the list could be expanded as, quote, "threats emerge around the world." The restrictions announced last night come after a man was charged
with attempted murder over Sunday's anti-Semitic attack in Boulder, Colorado.
Many of the countries on the list have frosty, adversarial, or antagonistic relations with Washington. It has perplexed Democratic Senator Dick Durbin,
the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. DICK DURBIN (D-IL): I don't understand it. The president said this situation, a terrible crime in Boulder was the reason for this. The
individual in Boulder was from Egypt. The president did not include Egypt on his list of nations of people we don't want in the United States. I
can't follow his thinking on this at all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: He's right, the suspect in the Boulder attack was originally from Egypt, which, as the senator mentioned, did not make the travel ban list.
When asked about this today, the president said Egypt was not on the list because quote, "they have things under control."
Efren Olivares is the legal director at the National Immigration Law Center. Efren, thanks so much for joining.
EFREN OLIVARES, LEGAL DIRECTOR, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: Thank you, Jim. Great to be with you.
SCIUTTO: First of all, in the simplest terms, is this legal, given the Supreme Court's decision regarding Trump's first travel ban in the first
term?
OLIVARES: It was in fact the third iteration of the Muslim ban that the Supreme Court ruled on in Hawaii v. Trump, and it upheld parts of that ban.
This ban is much broader and much more problematic, right? It expands the number of countries that are -- whose nationals are banned from entering
the United States. It added some countries and removed other countries. Syria is no longer on there. North Korea is no longer on there. This ban is
equally unconstitutional. It's not legal because it is equally arbitrary.
SCIUTTO: To your point, in terms of the arbitrary nature of this, The New York Times noted that, for instance, you look at a country such as Ghana or
Nigeria, not on the travel ban list, there are visa holders who are overstaying their visas, number in the thousands, they're not on the list.
But for several of the banned countries, the number is in the hundreds. It just doesn't seem to be a connection between the advertised threats or
violation and how the ban, how the list was made. Does that matter legally? In other words, if and when there's a court challenge, can lawyers make
that argument to attempt to get this blocked?
OLIVARES: Absolutely. The reasons given to justify this ban do not stand up to any scrutiny. For example, you listed those examples. North Korea is
no longer on the list, and that's an adversary country. I don't think the State Department would say that their vetting process is any better than
those of the countries listed on the ban.
Similarly for Venezuela, for example. The proclamation itself lists the percentage of Venezuelan immigrants who overstay their visa at 9.8, right?
Less than 10 percent, which means that nine out of 10 Venezuelans with an immigrant do not overstay their visa and they return to Venezuela. So, it
is not justifiable. It's completely arbitrary.
SCIUTTO: So, who's going to challenge -- who's most likely to challenge this legally?
[18:45:00]
OLIVARES: Well, I will tell you that we still have litigation from the prior iteration of the ban, and there's an injunction in place. Again, it
included some of the countries that are in this ban, and others are not. That's not a perfect match. We are looking, and we are already in
conversations with government attorneys about the implications of this new ban to the existing injunction, and also, examining and looking at all of
our options in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Hawaii v. Trump.
SCIUTTO: I remember in the first term that when Trump introduced his first Muslim travel ban, there was a great deal of uproar, even some bipartisan
uproar about it now. This one is broader, arguably more arbitrary. And yet, there does appear to be less uproar this time. And listen, some of that is
just the volume of things going on, on any given day with this administration.
But what impact do you fear that might have on the life of this, right? I mean, might that exhaustion or lack of attention make it less likely that
it's blocked?
OLIVARES: You know, I think you are right to point out that the reaction has not been what it was last time. I attribute that to the barrage of
immigration related violations from this administration, but we're also not losing sight of what is happening.
The reaction is different this time because the government attorneys are being more creative, right? They expanded the list, are purporting to
justify the ban, but the challenges in court will continue because every movement from this administration to codify racist rhetoric into
proclamations will be faced in court.
SCIUTTO: Do you see Trump's personal preferences playing into this? I mean, for instance, he has a good relationship with the Egyptian leader. He
says they have under control, even though apparently the proximate cause of this, right, was an attack by an Egyptian national who overstayed their
asylum claim. And in the past, he's had a relationship with the North Korean leader, despite the fact that North Korea is very much an adversary.
It might even have an intelligence interest in trying to get people into this country. Is that -- do you see that as a factor in the decision making
here?
OLIVARES: And perhaps even business interests that influence political decisions and policy decisions. You know, honestly, it is hard to tell, and
this president and this administration has been so haphazard that it is hard to use reason to predict what they might do or what they are doing.
The numbers, as you well stated, do not justify this ban.
And now, this stands to impact close to 500 million people across the globe, including U.S. citizens who now may not be able to reunite with
their family members. So, it is in fact a travesty, but I -- knowing this president, I'm looking at his track record, it's entirely reasonable to
expect that his personal interests and business interests are dictating his policy decisions.
SCIUTTO: Efren Olivares, thanks so much for joining.
OLIVARES: My pleasure. Thanks for having me.
SCIUTTO: Well, the NBA finals set to tip off with the Oklahoma City Thunder against the Indiana Pacers. Our preview of those finals coming up.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:50:00]
SCIUTTO: America's Coco Gauff putting an end to the fairytale run at the French Open by Lois Boisson, the last French player in the women's draw.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COCO GAUFF, FRENCH OPEN FINALIST: Lois is obviously an incredible player and for her to have the tournament that she had, she definitely proved
she's one of the best players in the world, especially on clay, and I'm sure we'll have many more battles in the future, hopefully here.
And yes, so, I know you guys wanted her to win. But I wanted to win as well. But yes, congratulations to her for incredible tournament. And yes,
today was just happened to be my day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Boisson entered the tournament ranked 361 in the world, but she upset two top 10 players on her way all the way to the semifinals. Gauff
will face Aryna Sabalenka in the women's final on Saturday. A match between the world's top two players as it happens.
Well, basketball fans around the world are getting excited as the first game of the NBA finals is set to begin in less than two hours. Oklahoma
City Thunder won both regular season matches with the Indiana Pacers. They are favored to win their first title since relocating to Oklahoma Home City
in 2008.
Michael Vorkunov is national basketball business reporter for The Athletic. He joins me now. So, Mike, who do you have your money on?
MICHAEL VORKUNOV, NATIONAL BASKETBALL BUSINESS REPORTER, THE ATHLETIC: Well, I think the Thunder are probably the large favorites in this. They
won 18 more games in the regular season and I don't know if I've seen anyone predict that the Pacers are going to take it.
SCIUTTO: The Pacers -- and listen, I'm a Knicks fan, so I got to put that out there. You know, my bias. They look pretty threatening though in the
conference finals, right? I mean, they've got some weapons.
VORKUNOV: Yes. I mean, first of all, my condolences on your Eastern Conference finals loss. And you of all people will know just how good the
Pacers can be when they beat the Knicks in six games, they were pretty great. You know, Tyrese Haliburton was an awesome point guard, really a
kind of a facilitator and spark plug for the whole team. And Pascal Siakam was the Eastern Conference Finals MVP.
So, they're a very good team for sure. It's just that the team that they're facing might just be a little bit better at everything that the Pacers do
well.
SCIUTTO: I mean, listen, SGA, right? I mean, he goes by three initials. That's a good player. I mean, is -- does he stand to be the -- I don't
know, maybe the superstar of these finals?
VORKUNOV: Yes, he could be the breakout star of these finals and for the NBA. You know, he won the MVP this year. He finished I believe in the top
three last year as well, and he's the best player on the best team in basketball, one that might just win the championship in a few weeks, and he
could be the next big thing for the NBA, which is looking for a number of stars to bank on for the next era.
SCIUTTO: Yes, they need it. Some of the other ones get a little old. Before we go, there's been a lot of talk about having two small market
teams play each other, and the NBA will say, oh, no, we don't mind. We're perfectly happy with Indiana and Oklahoma in the finals. I have to think
they would've preferred say a New York team maybe in the finals. And I know I'm biased.
VORKUNOV: Well, look, I think the ratings definitely would've been higher if the Knicks were in the finals. You know, I don't think that the
expectations are high for the ratings for the finals with Oklahoma City, which is the 47th largest media market, Indianapolis, which is the 25th
largest.
But the other thing the NBA has going for them, which is their next media deal is already signed. They're going to get paid no matter where the
ratings land for this. So, I don't know if they're sweating it too much.
SCIUTTO: Yes, that's a good thing about guaranteed contracts. Michael Vorkunov, thanks so much for joining.
VORKUNOV: Thank you.
SCIUTTO: Well, there's a once in a lifetime chance for luxury fashion lovers out there. Auction House Sotheby's is selling the original Hermes
Birkin bag. The black saddle stitched handbag was inspired by the late actor and singer Jane Birkin. Her bag will be part of the Sotheby's fashion
icon sale on July 10th. The original Birkin differs from other versions with its size, metal rings, brass hardwares, shoulder strap, and zip and
bottom studs.
In today's Good Brief, the moment gaming fans around the world have been waiting for.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CROWD: Four, three, two, one. Let's go.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCIUTTO: Nintendo faithful lined up to get their hands on the news Switch 2 console, which went on sale on Thursday. The updated console arrived
about eight years after the original one went on sale. Nintendo has made updates to the hardware with a larger screen, new social feature called
Game Chat. The Switch 2 selling for 450 bucks, about $150 more than the original.
[18:55:00]
Thanks so much for your company. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00]
END
