Return to Transcripts main page

The Brief with Jim Sciutto

Sean "Diddy" Combs' Trial, Jury Reached Partial Judgment; Domestic Policy Plan Endorsed By Trump Narrowly Passes The Senate; VP Vance's Assistance, U.S. Senate Passes Trump's Megabill; Trump's Megabill Rejected By Three Republican Senators; Father Of Idaho Murder Victim Speaks To CNN; To Avoid Death Penalty, Kohberger Consents To Plea Agreement; Megabill Drama, Trump Alludes Political Retaliation Against Musk; If Megabill Passed Into Law, Musk Claims He Would Start A New Party; Round 16, Al Hilal Surprises Manchester City; Real Madrid Advanced To Quarterfinals By Eliminating Juventus. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired July 01, 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]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, and welcome to our viewers joining us from all around the world. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington, and we begin with

breaking news.

A jury in New York says it has reached a partial verdict in the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Jurors, however,

will keep deliberating on Wednesday after saying they're in agreement on four of five charges. Both the prosecution and the defense wanted those

deliberations to continue. After the break, the judge instructed them to do so, but they now have been at least dismissed for today.

Joining me now is Leigh Waldman. Can you walk us through what we know about this partial verdict?

LEIGH WALDMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Jim, good to be with you. So, at this point, like you mentioned, they've reached an agreement on four of the five

charges, but not quite yet on count one, which is seen as the most serious charge that Sean "Diddy" Combs is facing. That's that racketeering

conspiracy or RICO charge that he is facing. It also carries a possible life sentence with it.

And that's what has the jury stuck at this point and it's not a surprise to legal experts here because it's a very complicated charge to prove. They

have to prove that Combs, one, had an enterprise and they also have to prove those predicate charges as well, which include bribery, arson, things

like drug distribution. So, that's what has the jury stuck at this point.

So, let's walk you through the other charges that they've reached that partial verdict on at this point. That's the sex trafficking and

transportation to engage in prostitution charges as related to Holmes's ex- girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, and the woman who is testifying on the stand under the alias Jane, at this point.

We have no indication on what the verdict is for those charges. And the judge instructed the jury to go back, continue deliberating, and also

reminded them of their instructions that they received yesterday. And Jim, part of those instructions is, quote, "It is your duty as a jury to consult

with one another and to deliberate with a view of reaching an agreement."

The jury then quickly sent another note back to the judge saying that they were done for the day, but they will continue with those deliberations,

9:00 a.m. on Wednesday.

SCIUTTO: So, when that happens, at that point, I imagine they can only deliberate as long as it's possible they come to a verdict, right? They --

I suppose there's a scenario where they come back to the judge and say, hey, we still can't come to agreement on that first charge.

WALDMAN: Exactly. And that's what the defense, especially, is hoping to avoid because if they are able to say he is not guilty on count one, but

guilty on the other charges, for instance, they can't retry him on count one, which again, is the most serious charge. But if they are ending any

mistrial or hung jury in this case, prosecutors have an opportunity to charge him again with these same charges that he's facing with this current

trial right now that's lasted nearly two months at this point.

So, that's why they're encouraging the jury to continue deliberating, to try and reach a verdict when it comes to count one. Just some color from

inside of the courtroom from our team who's been there dedicated every single day, they said that Combs started to whisper to his six children who

were present in the courtroom and also told his mom, I'll be all right. Love you. Before he was taken away back to jail. He's been locked up since

before this trial started back in September of last year.

So, this is the only opportunity throughout the course of this trial that he's able to see his family who's been there showing support throughout the

course of it.

SCIUTTO: Leigh Waldman outside the courthouse, thanks so much for joining.

All right. So, for some legal analysis now, CNN Legal Analyst Joey Jackson and David Weinstein, former U.S. attorney for the Southern District of

Florida. Good to have you both.

You're not inside that jury room, Joey, but give me your best read of what's the most likely scenario here. They've reached a verdict on some of

the charges, the underlying ones. Can't agree on the RICO charge. What does that indicate to you?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So, Jim, let me give you two competing perspectives. The one perspective is the jury concluded that he shot the

sheriff but didn't shoot the deputy. What does that mean? It means that they've concluded that he's guilty of sex trafficking as it relates to

Cassie Ventura and also Jane. That would be two of the counts.

And then they concluded on the other two that he's guilty of the prostitution, the transportation with respect to prostitution, but he's not

guilty in terms of furtherance of a criminal enterprise. That is, he's guilty of the four but not the RICO. Not that they concluded that, they're

still determining whether the RICO.

[18:05:00]

The other view of that is that if they can't reach the RICO, then perhaps they've concluded that he didn't do the other things either. Now, that

would be hard to imagine, and as much as the jury clearly said in their note that there are those who entrenched in their position with respect to

him having engaged in the RICO activity and then another view that he did not.

Now, that could also mean because RICO's complex that they felt that he was running some type of criminal empire as it related to arson, as it related

to bribery, as it related to obstruction of justice. But they don't buy the sex stuff and it could be consensual.

And so, in essence, there's different ways to interpret it. What we do know is that the jury has done its job as to the four, and I think there are

right all the parties to push for them reaching a conclusion as to RICO because then you have finality. There is no retrial, it wouldn't be a

mistrial, and we would all know what all five verdicts would be. We'll see if that happens tomorrow.

SCIUTTO: David, I hate to ask you to speculate as well but do you share that view of those two possible scenarios as to where things stand?

DAVID WEINSTEIN, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA: I share much of what Joey has said. I don't disagree with him,

that what they're struggling with is, was this a criminal enterprise? That's the hardest part, and that's the first thing that they're supposed

to consider on count one.

I think it's also possible that perhaps they're split as to the two victims. Maybe they didn't believe Jane. Maybe they didn't think that Jane

was sex trafficked. And so, they may have found him not guilty on that one, and then the accompanying prostitution across state line charges but still

found him guilty with regard to Cassandra and the prostitution across state lines. To me that was their strongest case. That was a testimony they had

read back.

And so, they're now struggling with what does it mean to have an overt act. We have two or more of them. And even if we do, was this just a musician

and his music enterprise or was this a criminal enterprise? There certainly was testimony about people conspiring together, acting together to do

things, but was it in furtherance of that criminal conspiracy? It's not an easy charge to resolve and certainly not an easy one to understand. So,

that may be the trouble they're having.

SCIUTTO: Joey, in your experience in the courtroom, when a jury's having trouble, comes out to the judge, says, we can't reach agreement. The judge

says, you know almost like a teacher to his class, go back in there, you know, do your homework. How often are they able to resolve whatever their

differences are?

JACKSON: So, quite often, quite frankly. It's not always the occasion where you have a jury that says we can't reach a conclusion. The judge instructs

them and the judge gives them the final charge, not that's happened yet, but -- right?

The dynamite charge, hey, there's no jury that would be wiser than you, that would be smarter than you, that can do what you've done. We respect

your service. We're not asking you to alter your side, but we're asking you to keep an open mind. Sometimes they come back and they've reached the

verdict. There are other times where they don't. So, it would be really just speculating as to that.

But I think, you know, David raises a strong point. It is true that they could also have concluded that he's a -- Cassie Ventura was the stronger

one, and Jane, there was nothing to see there, and split as to those trafficking cases, or they could have found not guilty or guilty as to

both. You just don't know.

But I just don't think, you know, it would be fair to say that we're done maybe tomorrow. Look, they go home, they sleep on it, they come back and

maybe views are altered, perhaps they are not.

SCIUTTO: David, you wrote earlier in the week about how quite early on in the deliberations on day one, the jurors had already contacted the judge

about one particular juror who can't follow instructions, I mean, is it possible today's events and that issue are connected?

WEINSTEIN: Well, it might be, or that juror may not have been willing to do things in the order that they decided they were going to do them. Or when

they said, look, this is what it says about this particular charge. He says, well, I don't agree that's what it says about that charge.

They must have overcome some of that, or there would have been a second note about this particular juror. We've heard nothing again about anybody

being unwilling to either deliberate or follow the rules of deliberation. There's a fine line between maintaining your position and not following the

rules.

And I agree with Joey. Let them get a good night's sleep. Let them come back tomorrow. They don't want to come back after tomorrow. I think we're

going to get some type of a verdict out of them tomorrow. And that might mean that somebody backs off the way they feel because they want to go

home.

SCIUTTO: Yes. Is that -- I mean, you often hear about this, Joey, and I'm sure you and I have talked about this in regards to other cases. Holiday

weekends, the -- or just weekends in general, are big sources of pressure for juries to come to a decision.

JACKSON: Yes, that's absolutely the fact. Weekends in general, particularly holiday weekends, I think a jury wants to go home. But also, to be fair,

they've sat through this through seven, weeks and although you cannot discuss with each other, that is, the jurors cannot over the course of the

time how they feel.

[18:10:00]

Certainly, they've been developing their positions and what they believe the evidence has shown. And then of course with the read back, that is they

can request and have requested various testimony to be read back, to refresh their recollection. It reinforces, right, some of their views.

Perhaps it changes or alters others.

But I think that, you know, look, they sat through the case. They have firm views about the case, but I don't see them. And even if tomorrow, let's

just be charitable to David's point that, you know, look, tomorrow's Wednesday -- Thursday, right? The -- it's the day before the 4th of July. I

wouldn't see them going past then. But, you know, who knows that speculation as well.

SCIUTTO: Well, yes, let's hope that they give all due consideration. Joey Jackson, David Weinstein, thanks so much to both of you.

JACKSON: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, a razor thin win for President Trump's signature domestic policy bill in the Senate. Why the congressional megabill could

still run into new trouble back in the House.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Well, they've had high trauma on Capitol Hill as the Senate approved President Trump's massive domestic policy bill, the big beautiful

bill, by the very narrowest of margins. The Senate evenly divided, 50-50. So, Vice President JD Vance cast the deciding vote to put it over the top.

Three Republicans voted against, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Susan Collins of Maine. Just one more Republican defection

would have sunk the bill.

The legislation now goes back to the House, which will take up the Senate's changes in their big ones. President Trump says, he believes the

differences in those two versions can still be worked out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: It is a great bill. There is something for everyone. And I think it's going to go very nicely in the House. Actually,

I think it will be easier in the House than it was in the Senate.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And just to be clear on the Medicaid cuts, you've promised not to cut Medicaid. You said this is all just targeting waste,

fraud, and abuse. Are you saying that the estimated 11.8 million people who could lose their health coverage, that is all waste, fraud and abuse?

TRUMP: No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying it's going to be a very much smaller number than that, and that number will be waste, fraud and abuse.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Not clear how he backs up those numbers. Senate Majority Leader John Thune admitted that the latest changes, two Medicare in the Senate

would create some challenges in the House. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham says the bill's fate remains uncertain.

[18:15:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): I don't know what's going to happen in the House. They're going to take it up pretty soon. Do they have the votes to

pass exactly what we did? I don't know. I just think we delivered for the president. We gave our House colleagues a better bill than we found.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan CBOs as the bill as it stands raises the U.S. deficit by some $3.3 trillion over the next

decade. Also raises the U.S. debt ceiling, that makes President Trump's tax cuts permanent.

Annie Grayer joins me now from Capitol Hill. Annie one would've lost a lot of money to bet against Republican legislative items supported by the

president even when the margins appear thin. Despite the major differences with the House version of this bill, does this have a path to passage in

the House?

ANNIE GRAYER, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, that's what House Republican leaders are working furiously to figure out, because lawmakers are coming

back into town. Remember, the House was not supposed to be in session this week, and lawmakers were on standby to see what happened in the Senate.

Now that the Senate has passed their version of the bill, it is in the House Rules Committee, which is the next legislative hurdle before can

actually get to the floor. And I've already spoken with one House Republican who told me he is firmly against the Senate's version of this

bill, and that is Republican Congressman Ralph Norman, who sits on that Rules Committee.

So, there's already roadblocks forming for House Republican leadership. Because remember, the version -- as the House bill, as you pointed out,

looked very different than the Senate bill when it comes to how steep the Medicaid cuts were. How the energy tax credits were phased out. How, you

know, rural hospitals were given, you know, funding in the House versus the Senate bill.

There are all these differences that lawmakers are trying to work through. House Republicans can only lose three votes. We know of at least one who's

a firm no, and there are a lot of others, Jim, who have concerns.

SCIUTTO: Annie Grayer on the Hill, well -- sure, you'll be covering that phase as well.

Joining me now, Congressman Ami Bera, U.S. House Democrat from California. Congressman, thanks so much for taking the time,

REP. AMI BERA (D-CA): Jim, thanks for having me on.

SCIUTTO: So, tell me your reaction to this bill. What's it look like to you?

BERA: You know, I think this is a big ugly bill. I think it shows a clear contrast between where we are as Democrats and where the Republicans are.

You know, it is going to take healthcare away from millions of Americans. It's going to make people that are already food insecure more insecure, and

it adds $3.3 trillion to the debt and the deficit.

So, this isn't a good bill. That said, you know, the Republican Party is in total loyalty to Donald Trump right now. And, you know, he wanted this

bill. You know, you think folks like Lisa Murkowski and others would have known better. Again, you know, they got the vote. So, I don't know what's

going to happen in the House. I think you'll see a lot of posturing, but at the end of the day, they seem to always roll over for what President Trump

wants.

SCIUTTO: You are a physician in your other day job. Can you describe the impact of the cuts in particular to Medicaid from, well, the combination of

the House and Senate bills?

BERA: Absolutely. You know, two decades ago, Medicaid really was for pregnant women, the disabled, and poor folks. Over the years though, it's

become a bigger source of healthcare for folks, pays for nursing home care, for, you know, a lot of our elderly. It pays for in-home supportive care

for folks.

Also, for a lot of working Americans through the eighth expansion, it's what allows them to purchase healthcare when their employer doesn't provide

that healthcare for them. It makes it affordable for them. In California, we're close to universal coverage.

So, what this bill does in a lot of rural communities and red states, it's going to take healthcare away from those very folks that are working. And

some of it's going to be just through increased paperwork burden. You know, when they say work requirements, really what they're saying is you've got

to re-up every couple months and prove that you're working. And a lot of folks are not going to be able to do that. And that's going to kick folks

off of healthcare.

And then on top of that, for rural hospitals, which in many of these Republican districts are the biggest employees -- employers and struggling

to survive, they depend on Medicaid. And you know, if those things get cut, those hospitals could close.

SCIUTTO: The -- it seems that the competing issues in this bill, right, and the difficulty in the political field of play, right, is that Republicans

can say, this cuts people's taxes. People like to have more money in their pockets, right, or if you let those tax cuts lapse, then it would be a tax

hike.

And from Democrat's perspective is that it's going to hit people in ways that they depend, right, on the government. Medicaid being the principal

one. When you interact with voters, which of those two arguments is winning?

[18:20:00]

BERA: You know, it is the healthcare argument. You know, folks are worried about losing their healthcare coverage. They're worried about, you know, a

lot of folks are very food insecure right now. That said, we can negotiate keeping taxes in place, the tax cuts in place, for working Americans, for

less fortunate individuals.

But for corporate America, you know, they could probably go to 25 percent. For the richest Americans, they could probably also stand to pay a little

bit more in taxes. Susan Collins proposed that in order to protect Medicaid, obviously the Republicans and the Senate voted that proposal

down.

SCIUTTO: I want to ask you about just one more topic about the -- given we're a week out from U.S. strikes on Iran, a little over that. Given that

the U.S. carried out these strikes with minimal blowback, as you know, going into it, there was a great deal of concern that it would lead to

attacks on U.S. forces in the region, perhaps a broader regional war. Would you call those strikes a success?

BERA: You know, at this point the ceasefire is holding and, you know, I think it does create an opportunity for a negotiated resolution since

conflict reports that we had. And, you know, what we were briefed on before we left last Friday did suggest that there's a contour of a deal.

It looks a lot like the JCPOA, the Iran nuclear deal that we negotiated and I voted for under President Obama. That set of deals a deal. If it can lead

to some peace and stability in a non-nuclear Iran, that's a good thing.

What's different this time is the Iranian regime is incredibly fragile. They're very exposed. You know, we saw how Israel controlled the skies. So,

if it is about regime stability and survival, that may be the thing that gets them to the negotiating table.

SCIUTTO: Final question, you're aware that it was confirmed today that Zohran Mamdani won the Democratic primary in New York for New York, mayor.

He's already after this remarkable victory over Andrew Cuomo, become something of a national phenomenon, right, and a target for President Trump

who calls him, without basis, a communist.

I wonder, for Democrats, is his win a positive or a negative nationally? Does it expose you --

BERA: You know, I think --

SCIUTTO: -- to criticism as moving too far to the left, or has he found a formula for winning?

BERA: You know, I think it was a surprise to a lot of us. Again, it's one city and one election against the -- a candidate that really did have some

political flaws and political baggage. I think there's things we can learn from the campaign that he ran. The planks that he ran on, et cetera, I

actually think the Democratic party is more pragmatic than that. And, you know, we're much more of a centrist party these days than what we saw in

New York.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Ami Bera in California, we do appreciate you joining.

BERA: Jim, thank you. Be well.

SCIUTTO: Coming up on "The Brief".

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE GONCALVES, FATHER OF KAYLEE GONCALVES: This isn't what we should be doing. If you don't deal with terrorists, then you don't deal with people

who kill your kids in their sleep.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: The father of one of the 2022 Idaho murder victims speaking out after the suspect and prosecutors agreed to a plea deal. He and other

family members just aren't happy about it. My interview with him, Steve Goncalves, right after the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:25:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief." I'm Jim Sciutto. Here are more of the international headlines we're watching today.

Jury deliberations resume Wednesday in the federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. Jurors say they have reached a

verdict on four of the five counts, but cannot reach one on count one. The biggest, racketeering conspiracy. The music mogul also faces sex

trafficking charges. Both prosecution and defense urge the judge to tell the jury to keep deliberations going.

U.S. Senate has passed President Trump's domestic policy megabill. Vice President JD Vance carried the legislation forward. His vote breaking a 50-

50 tie. Now, it heads to the House for one final vote. The bill would extend tax cuts, boost funding for things such as immigration enforcement

paid for by cuts to social programs, including Medicaid. President Trump wants it on his desk by July 4th, U.S. Independence Day, but there are big

differences between the House and Senate bills.

Sweltering heat in parts of Europe is now breaking records. England and Spain have topped their warmest dunes ever. And with little to no air

conditioning in the region, the Germans, French and Portuguese are sweating out their heat waves. There are also worries about wildfires in scorched

areas of Italy and Greece.

South America, though, it's chilly. People bundled up in Buenos Aires, Argentina, where temps dropped to a low of minus one degree Celsius, about

30 degrees Fahrenheit. That's below freezing.

Another story we've been following closely. Bryan Kohberger has accepted a plea deal with prosecutors which will spare him the death penalty in the

murders of four University of Idaho students in 2022. By pleading guilty to four killings, four murders, he will also avoid a trial that was set to

begin next month.

Kohberger is a former PhD student in criminology at Washington State University. He was arrested in Pennsylvania weeks after the killings. The

four students were stabbed to death in a rental home near their Moscow, Idaho campus in the middle of the night. One of the victims was -- and

there she is, 21-year-old Kaylee Goncalves. Her family's just furious with this plea deal. I spoke with her father, Steve, a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: So, Steve, you and I have been talking virtually since these horrible, horrible events happened. And I just wonder, how you're feeling

today with this plea deal?

GONCALVES: We're -- we feel a little defeated. We feel betrayed. I felt like we tried everything. I mean, we fought our tails off and there were so

many people who worked their tails off on this case, you know. The boots on the ground, the men and women, the investigation, FBI, the state, the

county. Multiple states were involved. We had all the evidence. We just didn't have somebody willing to push to that final step.

You know, I can't force a prosecutor who doesn't want to do his job. Unfortunately, the only person who can stop and force him to do his job is

Hippler. And we've even tried to get people to reach out to his office, be respectful.

[18:30:00]

But, you know, let him know where you stand and maybe enough people can help convey that this isn't justice. This isn't what we should be doing. If

you don't deal with terrorists, then you don't deal with people who kill your kids in their sleep. So, you know, we'll never see this as justice.

SCIUTTO: How did prosecutors react when you and some of the other families told them directly you weren't happy with this?

GONCALVES: They hadn't been honest with any of the two families that were involved in. There was actually three that were there. So, this was all

news to us. And they talked to us Friday, 3:45, around theirs. By the time the meeting was over, we probably had a 45-minute meeting. It was pretty

productive. We talked about case. We talked about safety, security, and things like that.

There was no this is over. We have a deal. We would like you to look at it, which I would've negotiated the deal way better. I mean, total amateur

hour, the way this deal was negotiated. He didn't even have to give up any proof that he did the crime.

So, we'll still be listening to these losers that are pro-Bergers, that'll think that he didn't do it and he was forced to take the plea it. They

would -- they should have at least said, where's the outfit, where's the knife? Just some common courtesy to say, it's over and done with. Let's all

move on.

And, you know, they could have negotiated. No media deal for him. They didn't do any of it. It was the bare minimum. The least amount of effort

you could do is what Thompson gave us.

SCIUTTO: And the first word you had of it was when you got that e-mail?

GONCALVES: They basically said something that came up in discussion that an offer had never even been considered. And now, like Bryan's team was

saying, hey there's this check box. We're almost at the end. Do you guys even have an offer?

And they said -- they made it sound like we never took an offer because we took them for their word that they were just fighting, and they really

thought he was innocent. We were -- so they didn't even consider it because they didn't even think that the other team was willing to just bow down and

be done with it.

You know, she took another murder case. So that -- and people don't know that. Not everyone does. But she took another case. So, her hands were full

and she made a decision and Thompson made a decision and the rest of us just have to live with it. And that's really what -- that's what they told

us.

And Friday meeting, all it was they -- hey, this is just a procedural thing. We have to go through this. We'll see it. We really don't think

anything's going to come of it of where you guys stand. And we were like, nope, we don't want a deal. We -- that's not -- we're not interested in

that. We didn't wait two and a half years for this.

SCIUTTO: So, you told them that close to the deal, the last communications you had with them was, we're not interested in the deal. And then they came

to you and said, we got a deal.

GONCALVES: Yes, and another family, for sure, was right there and told them the exact same thing, we told you we're not interested in the deal. So,

they didn't have a majority. They tried. They tried to do some maneuvering to try to get us to break apart. But no, no. They just -- it's really -- it

comes down to Thompson just didn't want to fight this. He was done with it and wanted to summer back.

And you know, we're all going to live with the repercussions for the rest of our lives that we'll have to defend this guy and -- unless -- people

(ph) steps in and says, you're not going to just say you're guilty. You're going to communicate some of the details so these families can actually

move on and not have to be dragged through this true crime nightmare over and over and over again.

SCIUTTO: Is it possible that there could be some amendments to the plea deal at the hearing tomorrow or following that hearing?

GONCALVES: Yes. From my understanding, talking to Shanon Gray, our lawyer, he -- everything's really in in Hippler's court right now. Hippler could

say, he could ratify it right then and there from the bench. But it's very rare and it would be an unusual -- he would have to be probably thinking

about right now or he would have to be looking at this stuff.

And, you know, talking to both sides and saying, hey I'm not liking the structure of this language. I'm not liking the fact that there's no

guarantee here that this individual's going to share details. He's going to take complete ownership of what he did.

You know, just pleading guilty, we know. You know, he can appeal that in six months and say, well, I was having a mental break or whatever. I mean,

he's already said that he has all these mental issues. So, we want something that -- something like the knife where he threw it or his kill

kit, his suit, anything like that.

If he gave those type of details, people would just be like, OK, we were wrong. He did it. And let's leave everybody alone and move on to another

case.

[18:35:00]

SCIUTTO: Tell me your view of the importance of the death penalty here, because you've described prison as nothing but adult childcare. Why was the

possibility, at least of the death penalty so important to you?

GONCALVES: Well, we have spent some time looking at what prison life is like, and death row is 23 hours locked up with one hour free. You don't get

to do college. You don't get to do extra activities. People don't really know prison is daycare these days.

I mean, there's people coming from other countries that get arrested, go to our prison, and they have an upgrade in life. They're -- you know, they got

AC. They've got three meals. They've got a cot. They've got dental vision. Some of these people have never had dental vision their whole lives.

So, our prison system has been overrun by, you know, people who just never had their kids lost and only have a -- just a basic understanding of what

that system is. It's not just this. It's basically adult daycare. And you know, it -- it's sad.

But death row is different. Death row is the only place where they're actually treated as true criminals. And it's sad that this individual won't

be treated like a criminal. He'd be treated like a, you know, a college student, you know, in a dorm.

SCIUTTO: And you're concerned as well that he might still have the ability to sell his story someday?

GONCALVES: Yes, he's a master degree in serial killers. That's what he did. That's what he studied. So, he studied the serial killer who worked with

one of his professors, one of Bryan's professors, and she wrote a book for him. And then that book was shared. How that transaction was put on his

books in the prison system. But he basically bragged about having power, being able to buy the big dogs, cigarettes and buy their protection.

So, we expect the same behavior and they should have too. If they just did a little bit of homework, they would've known that this guy has planned

this murder from the very beginning. I mean, he did Reddit surveys. He wrote about it. He dedicated his life to it. He has a plan for getting

caught too.

SCIUTTO: You know, listen, from the beginning as a fellow dad, and I know I've told you this before, I just -- my heart goes out to you. And I just

wonder how you -- how you're doing and how the rest of your family's doing through all this.

GONCALVES: Morning was rough. You know, every person's texting and calling each other. Just trying to keep -- figure out where everyone's head's at,

you know. Nobody feeling alone. We're a big family. So, we're all destroyed. We're all let down. We're so, so disappointed with the court

system. It's just -- and I don't even know who to go, you know. Do I blame my -- do I blame Latah County? I don't know.

But this isn't justice. This isn't right. This is a joke. And if we want to stop school shooters, we want to stop these mass killings, you don't do it

like this. You don't give them vegan meals in a suit, put them on a platform, make him famous. Tell everybody he's getting like, love letters,

and then say, oh, well he's in prison. He'll be in prison for this rest of his life.

Well, there's a lot of teenage kids watching this, guys. They're watching this right now and they're watching you, judge. They're watching you,

Hippler. They want to see a real man step up and put some skin in the game and not some push deal that was done in the back office on a Sunday. The

offer was made on a Sunday.

And then two -- and two days later, we're supposed to go to court on 4th of July weekend. Can people not see what's going on here? This is ridiculous.

Nothing moved in this for a year. And then in three days it's over.

SCIUTTO: We're sending you all the thoughts we can right now and do wish you the best.

GONCALVES: Appreciate you and your audience and everybody that cares, you know. If we don't have audiences and we don't have people like you, it

would be help for us to just have to eat all this by ourselves by sharing this with you guys. We really, really -- it's like medicine. It helps us

get through this and we appreciate you and your audience.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: Well, our thoughts, certainly with the family. Steve Goncalves and the other families of the victims in those murders.

Still ahead, President Trump's massive domestic policy bill remains deeply unpopular with the American public and with Elon Musk. How Musk's

opposition of the megabill could harm its chances, and also perhaps Republican political prospects.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:40:00]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back to "The Brief". Wall Street kicked off a new month and new quarter of trading today. The Dow rose almost 1 percent, but

investors rotated out of tech with the Nasdaq, as you see they're pulling back a bit.

Financial markets waiting for developments in the ongoing U.S. trade negotiations. President Trump says, it is possible the U.S. will strike a

deal with India before his 90-day tariff pause on trading partners runs out next week.

Trump also playing down a trade with deal with Japan saying, it could see a U.S. tariff hike of as much as 35 percent. It's not moving as quickly as he

has claimed. Fed Chair Jerome Powell says in a round table discussion in Portugal that the Central Bank would have cut rates sooner if it weren't

for President Trump's tariffs.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Chair, would the Fed have cut more by now if it weren't for the tariffs?

JEROME POWELL, U.S. FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR: So, I do think that -- I think that's right. We're -- in effect, we went on hold when we saw the size of

the tariffs and we're -- and essentially all inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Powell who President Trump continues to attack for not cutting rates sooner, says he still expects the Fed to cut rates later this year.

Tesla shares fell more than 5 percent, Tuesday, on fears that Elon Musk's continued battle with President Trump and attacks on the Trump backed

congressional megabill will impact Musk's companies. President Trump hinted at political payback against Musk earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you going to deport Elon Musk?

TRUMP: I don't know. I mean, we'll have to take a look. We might have to DOGE on Elon. DOGE is the monster that has -- that might have to go back

and eat Elon. Wouldn't that be terrible? He gets a lot of subsidies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Sounds a bit like weaponization. Musk has called the bill political suicide for Republicans because of its unpopularity. He has

promised primary supporters of the bill and says he will establish a new political party if the bill finally passes.

Alex Isenstadt, joins me now, a senior political reporter at Axios. So, I got a short term and a medium term question for you. Short term, do Musk's

threats against Republicans who vote for this bill to primary them, et cetera, do they strike fear in Republicans enough that they might vote

against or do Republicans fear Trump more?

[18:45:00]

ALEX ISENSTADT, SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER, AXIOS: I think Republicans fear Trump more at this point. You know, Trump has -- Trump also has a lot of

political money to play with here, right? He's got a billion dollar plus political operation that he can use at his disposal to go after Republicans

who he doesn't like, who he sees as crossing him. He's already doing that with Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie, who is one of only two House

Republicans to oppose the bill.

And so, Republicans have a lot to fear with Trump. They probably have more to fear with Trump than Musk just because Trump has shown that he's willing

to go after Republicans who are not with him.

SCIUTTO: How about down the line as we come around to the midterms when, at least if he follows through, right? Musk is talking about doing a couple of

things. Primary opponents, and he's got a lot of money as we know. Start another party, but there's -- the other element, right, is that, you know,

this is not a particularly popular bill with voters.

ISENSTADT: Right. So, what Musk has threatened to do is primary -- any Republican who votes for this bill. That's going to be a hard thing to do

given that there are going to be literally hundreds of Republicans who vote for this bill in the end, it's just going to be a tough thing to do.

What's going to be interesting to see is if he engages in this Thomas Massie race that I just mentioned. Musk has tweeted in support of Thomas

Massie. He says he plans to contribute to him. If Musk gets behind Thomas Massie in Kentucky, and you have Trump trying to unseat Massie, this race

becomes a proxy battle between Donald Trump and Elon Musk which is going to be a fascinating thing to watch heading into next year's midterms.

SCIUTTO: And we should note that, you know, if you look at for instance, the judge rate -- judges race in Wisconsin earlier in the year where Musk

dumped a lot of money in there, that was against Democrats. He, you know, his money doesn't always win the day nor does President Trump's endorsement

necessarily.

I wonder this, just in terms of creating a viable third party, even with virtually endless amounts of money, can Musk succeed there where others

have repeatedly failed?

ISENSTADT: What we know -- yes. What we know is that it's -- it is extraordinarily hard to form a third party. Even Elon Musk might not have

the resources to do that. And the other thing is it remains to be seen how serious Musk is about doing any of this. Are these just late-night Twitter

rants or are they something more real and more substantial? And the answer remains to be seen there, I think.

SCIUTTO: I mean, listen, it takes more than just money, right? It takes a lot of work, grassroots, et cetera, to keep that kind of thing going. We

saw that in the 90s with Ross Perot. Alex Isenstadt, thanks so much for joining.

ISENSTADT: Thank you. Thanks for having me.

SCIUTTO: Well, round 16 of the FIFA Club World Cup sees one European heavyweight go down as Manchester City is eliminated in a seven-goal

thriller, maybe the best game of the series so far.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[18:50:00]

SCIUTTO: A stunning upset in FIFA Club World Cup action is Al Hilal eliminates Manchester City,

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SCIUTTO: The Saudi Arabian Club heading to the quarterfinals after a four- three extra time win. And just a few hours ago, Real Madrid shut out Juventus. One nil -- there's a goal, also sending them to the

quarterfinals.

CNN World Sport Anchor Patrick Snell is outside Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta where the Dortmund-Monterey match begins in about two hours. I

mean, what a dramatic end to the round of 16.

PATRICK SNELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: Oh, incredible stuff, yes. This will be the match you referenced, Jim. That will be the final round of 16 game here at

the magnificent Mercedes-Benz Stadium in the heart of downtown Atlanta. And we already know that the winner of this match right here in the ATL will be

taking on five-time winners, Real Madrid Los Blancos know a thing or two about winning this tournament. There's no question about that.

They got the job done earlier against Italian giants Juventus. It was one goal game only, and the goal coming early in the second half. And what an

impact that the former Liverpool player, the newly acquired, Trent Alexander-Arnold is already making four Real Madrid. Not just is he

seemingly very proficient in spoken Spanish when he witnessed his press conference on joining the club.

But boy does he have an eye for the assist and a wonderful assist from him to provide the winning goal for Gonzalo Garcia, the young Spaniard, the 21-

year-old Spaniard, making no mistake. It was a terrific assist from Alexander-Arnold. A pinpoint cross, wonderful accuracy. One nil. The final

score Los Blancos, I tell you what, they know what it takes to win this. As I mentioned, they're going for a six-win, Jim, in this very tournament.

SCIUTTO: Wow. OK. Real Madrid winning, not really going to be a shock much. But Man City going out to a club for Saudi Arabia, now that's a shocker.

SNELL: Yes, that really was the powerhouse name of Manchester City, it carries weight everywhere you look. History makers in the Premier League,

although they were beaten to the title this past season by Liverpool. But they will not have expected to go out of the tournament at the hands of the

Saudi pro league side, Al Hilal.

But I do want to give full credit to Al Hilal because they were absolutely magnificent in this victory. There were three goals and extra time. It was

two-two after 90 minutes, it went to extra time, then it was three-three in extra time. And then eight minutes from time, it's the Brazilian, Marcos

Leonardo with his second of the match that wins it for his team.

Incredible scenes as pep gladiola (ph) side go out of the tournament. And Al Hilal advanced against all the odds. Few would have seen that coming.

City now have a well-earned break after a long, hard season. Take a listen to one of their key players.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BERNARDO SILVA, MANCHESTER CITY MIDFIELDER: No one wanted to lose. No one wanted more and more vacations. We're very used to not having holidays. And

unfortunately, obviously, because the schedule is crazy. But when we are in a competition, we take it very seriously and we had a lot of ambition for

this club World Cup. So, we're very disappointed.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SNELL: Yes, huge statement of intent from Al Hilal as I've said. Remember, Saudi Arabia has the FIFA World Cup in the year 2034, and their players

will be absolutely basking in their triumph here. It's a massive global statement, Jim. Saudi Arabia has thrown billions of dollars at the

beautiful game, the sport of football, and this is a really, really big impact statement victory.

And their award is a matchup against the Brazilian team, Fluminense. So, we'll see how that one plays out, that one Friday in Orlando. Right back to

you.

SCIUTTO: Patrick Snell, thanks so much.

Well, it is the end of the line for the British Royal family strain. King Charles has decided to retire the train by 2027. The British monarchy has

used its own rail travel since 1842 when Queen Victoria rode in her very own carriage. Despite the Royal Train's storied history, operating costs

have started to rack up. The train was only used twice over the last financial year, and those two trips alone cost more than a hundred thousand

dollars.

The Royals have already begun using helicopters as a cheaper alternative, relatively cheaper with an average price of about $4,600 per trip.

[18:55:00]

In today's good brief, the long agonizing wait for BTS fans. Finally, the K-Pop super group announced, Tuesday, they are gearing up for a new album

as well as a world tour next year. The news comes as all seven band members wrap up their mandatory military service in South Korea.

It will be the first new music for the band in five years. The first live show since 2022. K-Pop has changed a lot since we last heard from BTS, but

their millions of fans have no fear. Their next chapter will be to quote a popular BTS song, "Dynamite."

Thanks so much for your company today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington. You've been watching "The Brief." Please do stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:00:00]

END