Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Cassie Ventura's Friend Testifies Against Sean Combs; Trump Eyes Weak Jobs Data, Decries Fed Chair Powell; U.S. Warns of Americans Abducted in Mexico After They Used Dating Apps. Aired 2:30-3p ET

Aired June 04, 2025 - 14:30   ET

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

[14:30:00]

ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: ... happened in 2016. That woman is Bryana Bongolan, who's a friend of Combs ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura. Moments ago she talked about how she still has nightmares about that balcony incident and also talked about the lawsuit that she has filed seeking $10 million.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: She told the jury that incident left her bruised and injured her neck and back. She's now the third witness to take the stand under an immunity order. Meantime we're awaiting key testimony from another Combs accuser who's using the pseudonym Jane.

She was expected to take the stand today but prosecutors now say that appears unlikely.

Alyse Adamson is a former federal prosecutor and joins us now live. So walk us through the importance of Bongolan's testimony for the prosecution's case.

ALYSE ADAMSON, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Yes, thanks Boris. This was shocking and damning testimony that came out today. The reason I say that is because Bryana Bongolan was not in a relationship with Sean Diddy Combs and if you recall the defense has really tried to frame their alternative narrative of what was happening with Cassie, between Cassie and Combs as toxic domestic violence.

But here we have another witness who was not romantically linked to Combs being violently abused and here she described herself as 5'1", 115 pounds, being dangled by Combs off a 17-story balcony.

I think it also goes directly to the RICO charge because it demonstrates that Combs was operating in a way that through threats, violence and abuse that goes to the corrupt enterprise aspect of the RICO. So lots of important elements to her testimony and if she holds up on cross, I think very significant for the prosecution team.

HILL: So cross-examination actually just beginning, so we'll see what comes of that. But she is testifying under immunity. Why do you think she would need immunity in this case?

ADAMSON: Erica, that's a great question. I was wondering that myself when she first took the stand to go ahead and invoke that fifth because nothing we had heard from the reporting really indicated that she was involved with a criminal activity. Of course she did testify that she had been doing ketamine for eight hours with Combs and Ventura, so it's possible that it is drug-related or perhaps it's something else that did not come out on direct that could have implicated her criminally.

Unlikely that she is implicated in Combs' crimes, but if she was involved in anything, attendant crimes like drug use or distribution, that could be a potential reason for invoking a fifth. And so I will be following closely to the cross to see if they bring that out. She was obviously very nervous about something.

SANCHEZ: Alyse, overall, given that we're a month now into this trial, how do you think the prosecution is doing so far?

ADAMSON: I think the prosecution is doing very well for a technically complicated case and a very unconventional RICO. They have had to connect the dots for a lot of these seemingly isolated incidents, which again the defense is framed as domestic violence and romantic intimate partner spats and weave them into a larger narrative of this corrupt enterprise.

I think the testimony of Mia was very significant in advancing that narrative, although I also understand that the defense did a very effective job on cross, casting doubt in front of the jury about the veracity of some of her testimony.

But they have also been doing a good job foundationally bringing out testimony from various assistants to demonstrate this was not Combs alone, but this was actually an enterprise. So I think that the prosecution has been bringing out and eliciting the evidence they need to prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. I think what's really going to turn this case is whether or not the jury finds all of the witnesses credible.

Because at the end of the day, this is not a document case like we see in others. The witnesses are going to need to be believed for the prosecution to secure a conviction here.

HILL: Alyse Adamson, appreciate it. Thank you.

Up next here, President Trump going on the attack following a weak jobs report, who he is blaming and whether that blame is actually well placed.

We'll dive in after this.

[14:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HILL: Brand new insight into the economy dropping just a short time ago. And when it did, President Trump instantly looked to blame Fed Chief Jay Powell. So the new report itself, it was dismal. There's no denying it. ADP's weekly number shows just 37,000 new private sector jobs in May. That is a two year low. You can see also what was forecast. There were over 100,000.

The president on social media quickly blaming Powell, as I noted, saying he should have cut interest rates. All this is the president's trade wars, roil the markets and world trade with new tariffs on steel and aluminum going into effect overnight.

Joining me now, contributing writer for The Atlantic, James Surowiecki. He's written about the business world for years. So good to have you with us.

Just to clarify a point here. So the president, in reaction to some of this data, seemingly calling on Jay Powell once again to lower interest rates. Would lower interest rates incentivize hiring?

JAMES SUROWIECKI, CONTRIBUTING WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: More investment, more borrowing. You know, if you think about, for instance, construction, theoretically with interest rates as high as they are in terms of mortgage rates, it might encourage that. So that's the basic idea.

I mean, interest rates are the essential tool the Fed has to try to spur the economy.

[14:40:00]

I think the big challenge for Powell is that -- well first of all, this is one report and the ADP report is not -- I don't want to get too wonky -- but the ADP report is not necessarily a perfect predictor of the actual jobs report that we'll get from the Department of Labor on Friday. So we should really wait until Friday to see exactly what's going to happen.

But, you know, Powell is now trying to weigh the, you know, strength of the economy. Unemployment is still around 4.2 percent. And then you have the tariff problem built on top of that, which Powell is concerned about in terms of its impact on inflation.

So he's trying to balance all these different things. And Trump, of course, is just saying, you're too late. You've got to raise interest rates. And he's using this very blunt tool.

HILL: So in terms of the tariff problem, as you put it, companies, right, some of them have been more clear than others. But I will say just about every economist I speak with, every financial expert I speak with in the last several weeks has been clear. The continued tariff uncertainty is making it very tough for companies to plan, right?

So that impacts not just investment in infrastructure, but it also impacts the investment in talent. Do you think we are actually at this point starting to see the full impact of tariffs when it comes to hiring?

I mean, will that even be evident in this jobs report that we're waiting on? SUROWIECKI: The only thing that was in the ADP report that I thought was suggestive of maybe the tariffs having some effect was the fact that small businesses actually lost jobs in the last month. And small businesses, although you don't think of them as necessarily really connected to the global economy, in the United States they really are. A lot of small businesses are built on imports from places like China, Vietnam, and the like.

And so it would not be surprising if the rising costs that they have seen as a result of these tariffs would actually be impacting their hiring.

I think the more important point is the one you made, though, which is that, you know, if you think about it, Trump imposed these massive tariffs. Then he rolled them back. Then he imposed these massive tariffs on China. He rolled them back. Then he, as of today, has doubled our steel and aluminum tariffs, which have a big impact on American manufacturers, because it raises the cost of steel and aluminum.

It is very hard for any company right now to plan the future. It's very hard to figure out how much inventory to keep, how much inventory to buy. Should they load up on inventory with the tariffs being cheap?

And that also affects, as you said, hiring. And so that, I think, is really where this endless back and forth that Trump is doing is really having an effect on the job market, and I would argue probably on the economy more generally.

HILL: Yes. James, really appreciate it. Thank you.

SUROWIECKI: Thank you.

HILL: A new travel warning to tell you about concerning Mexico. U.S. officials noting recent kidnappings of American tourists have been linked to dating apps. What you need to know if you plan on perhaps looking for love south of the border this summer.

[14:45:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HILL: A warning from the U.S. Embassy in Mexico. Officials say several American tourists have been kidnapped in recent months by people they met on dating apps. The embassy says the abductions have happened in two popular beach destinations, Puerto Vallarta and Nuevo Nayarit. But officials warn that this type of crime is not limited to one specific area.

That security alert goes on to say that quote, Victims and their family members in the United States have at times been extorted for large sums of money to secure their release.

Joining us now, retired FBI Special Agent Rob D'Amico. So, Rob, when you hear this guidance, I mean, what stood out to you in terms of that warning? Were you surprised at all that the consulate issued this? ROB D'AMICO, RETIRED FBI SPECIAL AGENT: No, I actually had a friend of mine's son that this happened to in Columbia. And it's a way to get people alone in a situation where they're, you know, they're visiting, they don't understand.

This one was that they got on the dating site. They came up with a woman that they're going to meet. And the woman said, oh, I'll pick you -- I'm Ubering to the bar. I'm going by your hotel. I'll pick you up. So when the gentleman got in the vehicle, they started driving and then came up to a light. Woman gets out. Three guys get in. The driver was not an Uber driver. He was part of the scam.

And they do try to end it quickly. They don't want to keep the person too long. So the demand will be $2,000, $5,000, $7,000, something they think that the family can get together real quick. And they'll ask you to send it like Venmo, Cash App, one of the quick ways to get money. And they can't do too high of an amount because sometimes those will be stopped.

HILL: Right, and that would raise a little bit more suspicion. What struck me is some of the guidance ultimately that was issued here is pretty similar, right, to what's been said for years when it comes to online dating, right?

Letting somebody know where you're going to be, especially if you're in a foreign place, you know, don't meet somebody in a busy area. What struck me is there wasn't a lot of why from the consulate behind the warning, examples like the one that you just offered. Do you think some of that is needed?

D'AMICO: I do. I think one, you should screenshot everything you're doing and send it to a person that you trust. I think when you first go to the date, if you actually meet them, take a picture of them and quickly send it off to somebody.

Because if they know you have a picture of one of the people that's involved and you send it off to somebody, then they may not want to do something because, wait, they have my picture.

[14:50:00]

I used to advise military wives that were home when their husbands were deployed, when someone comes to your door selling magazines, it's usually a front to look inside your house to see if they want to rob it and they would leave a check mark on the curb.

I say, take a picture of the person and they're going to ask why. Say, I just sent it to my husband or I sent it to a friend of mine who's a cop so they have your picture. Because that's going to make them think twice about doing something because you already have a photograph of who you're involved with.

Doing that, screenshots of everything, meeting in a public place, get your own transportation there. I tell my kids when they're traveling, I have them get an air tag so that when they take your phone, we can still track where you are until they find that air. Some other things like that all lend itself to protecting yourself.

All my kids have a distress word that if they say on the phone, I know they're in trouble. Even if they're talking normal, if they say this word, I know something is wrong and I'm going to start calling the embassy and I'm going to start calling people.

HILL: Yes, it's interesting. I mean, that's what I did when my kids started going to parties, right? When they just got into high school, no reason not to continue it.

Rob, really appreciate you joining us this afternoon. Thank you -- Boris.

D'AMICO: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: As more states consider banning fluoride from public drinking water, many of you have questions about it. And Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta is here to answer them, starting with Paula in Massachusetts.

She writes, quote, in our household, we use filtered water coming out of our refrigerator. Does that eliminate the fluoride in the water?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: So guys, this is one of the most common questions we got, the value of filters. And the short answer is that most filters are not going to filter out fluoride. Fluoride is a mineral and it dissolves in the water. So it's actually pretty hard to filter out.

There are two types of filtration systems that are pretty good at getting fluoride out. One is something called reverse osmosis. That's where you're actually forcing water through this membrane. And another type of filter is something known as distillation, where you're actually boiling water, then collecting that water vapor. Those techniques are pretty good at removing fluoride.

But again, keep in mind that in most places in the United States, fluoride levels are not high enough to be of concern. They're about half the level that would be of concern. If you're worried about it, you can call your water company, get something known as a consumer confidence report. They're required to provide you that. They can tell you fluoride levels.

You can also check out the CDC's website. They have a My Water Fluoride page. Look up your area and see how much fluoride is in your water.

See if we can get to a more questions here.

This is from Lucia in New York. If fluoride was removed from drinking water, would brushing with fluoridated toothpaste or rinsing with fluoridated mouthwash be enough to protect the teeth?

Short answer is yes. And this is really interesting because fluoridation in the water is considered a huge public health achievement. But at the same time, since about 50 years ago, 1975, we know the incremental benefit of fluoridating water has really gone down. Why is that?

Because dental care improved. Fluoridated toothpaste became more commonly used. So there's still benefit, obviously, to fluoridation in the water, but not nearly as much as there used to be.

So simply brushing your teeth. And you don't need much toothpaste. For kids under the age of three, just a rice grain amount size of toothpaste. That'll do. For adults, just a pea size amount of fluoridated toothpaste. And you want it to stick to your teeth, this fluoride.

So don't necessarily rinse right afterwards and don't eat for 10 to 15 minutes afterwards. You want to let that fluoride do the job and actually stick to the teeth and re-mineralize.

One more question.

Clarissa from Brooklyn. Does fluoride strengthen bones in the body as well as the teeth?

This is a really interesting question because when you look at this animation here, you get an idea of how fluoride works. Acid sort of demineralizes the teeth. Fluoride re-mineralizes the teeth, makes that teeth less likely to have a cavity. Does the same thing happen in bones?

And the answer is a little bit nuanced here. They compared two cities. Toronto, which fluoridates their water. Montreal, which does not. And what they found was that the bones of people who lived in Toronto did have more mineralization in them as a result of that fluoride compared to Montreal.

But importantly, that did not necessarily equate to more bone strength. In fact, there are more stress fractures in people living in Toronto versus Montreal, especially people who had really high levels of fluoride in their water. So it's a bit nuanced. It's a difficult thing to study.

But the same process of remineralization in the bone is good to a point. But once it gets too high, it can result in something known as skeletal fluorosis, which could actually make you more likely to develop stress fractures. So guys, hope that helps.

[14:55:04]

SANCHEZ: Dr. Sanjay Gupta, thank you so much.

When we come back, new details about President Trump's phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, the first known conversation between these two leaders since Ukraine's surprise attack this past weekend.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: A new threat in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Vladimir Putin telling President Trump over the phone that he will respond ... END