Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Saudi Arabia Must Join Abraham Accords for Nuclear Deal; Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) is Interviewed about the Nuclear Deal; FDA Considers Lifting Ban on Peptides; Gig Companies See Spike in Workers on SNAP and Medicaid; Colorado River at Dangerous Turning Point; Teen Drops Social Media Lawsuit. Aired 8:30-9a ET

Aired July 23, 2026 - 08:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:31:03]

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: All right, got some breaking news. President Trump just posting about some new details a few minutes ago about the potential deal with Saudi Arabia on nuclear capabilities. President Trump approved a nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia yesterday that could lead to the kingdom enriching its own fuel for civilian reactors and bypassing international nuclear watchdogs.

Betsy Klein, joining me right now from the White House.

This tweet has a lot -- or this Truth Social has a lot of little bits of information. None of us publicly have seen this actual deal. What are you learning from what the president is saying right now?

BETSY KLEIN, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Well, Sara, there are a lot of questions for the White House right now, but the president appears to be placing a major new condition on Saudi Arabia for this nuclear deal that they unveiled just yesterday. This was a major win for Saudi Arabia. It was signed by Energy Secretary Chris Wright and his Saudi counterpart just yesterday evening. And the president had formally approved this deal that would allow Saudi Arabia to have a civilian nuclear program. And this could lead the kingdom, as you said, to enriching -- being able to enrich its own fuel for civilian reactors.

Now, the deal would last 30 years. It was expected to generate tens of billions of dollars. And the president now says that in order for this to happen, the country must join the Abraham Accords. The president saying in this new post to social media, quote, "the civil nuclear deal being made between the United States Department of Energy and Saudi Arabia, which pertains only to nonmilitary use, such as the ones that Iran and UAE and others already have, will be approved, but is totally subject to Saudi Arabia joining the very respected and successful Abraham Accords. The United States," he says, "is not opposed to civil nuclear facilities."

Now, historically, Saudi Arabia has largely been resistant to efforts to join the Abraham Accords. That, of course, is that agreement made in the president's first term and bolstered in his second term for countries to establish diplomatic ties with Israel. And it's unclear what impact this post is going to have. I've asked the White House if this will pause this agreement. We've also reached out to Saudi Arabia's embassy here for clarity on what this might mean going forward.

But this has already sparked criticism from Israeli officials, as well as what's expected to be a bit of a fight on Capitol Hill. They are, in Congress, going to have a review of this agreement in the coming weeks. It is possible that it faces a disapproval resolution that could block it from ultimately going forward. So, we'll have to see how this plays out.

But again, the president placing this new condition on Saudi Arabia very unexpectedly, Sara.

SIDNER: Yes, no one had heard that the Abraham Accords were paramount in this going through. They did sign a deal yesterday. There is definitely confusion that has been caused by what the president just posted.

Betsy Klein, I know you're watching all of it. Thank you so much for your reporting,

Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Let's talk to one of the members of Congress who would be taking this on, is joining us right now, is Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Senator, from what you now read from the president on this new condition and what he's saying this morning, does this make you more comfortable with this nuclear deal?

SEN. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN (D-MD): Hi, Kate.

As you reported, we still haven't seen any of the fine print on this proposal. I've said for years that I would not support a nuclear deal that did not have adequate safeguards in place. In fact, the highest standards, called the gold standard, to prevent the diversion of nuclear material for military purposes. I have no idea whether that's actually in the fine print here.

I'd also be surprised if the Saudis agreed to enter into the Abraham Accords at this point in time. They'd said -- they've said repeatedly that a condition of joining the Abraham Accords would be a clear path toward a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace with security for both Palestinians and Israelis.

[08:35:06]

They've not indicated they're changing that position, but we'll see.

BOLDUAN: To your -- to that point, though, you have -- the president has to understand that. This has been something that he's been working on and people around have been working on. His son-in-law has been leading the effort for quite some time. I'm curious what you think of the fact that he's now announcing this new condition with the understanding that it could potentially spike the whole thing.

VAN HOLLEN: Kate, you're exactly right. I mean only the Saudis can tell us whether or not this is a deal breaker or not. When the president unveiled this or put forward the idea just yesterday, the last two days, that was not part of the deal. And so, the big question, as you say, is whether or not the Saudis are going to accept that condition. It would violate the principles that they've laid out in the past regarding joining the Abraham Accords.

And, of course, there is also this issue that I mentioned about whether or not the gold standard would apply to prevent any diversion for nuclear weapons purposes.

BOLDUAN: Yes, I -- and, look, I think what we can all see here and we get -- the thing that's important here is that you would need to see the fine print. This comes before Congress for some kind of disapproval, look at, if you will, and you -- very clearly that has not been transmitted to a senior member of the Senate quite yet. The president saying, in a parenthetical, there will be no enrichment of material. But I think that's a long way -- there's a lot of distance there between laying out that the gold standard would be included in any of the print, fine or large print. So, much more to come on this.

Let me ask you also, because today is another -- kind of --

VAN HOLLEN: Well, that's right, Kate. Let me, really quickly, just --

BOLDUAN: Go ahead.

VAN HOLLEN: Well, I just want people to know, yes, this would be subject to what's called a joint resolution of disapproval. It would be an up or down vote. A take it or leave it vote on the Senate, on the -- on the president's proposal. So, there's no opportunity to amend it. So, whatever is in the president's proposal is what Congress will act on, yes or no.

BOLDUAN: Let's say it could be linked to this as well. Senate Democrats are forcing a vote today on your war powers resolution regarding the Iran War. A symbolic measure pushing to end the Iran War. Congress passed a war powers resolution, though, at the end of June. Why vote again, Senator?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, that was a concurrent resolution. You're right, the House and the Senate both adopted it. It does not -- that one did not go to the president for signature or a veto. And that is the law of the land.

But what we have, Kate, is a president who has no respect, no respect for our Constitution, no respect for our laws. So, I do think it's very important, especially as we now see more American service men -- members killed, oil prices spiking again, looking close to $100 a barrel again, the American people paying a huge cost for this senseless war, that every member of the Senate should be held accountable on where they stand and tell their constituents whether they want to end this war now, which is what we should do, or whether they want to keep on with this seemingly endless war at this point.

BOLDUAN: One thing we do know is, at the very same time, the white -- the administration is asking for more money to fund the war. And the House yesterday passed billions and billions of additional dollars that the White House was looking for to -- for war funding.

One of the Republicans who actually broke ranks and voted with Democrats on the war powers resolution previously is Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick. And he described kind of his struggle with this war funding vote. He described it this way, "I want to pay the troops. I do not want to support the war." He ended up voting for this measure yesterday. Do you understand his struggle here?

VAN HOLLEN: Well, the best way to help the troops is to end the war. And that means making sure there's no more funding for this illegal war. So, if you really want to end the war, you shouldn't be voting to provide money to fuel an endless war. We had Secretary Hegseth before the Appropriations Committee the other day. It was clear he doesn't know what the mission is, and they've been making this up as they go. And that's a very dangerous place for our country to be in. So, we should end the war and we should not provide funding to fuel it.

BOLDUAN: Quite a bit going on right now.

Senator, thank you for your time. Appreciate it.

BOLDUAN: Sara.

SIDNER: All right, starting today, the FDA is holding a two-day meeting of outside advisers to consider whether compounding pharmacies should be able to dispense popular peptides. You probably heard a lot lately about peptides.

[08:40:00]

They essentially are supposed to help your body work. And people are increasingly taking them for things like better skin, quicker muscle recovery, weight loss. The FDA is looking at whether some peptides could move closer to mainstream medical practice or remain largely outside of it.

CNN chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta has more on this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR., HHS SECRETARY: I'm a big fan of peptides. I've used them myself.

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice over): Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Trump's health secretary, is embracing peptides. And he isn't alone. The global market is projected to more than double by 2034.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Peptides. You want to know more about peptides? Look at my stash.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If you're curious about peptides, but have no idea where to start, then this one is for you.

GUPTA (voice over): Let's start with the basics. Our bodies have 20 fundamental amino acids. When they combine in short chains, they form peptides. For instance, this one is KPV.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's talk about KPV.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: KPV, the queen of anti-inflammation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: KPV, day three.

GUPTA (voice over): Peptides help regulate different functions in the body, and synthetic versions are promising everything, from building muscle to more youthful skin. In the United States, some peptides are approved by the Food and Drug Administration, like insulin and semaglutide. That's the peptide in Ozempic. But many more are not FDA approved, and they have not been proven safe or effective, including this list of 17 peptides. Until recently, people could still get these through compounding pharmacies, which made them from raw ingredients. But three years ago, the FDA banned them, citing significant safety concerns, including the risk of life-threatening allergic reactions. But that hardly made a dent in the demand. Peptides that were banned by the FDA were still widely bought and used, mostly through unregulated markets. They skirted the rules by labeling the peptides for research use only. And now Secretary Kennedy wants to lift that ban.

KENNEDY: The compounding pharmacies are getting those peptides from FDA-inspected facilities. And some of them in India and China. But they were the same one that the pharmaceutical industries are buying them. And we inspect those. So, you know you're getting a good product. You know, you're getting what you bought, what you -- what was advertised. With the gray market, you have no idea.

GUPTA (voice over): This week, an FDA advisory panel is discussing reversing the ban on seven peptides. That's even after an agency review already said the evidence does not justify letting pharmacies make any of them. Kennedy, he disagrees.

KENNEDY: You look for a safety signal. And if there is one, then you move it. But if there's not one, then you don't.

GUPTA: (voice over): Critics warn that would essentially reverse decades of how we approve drugs in the United States.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GUPTA (on camera): I've got to tell you, Sara, this --

SIDNER: Wow. Sanjay is here with us.

GUPTA: Yes, and I've got to tell you, Sara, this is probably just as much about peptides as it is about how the FDA is actually going to work, Sara, going forward. So, as you heard, you know, in the past, there was an FDA advisory committee, mostly made up of researchers and academics who cited all these concerns, not enough evidence that it works and safety concerns. And now that committee has largely been replaced by people who prescribe, promote and produce peptides. So, we're going to see what they say.

Look, you know, supporters of this, Sara, I will tell you, they're basically saying, look, people are already taking these peptides. So, why don't we try and create as safe a structure as possible for them to get those peptides? Critics will say there's no data, there's no safety data, or there's concerning safety data, no data that these work. That's the problem.

SIDNER: Yes, and just to be clear, it's all over social media.

GUPTA: Yes.

SIDNER: I mean, if you look anything to do with health, it shows up constantly. And I do find it really fascinating that people will take these things but they were scared to take Covid, but they will literally find something that they see online and they will inject it into themselves, not knowing what the science is behind it, but they're listening to influencers. There's a lot of issues here, Sanjay.

GUPTA: Yes, I mean --

SIDNER: And is there anything that shows that they're effective? Like, have there been studies that show that, you know --

GUPTA: No, I mean we really investigated this. And this is remarkable. Hundreds of millions of posts on social media, as you -- as you say. But if you look at the data, it's almost entirely either animal data, laboratory data or data that basically is what's called open label, meaning the person knows that they're getting a peptide and that they say it works. It's not placebo controlled. So, this would never be data that would actually typically warrant an FDA approval of some sort. And I think that's what makes this so interesting.

I will say that this is an advisory committee meeting hearing today. They're going to talk about several different peptides over the next couple of days. It's not binding. The FDA ultimately will still decide what to do with all this.

[08:45:02]

SIDNER: Yes, there's a lot to learn about this. Dr. Sanjay Gupta, I'm glad you're here helping us to understand it. Appreciate you.

John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, so a new federal report shows the number of Amazon and other gig company workers, that includes Uber, DoorDash, places like that, the employees, there's a large number of them who are on SNAP and Medicaid, that that number really has surged over the last few years. Again, these are employees of big companies or workers at big companies still getting federal assistance.

CNN's senior business reporter David Goldman is here with the details on this.

So, David, what are you learning here?

DAVID GOLDMAN, CNN BUSINESS SENIOR REPORTER: Well, there's a bargain in this country, right, where you do hard work and you get paid and you can feed your family, but it looks like that bargain hasn't been held up by the corporations that are paying a bunch of employees. In fact, these are some of the largest corporations in the country. You mentioned Uber and Lyft and, you know, gig work has always been kind of a tricky one. But then there's also Amazon on this list and Walmart.

So, what happened was there's a Government Accountability Office report that Senator Bernie Sanders wanted done. And it looked at 11 different states and the employees that were receiving SNAP benefits, food stamp benefits, and Medicaid on those -- in those states. What they found is that two-thirds of employees that were receiving those benefits were doing full-time work.

And "The Washington Post" did a really interesting analysis of this, and they said, well, Amazon's on that list, and Walmart's on that list. In fact, Amazon employees, the number of employees on these emergency benefits tripled since the last report, which was over a decade ago.

So, what you see here is that, well, you know, you can do hard work. You can do full-time work and still make less than $42,000 a year for a family of four and qualify for SNAP benefits and Medicaid. Amazon says this isn't a fair assessment because, you know, this is a giant corporation. And, of course, we're going to be on any list because we employ so many people.

But again, you know, if you do the work, then if you can't afford to feed your family without emergency benefits, then I think a lot of people would say something's wrong here.

BERMAN: Yes. Again, it's sort of like the American bargain. If you are doing full-time work, if you have a full-time job, one thinks that you should be able to afford to live, you know, at a bare minimum lifestyle.

GOLDMAN: You would hope.

BERMAN: David Goldman, thank you for this update. Appreciate it.

GOLDMAN: Thank you.

BERMAN: Sara.

SIDNER: All right, thank you, John.

Experts are weighing in on the unprecedented A.I. breach by OpenAI after two of its test models went rogue and escaped their controls during testing and hacked into another A.I. company's production servers. Earlier, I spoke to A.I. expert Dave Kasten.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVE KASTEN, HEAD OF POLICY, PALISADE RESEARCH: We're lucky that OpenAI decided to disclose this. They did so voluntarily. There's probably no law that required that they do so.

The unfortunate truth is that right now we don't have technical solutions that can guarantee that a model will never do this. What we need is we need the, one, requirements to make sure that companies are required to report this when it does happen. And, second, we need to have more proactive vetting of the entire development process.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: He said it revealed a really dangerous thing that happened there. The company that was hacked, called Hugging Face, says they are working with OpenAI to solve the security flaws that the model exploited.

All right ahead this morning, major concerns after two of the nation's most important water reservoirs dropped to historically low levels.

And your friendly neighborhood spider-man caught on camera stopping traffic to do his best and save a man.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:52:44]

BOLDUAN: New this morning, the Colorado River crisis is reaching a dangerous turning point right now. The combined water levels in two of the biggest reservoirs in the country, Lake Powell and Lake Mead, have dropped to alarming new lows. And there's a new analysis showing that they haven't been this low since 1957, which is really prompting dire threats and warnings from experts.

Bill Weir has been tracking this one for a long time, and now we have this.

BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: It's a slow motion disaster, but it's getting really acute right now because it was a miserable snow year. The winter was really bad.

BOLDUAN: Oh, right, right, right.

WEIR: And that's the water tower of the American southwest, the Colorado River. The snow in the Rockies melts, goes downstream. Seven states and Mexico share that. Right now, look at these numbers, Lake Powell, you got to think of Lake Powell and Lake Mead as two big reservoirs, two water storage tanks connected by the Grand Canyon. Lake Powell, 23 percent full. Lake Mead, 27 percent full.

What is at risk right now? Well, you got drinking water for 40 million people and their animals. You've got hydropower for 700,000 homes. And then you've got five million acres of farmland that gets irrigated all out of that same water.

And what's -- what are people talking about these days? Data centers, which take a lot of what, water and power. That adds added pressure to this. And why is it happening right now? Hotter temperatures as a result of climate change, prolonged drought. They're in a 25-year drought, a little bit longer than that. And as I mentioned, the low snowpack before.

Now, look at these pictures. This -- I was out there in recent years sort of covering what has happened.

BOLDUAN: Oh, man.

WEIR: You look at the brochures. That's what has happened to Lake Powell there. This used to be a boater's paradise in the desert, but it has shrunk so much that these docks are becoming unusable. What was once a level dock, where you stepped off the land onto the water, you now have to take a ramp down 30, 40, 50 feet. And that is, you know, bad for recreation.

But the main concern here is drinking water and how this is divided up. And since 1922, when the first Colorado River compact was settled in these seven states on how to divvy it up, it was one of the wettest years ever. So, it's been over allocated. States are loath to give up their share.

BOLDUAN: Of course.

WEIR: Lower basin states like Nevada have done a good job about conserving water, like ripping up lawns in the desert and really conserving it.

[08:55:01]

They want other states to do the same. A lot of tension. They've all blew past the federal deadline in February to come up with a new plan. So, nobody knows what happens next.

BOLDUAN: I am afraid to ask, but what is a worst-case scenario here? I mean, if we go from 27 and 23 to less, I don't even know what happens.

WEIR: So, at a certain point, it can no longer generate electricity. And the dam is -- essentially becomes a dead pool. So, you can release a little bit of water, but the Colorado River would dry up entirely next summer if this happens, if we reach these warnings.

BOLDUAN: That would be insane.

WEIR: Exactly. And that's the worst case. And then it adds all this pressure to the infrastructure.

BOLDUAN: Yes.

WEIR: You know. There's this -- there's strange pressures that happen when there's not enough water flowing through there. So, that's billions in repairs coming out of this. This is a major, major problem.

And because most people, they turn on the tap, water comes out, they don't think about it.

BOLDUAN: Not their problem.

WEIR: They're asked to conserve. Maybe don't wash your car on a hot day. But this is -- this is a ticking time bomb.

BOLDUAN: The people who are really seeing it very quickly are farmers.

WEIR: Totally.

BOLDUAN: When you, like -- now you add this on to farmers out west and agriculture is already under strain, it's like they are -- it's almost like they're a bit of a canary in the coal mine about what they're up against.

It's good to see you.

WEIR: And they're taking it on all sides.

BOLDUAN: Literally.

WEIR: Tariffs (INAUDIBLE).

BOLDUAN: Literally.

WEIR: Yes.

BOLDUAN: Thank you, Bill.

WEIR: My pleasure.

BOLDUAN: My goodness.

Sara.

SIDNER: Bill, you're freaking me out.

WEIR: Sorry.

SIDNER: Gee.

BOLDUAN: That's his -- chief freak out correspondent.

WEIR: That's my job.

SIDNER: That's -- wow. All right, I'm thinking about that and also wanting you to see this.

On our radar, a good lesson that road rage might get you arrested or might get you killed, but it's certainly taking you nowhere. Gwinnett County Police in Georgia posting this video captured by a motorcyclist. A driver yelled at him, then pulled out a gun. That crystal clear video led police right to the driver and they arrested him at his job.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The person that is claiming that you pointed a gun at them was riding a motorcycle.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. And they had a camera on their helmet.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Ringing any bells?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Nope.

That does ring a bell, but I don't see no gun.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SIDNER: That does ring a bell when you have the video showing you did it. The man was charged with aggravated assault.

All right, a real-life spider man jumped into action in Arkansas. The masked hero got out of his Jeep and ran to help a man who was in a wheelchair, struggling to cross the road as the light had already turned green. Police posted the video online. They just wanted to thank Spidey, right? That was so cool. He jumped back into that Jeep, by the way, and everybody was happy.

If you are afraid of heights, look away. A 30-year-old Australian daredevil sets a new world record on a bicycle 3,000 feet in the air. He's now the first person in the world to ride off a hot air balloon, perform multiple front flips at an altitude of 950 meters, and then skydive to safety. And to that I say, why?

John.

BERMAN: Yes, it seems like all those skills are applicable in everyday life, right? Because you find yourself often riding a bike on a hot air balloon.

SIDNER: On a balloon.

BERMAN: Thank you very much for that, Sara.

All right, new this morning, a teenager has dropped his lawsuit against Meta days before the trial was set to begin. He accused the company, along with TikTok, YouTube and Snap of creating addictive and harmful social media features. These cases are really important to set precedent.

CNN business tech reporter Clare Duffy has been following this.

So, talk to us about this case and where it fits. CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS TECH REPORTER: Yes, John, another major

case, another major trial that Meta won't have to face here. So, certainly a win for the company, although, as you said, there are hundreds more of these cases.

This Florida teenager, who is going by his initials RKC, sued these four companies alleging that their addictive features led him to sleep deprivation, suicidal thoughts, other mental health challenges. In recent weeks, he had settled with Snap, YouTube and TikTok. And the trial was set to start with jury selection on Monday in Los Angeles. But yesterday he dropped his case against Meta.

Meta is claiming this as a win. In a statement, the company said, "these claims never held up and this outcome makes clear that we will not back away from defending ourselves against baseless lawsuits."

His lawyers also framed this as a win, saying that he had had success with these other companies and wanted to move on with his life. In a statement they said, "he's ready to close this chapter and focus on his recovery and engage in therapy as he aspires to have a normal life."

And, John, this was set to be the second bellwether trial in hundreds of these similar cases brought by individuals against the four companies. Of course, after the major win against Meta and YouTube back in March. And so certainly a win for Meta. But the company, in addition to that March loss, also was found liable by a New Mexico jury back in March for failing to protect children from sexual exploitation on the platform. Ordered to pay $375 million in that case.

[09:00:02]

There is also an ongoing trial in Tennessee in a case brought against Meta by the state attorney general related to these similar addiction claims.