Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
CNN International: U.S. Supreme Court Allows Abortion Pill Access To Stand; U.S. And Ukraine To Sign 10-Year Security Agreement; Sources: G7 Expected To Announce $50B Loan To Ukraine. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired June 13, 2024 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN Breaking News.
RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN HOST: Hello, and welcome to our viewers from around the world. I'm Rahel Solomon live in New York.
I want to get straight to our breaking news this hour, a major setback for the anti-abortion movement. Moments ago, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that they are rejecting a bid by doctors and anti-abortion groups to restrict access to the abortion pill mifepristone. So, this means that the pills can remain on the market and be mailed to patients without an in-person doctor's visit. And this moment marks the first major ruling on reproductive rights since the court's conservative majority overturn Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Let's bring in CNN Justice Correspondent Jessica Schneider to help us understand the rule and break it down for us. Jessica.
JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Rahel, this is one of the big rulings we've been anticipating from the court, as we approach the end of the term here. And it really did, like you said, thrust the nine justices back into the center of this abortion debate two years after they overruled Roe v. Wade. But, this time, they are actually giving a somewhat inadvertent win to supporters of abortion rights.
So, the Supreme Court in this unanimous opinion, they're dismissing a lawsuit that was brought by anti-abortion doctors, that if the doctors had it their way, it would have severely restricted the availability of the abortion pill mifepristone. And of course, this is a drug that is used in more than half of all abortions nationwide. It's a drug that's become increasingly more widely used in the two years since abortion rights have really been restricted in many states around the country.
So, what the Supreme Court is saying in this decision, they're saying that this group of doctors that brought this lawsuit doesn't have the necessary legal standing. That means the legal right or the injury to bring this case. And the Supreme Court saying that's because the doctors themselves don't prescribe mifepristone and they don't use mifepristone. So, they just don't have the legal right to challenge the use of this pill.
Now, these doctors, they had brought this lawsuit on the basis that, in their view, the Federal Drug Administration did not have the ability to even approve this drug and didn't have the ability to make changes to the drug in recent years that made it more widely available, like via mail, via telehealth, and then also the fact that the rules were changed to allow women to use it up to 10 weeks of pregnancy instead of the previous seven.
So, Rahel, this is really a major win for abortion rights groups. But, what it doesn't do is close the door to future lawsuits against the FDA or against this pill. So, other groups who may be have the legal standing in this case, they may decide at some point in the future to bring a challenge, challenging or questioning the legality of mifepristone. But, for now, it will remain status quo for the pill, meaning it will remain widely available nationwide. So, that was a big case today.
Rahel, interestingly, we're still waiting for two dozen cases to be released in what we expect to be the next two weeks, before the end of June. That includes another case dealing with abortion rights and what emergency room doctors are able to do when it comes to women's health, and whether they can perform abortions without facing any legal consequences. Then, of course, there is the big one, whether or not former presidents, notably in this particular case, Donald Trump, whether they're immune from criminal prosecution for any action taken while in office, and that decision could really potentially upend the criminal case against Donald Trump here in Washington, or it could let it move forward as normal. So, we're waiting for that one as well.
SOLOMON: Jessica, it's a good point that that is the big one. But, this is also a big one, because as you laid out well there, this impacts so many people who use this type of pill to --
SCHNEIDER: Yes.
SOLOMON: -- facilitate their abortion. Break down for me, Jessica. How did this come down? Was this unanimous? Was there any dissent, and who wrote the opinion?
SCHNEIDER: Yeah. This opinion was written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He is one of Donald Trump's nominees. And Brett Kavanaugh actually was on the side of the justices who overruled Roe v Wade. In this case, though, Justice Kavanaugh wrote the opinion. All nine of the justices agreed with this opinion. And again, it's because it's really on a technicality here, saying that the doctors in this case, they didn't prescribe mifepristone. They really didn't have any direct stake in the outcome of what happened to mifepristone. Therefore, they couldn't even bring this case in the first place. So, it was a bit of a technicality.
Again, it does leave the door open for other lawsuits. It is interesting that the lower courts here never had any problem with the doctors and their standing or the fact that they had an injury. The lower court, the Texas judge, had ruled in favor of these, in these doctors. He had said that the mifepristone drug should be taken off the market.
[11:05:00]
Then it was the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that also ruled in favor of these doctors, didn't say the pills should be taken off the market, but that some of those recent changes, including letting people get it by mail, they were saying that that was an overstep by the FDA. But, what the Supreme Court did today, it maintains the status quo for this abortion pill until of course another group decides to bring about a lawsuit, and then we could go through all of this again, and we would see if that group might have standing enough --
SOLOMON: Right.
SCHNEIDER: -- for the Supreme Court to decide the issue at hand here, which is whether or not the FDA has the authority or had the authority to approve this drug, and then make some of those changes to it.
SOLOMON: And put another way, when you say standing, another group who might be able to prove more effectively that they themselves were injured by this procedure or by this law.
SCHNEIDER: Right.
SOLOMON: Jessica Schneider live for us there in Washington. Jessica, thank you.
Let's discuss this further, and for more insight, I want to bring in former federal prosecutor David Weinstein. David, just your first reaction to this news. It was a unanimous decision. All of the justices agreeing. Can you hear me, David?
DAVID WEINSTEIN, FORMER U.S. FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I can. I can.
SOLOMON: OK. All of the justices agreeing that this group did not have standing. So, why pick it up at all?
WEINSTEIN: Well, look, the thing that struck me, and Jessica just talked about it a little bit with you, Rahel, is that this was a technical opinion. It never got to the crux of the issue. They never got to women's rights. They never got to who could advocate on behalf of them. What they said was, the group that brought this lawsuit, they couldn't get into the courthouse because they had no right to object to this, and that's significant. And so, to me, there were a couple of things I draw out of this. It is a victory for women and their right to control what they do with their bodies, as well as what they choose to do medically. So, that is a victory. But, again, it was one of those technical issues.
What I did pull out of this is what Justice Kavanaugh wrote at the end of the opinion. What he said was, these people didn't have the standing, the legal right to come into court to challenge this. But, that won't prevent groups like this who have the right to object to this kind of an issue, to go talk to the legislature, to the FDA themselves, to the President, and seek their assistance in getting the regulation they want to get. So, that's one of the things I drew from this.
The other thing I drew from this, they relied a lot on precedent, and what prior courts had said about standing, and they went through three different ways that the people here who brought the original lawsuit could have achieved standing and they rejected all three, and chapter and verse cited back to why they didn't and what prior courts had decided. And Justice Thomas, in his concurring opinion, went on to say there was this alternative approach to standing. He wasn't so sure that that got them into court as well.
So, what that makes me think is, how will these justices, who just unanimously upheld precedent, prior decisions, standing issues, addressed the one remaining big case that's on their docket, and that's presidential immunity. Are they going to rely on standing? Are they going to carve out some new exception? So, those are the two things that stood out of today's decision (ph).
SOLOMON: Oh, that's a fascinating point. I actually do want to get back to mifepristone. But, let me just stick with that point there, David. Are you saying that you may be able to read in this decision how they may sort of lean in the presidential immunity decision based on the opinion, based on Brett Kavanaugh's opinion?
WEINSTEIN: I think we can. Look, we're all reading the tea leaves.
SOLOMON: Yeah.
WEINSTEIN: Nobody knows the outcome for sure. Nobody knows that, but the nine people who are writing the decision, and may have written it already. But, the fact that Justice Kavanaugh relied on precedent and standing and addressed a chapter and verse could give some insight as to how they might be struggling with this issue about presidential immunity. Because, remember, it's a narrow question. It relies on a lot of history in our Constitution on prior decisions. If they stick with that history and those prior decisions, they may be unwilling to expand presidential immunity as much as the former President had asked for.
On the other hand, we've seen them discard precedent and prior decisions. That's what happened when they overturned Roe v. Wade. So, this is an opinion issue today that reflects what the court is thinking today. Perhaps, it'll give us some insight as to what they're thinking on upcoming decisions.
SOLOMON: Well, we will certainly know within the next few weeks or so. David, let me just ask, for everyone watching at home, I mean, it sounds like to me everything remains the same.
[11:10:00]
Does this change anything in states where abortion is outlawed?
WEINSTEIN: It doesn't. The only thing it changes is the ability of women to obtain this particular drug or its generic equivalent without having to go see a doctor. Now, if your own state has regulations about things like this, then that's not going to change in your state. But, in those states where there are no regulations about the use of this particular drug, again, states' rights versus federal rights, status quo, everything remains the same. So, it is a victory for women and those people who advocate for women to have the right to decide what to do.
SOLOMON: David Weinstein, really good to have your insights today. I'm sure I'll talk to you again soon in the weeks to come. Thank you.
All right. Right now, leaders of some of the world's largest democracies are meeting in Italy. Just ahead, the major steps they are taking to support Ukraine in its war against Russia. Plus, Ukraine's security is the topic at the meeting of NATO defence ministers in Brussels. What the U.S. Secretary said about a newly approved tactic against Russia? Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOLOMON: All right. Now in Italy, world leaders are meeting for this year's G7 and the stakes are high. Ukraine's very survival may just depend on the decisions made at this summit. U.S. President Joe Biden is among the heads of state working to cement alliances and stand firm against Russia. A senior Biden administration official telling CNN that G7 members will sign off on a $50 billion infrastructure loan for Ukraine. That loan will be financed by the interest on frozen Russian assets.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a special guest at the summit, and he is expected to meet with President Biden to sign a 10- year security agreement between the two countries. Now, that deal will include the training of Ukraine's Armed Forces. Mr. Zelenskyy calling the security pact with the U.S. "unprecedented".
Let's get to CNN's International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson, who is in Italy for us. A very beautiful shot behind you, Nic. Talk to us a little bit about what this expected long-term security deal between the U.S. and Ukraine, what does this involve? What does it involve?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: They're not putting a financial finger on it. But, what President Zelenskyy wanted, and he wanted it from NATO last year, was that the NATO nations would treat Ukraine like they treat themselves. So, Article 5, an attack on one is an attack on all. Everyone comes to Ukraine's fast and immediate military support. Well, this is designed to be the next best thing, a series of bilateral agreements with the members of NATO.
Now, the United States is the 15th of the NATO nations to sign one of these with Ukraine. And it's important, obviously, the power, the influence of the United States or the weapons that it's giving as well. So, part of it, as you said there, will be the training of Ukrainian forces, a firm commitment.
[11:15:00]
Part of it also is a commitment that if Ukraine is attacked in the future, within 24 hours, the United States gets engaged, gets involved, starts discussing what can be done on top of that military support they've already been given. So, this is something that Ukraine wants to build on with those remaining 17 NATO nations, and that -- this is seen as something that could help push them. These other countries, yet to sign these bilateral security arrangements with Ukraine.
But, I think also the multilateral G7 loan, $50 billion loan for Ukraine, is hugely significant, not just because it the unique and unprecedented way it uses profits from frozen Russian assets to help fund that loan, but the idea is the loan is given by the end of this year and the principle of doing that this way means that Ukraine gets that $50 billion before there can be a change in presidency in the United States, if President Biden loses to, potentially to Donald Trump. So that's very important for Ukraine as well.
There is still some detail about how that deal gets worked out and how some of the financial mechanisms that support that loan are put together, but it's been signed off on at the top level. And the reason for that is speed. Get it done before the end of the year. Get the money in Ukraine's hands.
SOLOMON: Well, I mean, to that point, Nic, I mean, how much of this is about the politics of the moment, just sort of ensuring that there is some protection in place? In fact -- if in fact there is a different person in the White House come November, the American people should decide.
ROBERSTON: Yeah. And it's not just Ukraine that has this concern, because obviously, if the United States under a different President, and if it were President Trump, and if he carried through some of the things he had said, like, not giving financial support, military support, in the way that it is right now to Ukraine, or even pulling out of NATO, it's not just Ukraine that loses. The NATO feels that that would be a massive loss. The European Union would feel that sort of transatlantic weakening of the ties there as well.
So, the European Union, the other members of NATO, would be on the stump, really, to support Ukraine and help it get through the war with Russia as best they can. So, everyone at this meeting is worried. So, complex legal arrangements, the sort of things that are going into place around this loan are the best that they can hope for, as they have faced the uncertainty of the U.S. presidential election. I think you have to add to that as well. There were five other leaders around that table today, who also have somewhat uncertain political futures at the moment. The British Prime Minister expected to lose in his election, June 4. Power and political influence of President Macron could be curtailed if elections go against his party and the elections that he has called in France coming up, and so on and so forth.
It could be a very different look around the G7 table in a year's time.
SOLOMON: Yeah. I mean hard not to notice that the one person who seemed to be feeling pretty comfortable at that table was Giorgia Meloni, who is one of the few at that table whose party actually secured a victory recently.
Nic Robertson live for us there. Nic, thank you.
Let's turn now to CNN Global Affairs Analyst Kimberly Dozier. Always good to have you. So, let's actually pick up where Nic left off, the politics of the moment. Kim, how much of this and the urgency and the timeliness of this is about the politics, not just here in the U.S., but as Nic rightly pointed out there, in France, in the UK? I mean, how much of that is a factor here?
KIMBERLY DOZIER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, the leaders around that table are trying to both reassure Zelenskyy but also put in place some structures that any potential successors would have a hard time getting out of. The problem is, for instance, in the U.S. case, this defense pact, it's not a treaty. It's not approved by Congress. So, the next President, if it is a second term for President -- former President Donald Trump, then that means they could -- he could simply repeal it. But, by putting these promises and pledges in place, it's at least going to embarrass the administrations to come.
There is also, of course, the worry that after many parties in the European Union won in parliamentary elections, who are conservative to hard right-leaning and many of them are pro-Russia, that they too represent the sort of thin end of the wedge of the erosion of European support for Ukraine.
[11:20:00]
So, all in all, smiles all around but worries behind the scenes about what's to come.
SOLOMON: Talk to me about, not just the practicalities here, but the diplomacy here, the message that this is meant to send, the assurance that this is meant to send to Kyiv, but also perhaps a message this is meant to send to Moscow.
DOZIER: This is trying to message Moscow that the support is going to continue and that structures are being put in place to keep Ukraine empowered to fight back against Russia. The problem is, from Putin's standpoint, he is seeing a potential change in the U.S. presidency, potential change in France, in Germany, at least in France and the U.S., to parties and politicians who wanted to talk to Russia. The Marine Le Pen's party in France actually took money from Russia to win prior elections.
So, that all in all spells a future political environment where Putin could convince these various countries to strong-arm Ukraine into accepting some sort of a peace which forces Kyiv to give up parts of territory beyond Crimea, parts of territory recently gained. And that's just a bleak future, no matter what's going on around the table today in terms of taking some of the earnings from the seized Russian money to lend money to Ukraine.
SOLOMON: Yeah. And Kim, to that point, I mean, that's been such a thorny issue. I mean, world leaders have been talking about sort of what to do with these frozen assets, the legality, if you might, of seizing some of these assets. Who carries the risk if Ukraine perhaps can't pay back this loan, if Ukraine at some point in the future defaults on this loan? Is that clear?
DOZIER: It really isn't. But, ultimately, the G7 countries that decided on this policy bear the ultimate responsibility for paying it back. Look, I've just come from reporting trips to Estonia, in the Baltics, and also from Georgia and Armenia, in the caucuses, and met with various European officials who want to aid Ukraine, and many of them are frustrated because they wanted to actually take the actual seized assets and use those to pay for Ukraine's armaments, not to give Ukraine a $50 billion loan. And you also see the NATO Secretary General is calling for similar pledges of funding, roughly $50 billion a year, to keep Ukraine empowered to defend itself.
But, from -- various central bank leaders have pointed out that we're not sure this is -- this could set precedents in future. They're not sure of the international legality of this. So, this was deemed the safest way to access, just to get access to the interest on the seized and use that as a guarantor of a loan. But, it does leave Ukraine and the G7 with a big bill.
SOLOMON: Yeah. To that end. I mean, we are expected in a short time to hear from both President Biden and Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Kim, how much you're going to be and what specifically are you going to be listening for? I mean, obviously, the contours of this agreement have had been reported at this point. What are you going to be listening for?
DOZIER: Publicly, they're going to be celebrating this as a long-term agreement, just its message to any future occupant of the White House and to Moscow that this is a serious agreement and walking away from it would be a major black eye for the United States. But, I will be listening for, will Zelenskyy express some of the frustration that he has expressed over these past years at the slowness of the U.S. first approving certain weapons systems? Right now, they've said yes to another Patriot system. But, Zelenskyy says they need seven Patriot systems to repel Russian air attacks.
Is Zelenskyy going to put Biden on the spot in how the White House has been perceived to drag its feet and then put limitations on the weapons they finally give? Just giving Ukraine enough to, like a drowning man, just let them get a gulp of air before they drop back to meet the water.
SOLOMON: Yeah. What an image, and it's an interesting point, Kim, because we just heard the President, not long ago, apologize publicly for the slowness in Washington, sort of pointing out and calling out conservatives.
[11:25:00]
A lot to listen for. Kimberly Dozier, did you have a final comment?
DOZIER: Yeah. But, that was Biden blaming it on Congress, whereas what I heard, the earful I got from European officials is they're upset that the White House has been so risk averse, taking Putin's nuclear threat seriously, and not challenging them by letting Ukraine use the weapons it has got to hit it further inside Russian territory and stop the supply lines and stop the attacks. SOLOMON: Yeah. It is a distinction. Kimberly Dozier, thank you for
pointing that out.
OK. And while Ukraine's President is attending the G7 summit, NATO defence ministers are meeting in Brussels. Their gathering comes as the UN reports that last month marked the highest number of Ukrainian civilian casualties in nearly a year. The UN saying that over half of those numbers occurred in the Kharkiv region. Now, despite those figures, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said that he does not expect Russia's offensive in Kharkiv to make major gains. Two weeks ago, the White House gave Ukraine permission to strike inside Russian territory with American weapons.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LLOYD AUSTIN, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Ukraine requested permission to conduct counter-fire in the Kharkiv area using U.S. weapons. President Biden granted them permission to do that. And so, our policy in using long-range strike to -- capabilities to conduct strikes deep into Russia, that's not changed. So -- but, the ability to conduct counter-fire in this close fight in the Kharkiv region is what this is all about. And Ukrainians, my expectation is that they'll put that to good use.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOLOMON: Joining us from London now is CNN's Clare Sebastian. Clare, take us through the main takeaways out of the NATO meeting.
CLARE SEBASTIAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Rahel. We don't have the final conclusions yet from this meeting. But, it's clear that the backdrop here is the same as what they're grappling with at the G7, right, the concern over what political change potentially in Washington in November will mean for Ukraine aid going forward, and of course, concerns over what happened earlier this year, that six-month delay that was so damaging to Ukraine's fortunes on the frontline. That delay in terms of Congress agreeing to new U.S. aid.
So, to that end, NATO is discussing taking on a lead role when it comes to coordinating Ukrainian security assistance and training, potentially taking some of that responsibility away from the U.S.-led so-called Ramstein Contact Group, which has been leading that so far. That effort will come, says the NATO's Secretary General, with a financial commitment as well. So, we may get more details on the contours of that.
They're also getting into the finer details of what Ukraine needs. Air defenses are a key priority. No commitment yet from the U.S. on whether it could provide more Patriot batteries, which have proved so critical to Ukraine's defense, but are so sorely lacking at the moment. And of course, F-16s was also a big talking point. Those are on the horizon. The NATO Secretary General says that they are trying to fast track the training for that. But, crucially, given that we've been talking about using Western weapons to hit targets across the border in Russia, he was asked about this, and he said, look, Ukraine has the right to self-defense. If we don't allow them to do this, we're essentially asking them to defend themselves with one hand tied behind their back. So, he is not ruling out that F-16s could be used for the same purpose. Rahel.
SOLOMON: OK. Clare Sebastian live for us there in London. Clare, thanks so much.
All right. Coming up for us, a sweeping reform bill passes Argentina's Senate, as protests turn violent in the country's capital. That is coming up. And later, a proposed ceasefire in limbo. We will have the latest on the U.S. push for an end to Israel's war on Hamas in Gaza, when we come right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:30:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOLOMON: Welcome back. You're watching CNN Newsroom. I'm Rahel Solomon live in New York. And here are some of the international headlines we are watching for you today.
Let's begin in Greece, where authorities say that a pair of tourists are missing after going on separate hikes on two different islands. Take a look. This is 59-year-old American Albert Calibet. He went missing on Tuesday. Also lost, a 74-year-old Dutch tourist who went missing on Sunday. Emergency crews and volunteers searching for both men now, all of this as Greece faces a dangerous heatwave.
And Saudi Arabia also putting out warnings for extreme heat. Officials say that 1.5 million people have come to Mecca for the annual Muslim pilgrimage of Hajj. Now, the temperature there is expected to hit 48 degrees Celsius in the holy city or 118 degrees Fahrenheit. Pilgrims are being asked to use umbrellas and stay hydrated, while authorities, including army personnel and thousands of health and first aid volunteers, are ready to respond.
Now, to a massive fire that broke out at an oil depot in Iraq's Kurdistan region earlier today. Local reports say that the blaze began at an asphalt storage warehouse. An official says that one person was injured but he is now stable. Other workers experienced shortness of breath, but all are now safe.
And to Argentina now, where the Senate approved a sweeping reform bill, as protesters, as we can see in these videos, rallied outside, just outside of the National Congress, and they clashed with police in Buenos Aires before a Senate vote that really went down to the wire. Police say at least 27 people were arrested and three officers were hurt.
Stefano Pozzebon has more now.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STEFANO POZZEBON, JOURNALIST: The clashes outside the Argentinian Congress in Buenos Aires on Wednesday, were some of the fiercest in the last few years. The senators were debating and eventually they approved a sweeping reform bill from libertarian President Javier Milei. But, outside, anti-riot police employed water cannons and tear gas to disperse the crowd, while protesters threw rocks and other objects at the agents. At least one car belonging to a local television station was overturned and set on fire, while shops and road infrastructure in the vicinity of Congress were all heavily damaged. The fire was eventually controlled. And federal and local police made more than two dozens of arrests.
Milei was speaking at a right-wing conference, also in Buenos Aires, when the violence erupted. His office released a statement, accusing the protesters of terrorism and offer for maintain a coup. However, not everyone agreed with Milei's plan.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (Interpreted): Unfortunately, the President is doing things wrong. So, I want everyone, including the youth, to realize that things are going badly. And today, what has to happen must happen as it should. The law was not be passed.
POZZEBON: The bill eventually passed the Senate after 11 hours of debate and only very late on Wednesday night, because the Vice President, Victoria Villarruel, voted to break the tie. The reform bill, which includes a provision to grant the executive emergency powers to handle the severe economic crisis in the South American country for 12 months, will now go back to the chamber for further discussion. The clashes also continued very late into Wednesday night, a sign that tensions are still very high down in Buenos Aires.
For CNN, this is Stefano Pozzebon, Bogota.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SOLOMON: All right. With the ceasefire proposal for Gaza still in limbo, hostilities along Israel's northern border escalating after a fierce barrage of rockets from Lebanon.
[11:35:00]
The IDF says that 40 rockets were launched at Israel and the occupied Golan Heights today, igniting at least 10 fires. Hezbollah has claimed responsibility, saying that it targeted six Israeli military barracks in retaliation for the death of a Hezbollah commander in an Israeli strike. Now, the escalation comes amid an intense U.S. effort to secure a ceasefire for Gaza. Secretary of State Antony Blinken wrapping up a Mideast tour with no public commitments to the deal from either the Israeli government or Hamas.
Let's go now to Paula Hancocks. She is live for us in Jerusalem, and she spoke with the family of one of the Israeli hostages rescued over the weekend in Gaza to learn more about his terrifying ordeal. Paula, talk to us about the conversations you had and what they told you.
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. So, Rahel, I spoke to the father and brother of Andrey Kozlov. He is the Russian-Israeli citizen who was taken hostage on October 7. He was working security at the Nova Music Festival. His father was telling us how, from what he had heard from his son, it didn't appear as though his Hamas captors considered him as a human. That's not how they thought of him, saying that he had been detailing some of the mistreatment he'd undergone over the past eight months.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
HANCOCKS (voice-over): When the Israeli military launched Saturday's rescue mission in Gaza, one of the hostages thought they had come to kill him. Andrey Kozlov shanked (ph) his name in terror to the troops. His family says the Hamas guards told them for months, the sounds of war they were hearing were Israel trying to target them because they were causing trouble for the state. His brother Dmitry tells me he didn't understand why the IDF came. He was afraid they came to kill him. It took some time to realize they had come to rescue him. Psychological abuse coupled with frequent punishments marked Kozlov's captivity, according to his family.
They were trying not to leave marks, his brother says, because eventually, it is their reputation, but they would still punish him this way or the other. He has told us there were some moments he will never share with us, his father says. But, what he did share is that at the hottest time of the day, they would cover him in blankets. It's a difficult ordeal to be dehydrated through heat. Kozlov, 27-years- old, is a Russian citizen who moved to Israel almost two years ago. He was working as a security guard at the Nova Music Festival on October 7 when he was kidnapped and taken into Gaza. His parents flew from Russia Sunday for an emotional reunion, one they hadn't dared to hope for after eight long months.
This is the best scenario we could have hoped for, his father says. To see him alive, to feel his presence and to hug him, it is outstanding. His mother says we are infinitely happy to see him. He laughs. He jokes. He enjoys communicating with all of us, with his family, with doctors, with the people who surround him. His family says Kozlov was shocked when Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came to visit him and the three other hostages rescued while in hospital. As for those hostages still in Gaza, his father says a deal or a rescue, whatever it takes to get them out.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
HANCOCKS: Now, Kozlov has undergone the initial medical checks. He has since left hospital. We understand he was going to a hotel to be with his family. We did speak to the heads -- doctor of his medical treatment, in fact all of the hostages, those rescued last weekend and also those released last year, and he said that the journey back to recovery for these four will be particularly long, he said, when you compare it to those who were released back in November. They have been in captivity so much longer. So, he says the psychological damage that they will have to try and recover from is more significant. Rahel.
SOLOMON: Yeah. You think about the psychological scars of everything they witnessed, both October 7 and obviously in the months that followed.
Paula Hancocks live for us in Jerusalem. Paula, thank you. Still to come, we will take a closer look at the state of the U.S.
presidential race, the presumptive Republican nominee visiting key congressional allies today. Meanwhile, the Biden campaign wants voters to remember the day Capitol Hill became a crime scene, details ahead on the latest attack ad now airing in battleground states. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SOLOMON: Welcome back. You are looking at a live picture there on the sidelines of the G7 in Italy, as we see Giorgia Meloni there to the President's right. I believe that is President Joe Biden. This is a global infrastructure and investment event. So, we expect to hear from the President shortly. We'll wait to hear from that. But, of course, this is expected to be a pretty significant day, both in terms of announcements about Ukraine, the loan, the $50 billion roughly loan that is expected to be announced, and the contours of what that could look like as well as the security pact. We'll keep an eye on that.
In the meantime, for the first time since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee as well as a convicted felon, Donald Trump, meantime, is back in Washington, D.C. Right now, the U.S. President -- the former U.S. President is meeting with House Republicans and will later speak with Senate Republicans. Now, these are closed meetings. But, we do expect to hear from Trump in just a couple of hours, around 1:30 p.m. Eastern.
I'm going to show you really quickly the scene earlier this morning. This is when he arrived at the Capitol Hill Club. While Trump is not expected to go inside the U.S. Capitol building, his appearance back on the Hill is happening, more than three years since the January 6 insurrection. While Trump meets with Republican lawmakers in Washington, his Republican and political rivals are seizing on this visit. Take a look at the latest attack ad from the Biden campaign, which spotlights Trump's role in the Capitol insurrection. Look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: On January 6, Donald Trump lit a fire in this country.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: 140 officers were injured. The siege lasted for seven hours.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SOLOMON: Now, the campaign recently announced Biden's endorsements from several January 6 police officers. Those officers are expected to show their support later this week in the battleground state of Wisconsin.
Our team is tracking these stories from all angles in Washington. Kevin Liptak is at the White House. But, first let's get to Alayna Treene, who is following Trump's meeting with congressional allies. Alayna, before I toss to you, a quick sort of caveat that if we start to hear the President speak at the G7 in Italy, we will cut to that. But, in the meantime, walk us through these meetings on Capitol Hill today and what we have seen so far.
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN REPORTER: Well, look, Rahel, these meetings are significant for all of the reasons you laid out. This is Donald Trump's first visit to Capitol Hill since the January 6 attack on the Capitol, since becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, and also his first time really meeting with a large group of lawmakers since his felony conviction in Manhattan. So, a very significant day for a number of reasons.
And look, when I talked to Donald Trump's team prior to today, they really said that their goal for these meetings was all about unity. They wanted to get the Republican Conference in the House as well as in the Senate, unified on a messaging strategy ahead of what is expected to be a very contentious few months leading up to the election. They also wanted to really start talking about policy and how Donald Trump could hit the ground running, if he were to reclaim the White House in November.
[11:45:00]
Now, according to our sources in the room, he had one of these meetings today. He already met with House Republicans. And we learned that he did talk about some policy. He did talk about some messaging. But, a lot of the meeting was Donald Trump ranting, and it kind of devolved into a chaotic sort of pep rally. And we know many of these House Republicans are fierce allies of Donald Trump. And so, we kind of heard a lot of the language that the former President even uses in his rallies on the campaign trail.
For example, at one point, he was talking about railing against really a lot of the Republicans who had voted to impeach him and boasting that many of them are no longer in office. He also talked about Nancy Pelosi sharing a rumor that was since debunked by Nancy Pelosi's family that one of Nancy Pelosi's daughters had claimed that in another life the two could have had a great romance.
So, a lot of interesting things in the room. He also brought up Taylor Swift and said -- criticized her support of Joe Biden, saying, why would she endorse this dope? These are all, according to sources in the room, again, but clearly, not exactly on message. However, we did learn that he did bring up one very serious policy issue and that is abortion. He told Republicans that they need to be careful in their messaging on this, that they shouldn't run away from the message, but also very much laid out that he stands by his position that he believes that abortion should be left to the states.
Now, of course, this is something that Donald Trump has very much struggled with and personally believes and continues to say privately that he thinks the issue of abortion is a political loser. So, I think it's very interesting that that is one of the policies that he brought up today. And of course, we're still waiting to see what will happen in the later meeting with Senate Republicans. That is expected to start around 12:30. And then, he is going to speak publicly after that. So, a lot more from Donald Trump and the Hill today.
SOLOMON: All right. Certainly, a lot more to watch. Alayna Treene live. Thank you.
Let me bring in Kevin Liptak now. Kevin, talk to us -- Kevin, actually, standby. I'm going to go to the President in Italy. Let's listen to what he has to say. Kevin, standby for me.
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: -- -- we make now are going to determine the course of our future for the next five or six decades. And I truly believe the infrastructure we're building with the investments we're making through PGI are going to help that set that course on a fundamentally stronger path than otherwise would be the case.
Just look at the progress we've made over the past -- over the last year. The Lobito Corridor in sub-Saharan Africa. We've mobilized $33 billion for clean energy projects, which will bring electricity -- clean electricity to 1.5 million families who had no access to it before. We've broken ground on a new data center in Ghana and announced another in Kenya. We're laying fiber-optic cables to support, secure and affordable and reliable connectivity. And we're developing the first railway line to extend from Angola to DRC, Zambia to the Indian Ocean. I think this is a gamechanger. I really do. That economy is going to have over two -- billions of people very shortly. And it really is a gamechanger.
We're already seeing goods that normally take up to 45 days to transport, now taking only 40 hours. And think of the transformative -- how transformative this is for trade, agribusiness, farming, food security as a whole.
I want to thank the Prime Minister, Meloni, for partnering with us and the EU on this project. I also want to thank President Kishida -- Prime Minister Kishida, I should say. I just demoted him. In April, we both came together with President Marcos to launch the Luzon Economic Corridor in the Philippines. It's happening in the Pacific as well. And already, we've mobilized capital for sectors that are critical to our future: clean energy, agriculture, semiconductors, and so much more.
All told, I'm proud to announce the United States has mobilized more than $60 billion in investments around the world thus far. That's double where we were last year. Now, we've still got a long way to go to close the infrastructure gap that holds too many countries back. But together, I think we're showing that democracies can deliver. This is an important moment to be able to do that. And the -- and when you're that -- when you focus on people, transparency, and high standards, on quality and sustainability, it doesn't inhibit investment. It attracts investment.
I got criticized at home for asking: When the federal government invests in something, does that discourage or encourage the private sector to invest? 96 percent of the people asked said it encourages investment, not discourages investment. It attracts investment. And people around this table are proving that, I would argue.
[11:50:00]
That includes Mr. Fink -- I call you Larry; I'm calling you Mr. Fink -- but we go back a long way -- BlackRock and Mr. Nadella of Microsoft, an outfit that we know well at home. Today, BlackRock and other partners are committing to invest at least $4 billion, $4 billion, toward infrastructure projects that align with our PGI priorities. And Microsoft recently announced $5 billion investment into digital infrastructure, including $1 billion for a data center in Kenya. That's a really big deal. This is because the G7 and our partners created opportunities for sound investments in infrastructure.
And we mobilized our own capital and created efficient ways to de-risk projects so the private sector could get on board more easily. And you are getting on board, and it's not just U.S. companies.
So, let me close with this. During the G7 summit, we're addressing a range of issues: clean energy, economic development, global security, food security, orderly migration, digital connectivity. And infrastructure is central to our progress across all these challenges, every one of them. I remember when I introduced the infrastructure bill at home, they said we couldn't get it done. It was only a trillion 300 billion dollars, but we got it passed. And it's really having an impact on development at home. But this is bigger than that, in a sense. It's -- we're talking about the world.
So, today, we began PGI's third year. And I would strongly hope we can keep up the momentum. Let's keep finding opportunities to invest in quality physical, digital, and energy infrastructure. Let's keep partnering with each other and the private sector, with the World Bank, with countries around the world to mobilize even more capital. To go from billions, we have to get to the trillions that are needed, and that's what's going to be needed to close this infrastructure gap. And at this inflection point, let's keep forging a better future together, because I'm confident we can do it. I know I get accused of being overly optimistic, but I am confident this could be a significant, significant breakthrough.
And I thank you again for your partnership, your leadership. And, with that, Giorgia, I turn it back to you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you very much, Joe. Now, I give the floor to the Prime Minister of Japan, Fumio Kishida. Fumio.
SOLOMON: All right. You've just been listening to U.S. President Joe Biden speaking there at the G7 meetings in Italy. A few things and takeaways from what we just heard there. He only spoke for a few minutes. But, he talked about the $33 billion mobilized for clean energy projects. He talked about all the infrastructure investments, some, of course, within the continent of Africa, the impact to trade, farming, food security. He said that we've mobilized more than $60 billion, double last year.
And Kevin Liptak, let me bring you back into the conversation. And after sort of outlining some of those measures, this is the part that got my attention, Kevin. It shows that democracies can deliver. This is an important moment to do that. What were your takeaways here?
KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yeah. Yeah. And the subtext of all of this is this group that the President is assembling here, it's called the Partnership for Global Infrastructure. He created it earlier in his term. Back then, it was called Build Back Better World. They changed the name around. But, the real goal of it at the end of the day is to counter China, is to counter China's own infrastructure investments in the developing world through its Belt and Road Initiative. The United States sees those projects as saddling developing countries with Chinese debt that they oftentimes aren't able to dig themselves out of.
And what President Biden is trying to do with his own initiative is to provide a better partner, in his view, better terms on these loans, bringing in the private sector. And you saw him there with the CEOs of BlackRock and Microsoft, trying to emphasize that America can be a better partner on some of these projects. The U.S. has gotten some of them off the ground. For example, in Kenya, they are trying to build a major rail corridor from the Middle East, through up into Europe. And so, the U.S. really trying to show that it can be a partner for the developing world at a moment when Beijing is making very, very heavy investments in these places, and the President trying to emphasize that the U.S., through its private sector partnerships, can do that as well.
SOLOMON: And Kevin, you lay out a really interesting point there that the message is to counter Chinese influence in the continent of Africa. I wonder also, though, was there any messaging you think to a domestic audience? The reason why I mentioned that is because, as you pointed out, he did mention the BlackRock CEO Larry Fink. He did mention the Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella on the same day that his opponent, former President Donald Trump, is meeting with a business roundtable, a slew of American CEOs.
[11:55:00]
LIPTAK: Yeah. I think that's right. And I think President Biden's goal in this is showing the world that he does have a pro-business sort of attitude, particularly when it comes to trying to bring together the private sector with the needs in the developing world. I think the other thing that was important that he said was, as you mentioned, democracy can deliver. He is saying that at a very critical moment. He along with so many other leaders at the G7 facing their own political vulnerabilities. And his goal and his message at this event and throughout this summit is to try and show that he does have a strong democratic message.
SOLOMON: Yeah. So, in those short comments, there was an international message. There was a domestic message. Kevin Liptak live for us at the White House. Kevin, thank you.
LIPTAK: Sure.
SOLOMON: And we know your time is money. So, thank you for spending some time with me today. I'm Rahel Solomon live in New York. Stick with CNN. One World is coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
