Return to Transcripts main page

Erin Burnett Outfront

Trump Shifts Strategy After Major Defeat On Birthright Citizenship; Trump Discloses He Made $1+ Billion From Crypto Ventures In 2025; GOP Representative Returns To Congress After Mystery Absence, 142 Missed Votes; Ukraine Launches Massive Attack On Moscow. Aired 7- 8p ET

Aired June 30, 2026 - 19:00   ET

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

[19:00:22]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:

Breaking news, Trump trying to take matters into his own hands after a punishing defeat by the Supreme Court. But his plan B on birthright citizenship is going nowhere fast.

Plus, breaking news, Trump's massive windfall. We look through the president's 900-page financial disclosure report just came out. Wait until you hear how much he has made from crypto alone.

And the Republican congressman who vanished from Congress is speaking out about his four-month absence and depression diagnosis. But his Democratic opponent tonight is not shying away from calling him out for being absent. She's our guest.

Let's go OUTFRONT.

(MUSIC)

BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett.

And OUTFRONT tonight, Trump's plan B. The president reeling from the Supreme Court's ruling against his attempt to end birthright citizenship, and he's now turning to Congress, which is a desperate move that seems to be going nowhere and nowhere fast. Trump trying to shame anyone against his position on birthright citizenship, writing, "I would like to congratulate President Xi and the great country of China on their massive birthright citizenship win."

Trump arguing that people from countries like China traveled to the U.S. to give birth just to game the system, exploiting the constitutional right to citizenship. And the president this hour is directing U.S. attorneys to prioritize investigations into birth tourism schemes.

However, this ruling is a big blow to Trump. One of the biggest defeats, in fact, that he has suffered at the hands of this Supreme Court, full of justices he's appointed, because birthright citizenship is a defining issue for Trump. He signed an executive order to remove the constitutional right on the first day he returned to office. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This next order relates to the definition of birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment of the United States.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: That's a good one. Birthright. That's a big one.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: And when the case went to the Supreme Court, Trump became the first sitting president to actually ever attend arguments at the high court, which is significant in and of itself.

In fact, long before the case ever got to the Supreme Court, Trump had talked about it for more than a decade.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)

TRUMP: Birthright citizenship, it's over. Not going to happen.

We will end, finally, birthright citizenship.

We are looking at birthright citizenship very seriously.

I will sign a day one -- on day one, executive order ending automatic citizenship for the children of illegal aliens.

I signed an order that will end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal aliens.

Birthright citizens, a big deal.

(END VIDEO CLIPS)

BURNETT: But in a 6-3 vote, the justices ruled against Trump's efforts. Chief Justice John Roberts writing, "The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to every freeborn person in this land. We keep that promise today."

So now, faced with that rebuke, Trump is now urging Republicans in Congress to make it happen, writing, "The Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for our country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through legislation. Congress should start today to work on ending expensive and unfair to our country birthright citizenship. This will have my complete and total support."

That may, though, be much easier said rhetoric than done reality. The House Speaker doesn't even know what to do.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: It certainly is time for us to do everything that's possible. I don't know what that is.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: Former Trump lawyer John Eastman, who is the architect behind the argument against birthright citizenship, wrote, So I don't think Congress can fix this.

And Fox News contributor Hugh Hewitt, who is a true conservative, went so far as to praise the Supreme Court's ruling.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HUGH HEWITT, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: The Chief Justice has hit it out of the park on the birthright citizenship issue, and we finally have a decision that lays to rest this endless debate that text history and tradition, in fact, affirm if you're born in the United States, you're a citizen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Kristen Holmes is OUTFRONT at the White House to begin our coverage tonight.

And, Kristen, what more are you learning about Trump's plan now to get over what is, frankly, a major loss on birthright citizenship that he has really fought for consistently for at least a decade?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Erin, this couldn't be a bigger loss. And when we talk about him signing this the first day in office, we have to remember that it's not as though he came up with it the first day. His team spent months with lawyers trying to look at the Constitution, trying to find workarounds so that he had the text in front of him for an executive order that they believed worked around the law, worked around the Constitution.

[19:05:03]

And as you noted, he sat down on those oral arguments.

Now, he heard what any of us in America heard when we were listening to those oral arguments. He probably likely believed what all of us did was there was a lot of skepticism in that court. It was not sounding like it was going well for President Trump and for the government's attorney during that time.

So, now, you see him throwing everything at the wall, trying to maintain this campaign promise, talking about Congress, talking about having the Justice Department step in and see what they can do about birther tourism.

Now, I've talked to a number of administration officials. They say they don't see any way around this, that this was their way around this. That was the executive order.

I've also talked to several Republicans on the Hill who say this is a non-starter. It's even further behind than the Save America Act.

Now, I can tell you one thing. This is likely to be another huge headache for those same Republicans who are now going to have to contend with this on top of Save America Act as they try to both please President Trump and get anything they possibly can done on Capitol Hill.

All right, Kristen, thank you very much. Kristen Holmes reporting from the White House tonight.

And everyone's here with me now.

So, S.E. Cupp, what do you make of Trump's plan B here, right, using the DOJ such that he thinks he can and now pushing Congress, but the DOJ to go after birth tourism?

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, birth tourism is a very small but actual issue, and I would encourage any Justice Department to go after fraud and abuse in a surgical way, not like the DOGE way with, you know, a giant pretend chainsaw, but we should absolutely be going after that fraud and abuse. But it's a very small issue by our own like CDC estimates.

And good luck cajoling Congress to do these things that are unpopular. This is not what the American public wants Congress to be focused on. The Save America Act doesn't have Republican support. So Trump's got a bit of a headache from his own party in Congress.

That's not going to get better as we get closer to and after the midterms when control could change. This is the time when you've got, you know, the courts, the Congress, the White House. I mean, they've got all the power if they can't get this kind of stuff through now, maybe move on to other things.

BURNETT: I mean, Jamal, all the power. And, you know, it's like when you heard Thomas Massie the other day say, stop talking about rigged elections when you control the House and the Senate. And he mentioned the Supreme Court, and yet it is the Supreme Court, which, yes, in a split decision, but a Supreme Court who dealt this very big blow to the president.

JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It did deal a blow to the president. But let's keep in mind, this isn't just about him. It's also about all the millions of Americans who live here who are immigrants and those who are the children of immigrants and whether or not, they were going to be, some of them, maybe tens or maybe hundreds of thousands, who may have been stateless. citizens of the world, right, who, if they were not going to be American citizens, they didn't actually -- they weren't actually citizens of another country.

And so, what would they do? I mean, Pope Leo mentioned this. This was a big problem. So, the actual effects of coming up with this, let alone the history of the fact that this was done in the 1860s and now, it's, you know, we're now in the 2020s, and they would change this. It's just pretty amazing that the president of the United States would want to do that.

But it goes to a fundamental point about MAGA-ism that is becoming clear. It is really about a white America being great again, more than it is about the rest of us. And the concern about limiting the impact of people of color in the United States of America is becoming more and more clear as we see those concerns about immigrants from Black and Brown countries while we bring in white South African people from South Africa. That is a real concern that that's where we're headed in this country, and we've got to really pay attention to it.

BURNETT: And so, Ryan, some conservatives are blaming one of Trump's own picks for the Supreme Court for the big losses, okay? Because I mentioned this being split. Amy Coney Barrett. Conservative commentator Matt Walsh said, and I quote, okay, you ready for this one? It turns out Amy Coney Barrett is a DEI higher, little better than Ketanji Jackson. Terrible pick.

I guess that would be the definition of a fair weather fan.

And here is more of what conservatives are saying. Prepare yourself for this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MEGYN KELLY, HOST, THE MEGYN KELLY SHOW: Amy Coney Barrett is a turncoat. She's constantly siding with the left.

STEVE BANNON, HOST, BANNON'S "WAR ROOM": Did you do your due diligence? Are you happy with what you got?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: So, all right, Ryan, what's your response to that? I mean, is she a, quote/unquote, "turncoat"?

RYAN GOODMAN, JUST SECURITY CO-EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Maybe under their terms. I'm not sure what their terms are, because it would require her to defy what she understands to be the Constitution.

[19:10:02]

And the idea that they would generate this kind of criticism over the birthright citizenship case is kind of wild to me. The overwhelming consensus of experts is that this was a foregone conclusion. It's a 6- 3 decision. Even Justice Gorsuch and Justice Thomas say in their opinions that they think that the Constitution might well protect people in the country who are here undocumented because they made this country their home and therefore would be protected by the 14th Amendment.

So, the idea that Amy Coney Barrett, what was she supposed to do, go against, you know, what's the very plain reading of the Constitution plus a statutory text that even Justice Kavanaugh agrees with in the opinion? I don't understand that.

And for the big cases that also came down this term, she's there in the 6-3 conservative majority that's, you know, gutting the Voting Rights Act, gutting it a second time, even when there's proof of racial discrimination in Alabama, two major immigration cases decided just at the end of last week on asylum and Haitian temporary protected status migrants in the country. She's there, 6-3, 6-3, 6-3. So, I don't understand what they're trying to do. And, in fact, they

might just alienate her by this kind of bogus criticism. And what on Earth they expect justice to do except apply what she thinks is the constitutional text.

BURNETT: S.E., so what do you think when suddenly you have, you know, Matt Walsh with she's a DEI hire little better than Ketanji Jackson. Terrible pick. As I said, fair weather fan and Megyn Kelly calling her a turncoat.

I mean, pretty sudden, they turned on her. When she's ruled in favor of conservative decisions, she's been lauded.

CUPP: Yeah. It's so lazy. This is such lazy, trollish criticism. These are, you know. MAGA influencers, we should not be taking them seriously.

But when are we going to stop being surprised when a justice on either quote side of the aisle we have put them on does their job? And you know, defies your expectation of their politics. The job is not political.

I know that we think we know the politics of all of these nine justices, but more often than not, they surprise you. with their rulings. I don't -- I mean, I don't have to tell Republicans --

BURNETT: Yeah.

CUPP: -- you know that John Roberts surprised us all with that Obamacare ruling, right? That's because the job is to interpret the law and Constitution and not come down on a certain political side.

But every single time it's the left, it's the right. They say the court's illegitimate when they don't get the ruling they want. This is not how it's supposed to go. I don't know when we all got in this loop of political expectations from the Supreme Court.

BURNETT: Well, interesting, Jamal, back to what Thomas Massie said, well, when we have the Supreme Court, and I guess that's the shorthand that many use because Trump obviously was able to put on people that he thought were going to vote the way he wanted every single time he wanted them to. Hasn't been the case, certainly for Coney Barrett.

But let me ask you about what he's doing now, Jamal, to try to get around this, and that is go to Congress. And I mentioned that at the top of the program that he says, and I'll read what Trump posted. He said the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is too bad for our country, but we can easily make it up in Congress through legislation with the support of the president. Not long -- no long and unwieldy constitutional amendment is necessary. Congress should start today.

Okay. Now, Kavanaugh seemed to indicate, in his opinion, that Congress could act. But I mentioned John Eastman, who was the architect of Trump's case, said Congress can't act. I mentioned Hugh Hewitt. You know, I mentioned Speaker Johnson saying, I don't even know where to start here.

But is there a path here, Jamal, you think, congressionally?

SIMMONS: Even if they did act, it does appear there are five to four -- I mean, there are five other justices who would still side with this based on the constitutionality, not based on the legislative record. So, my question here is, why is it everybody is so animated about this particular question?

The president of the United States in his MAGA-dom, would like to have everybody act 100 percent on his side. And it's as if you don't -- if you're not with him 100 percent of the time, my 1 percent enemy is my 100 -- my 1 percent friend -- or my 99 percent friend is my 100 percent enemy.

That is the kind of politics that the country can't withstand. And I think both on the left and the right, Democrats may have this problem come next year if they control one of these houses of Congress, there are going to be some Democrats that don't side up with them, and we're going to have to make sure we still have a politics where people who are on the same side can still disagree and that doesn't mean that they're not loyal.

BURNETT: Ryan, are there ways to chip away at this? When you look at some of the caveats that -- for example, Kavanaugh raised, when you look at what Trump's now trying to do to crack down on birth tourism where, of course, when there's fraud and we've done reporting on stories where there has been fraud, that that should be stamped out.

But do any of these things create a path for a workaround where the concept of birthright citizenship, as exists in the 14th Amendment, starts to actually be chipped away in a meaningful way?

[19:15:07]

GOODMAN: No, essentially. If Congress were to try to pass legislation, it would be deemed unconstitutional. There are five justices that just said the 14th Amendment of the Constitution protects it. There's no statute above the Constitution. So, big workarounds, no.

Birth tourism, yes, but as one of the briefs in the Supreme Court said, that is an infinitesimal proportion of birthright citizens cases in the United States annually. Could they prosecute that as fraud? Sure.

The DOJ, you know, two-pager that came out today that said this will be their priority, it cites three cases. Two of them are from the Biden administration, in which people were sentenced for birthright tourism fraud as businesses that they were running. They can certainly prosecute them, but that's only going to get them an infinitesimal proportion.

And the idea of taking up Congress's time when there are already crimes on the statute books for that is very difficult to explain, I would think, to American voters.

BURNETT: Yeah -- well, especially when you're talking about that's an enforcement issue if you already have laws to pretend against it.

Thank you all very much. I appreciate you as always.

And next, the breaking news, Trump has just disclosed how much money he made in crypto. It was a 900-page document. We were going through it. The number is more than a billion dollars in that alone. It happens to be an industry that his administration has actively promoted and that his family has been directly involved in. Is it legal?

Plus, Russia under attack. Ukraine pummeling the Russian capital, Moscow. So, we're really asking a question now of how much longer Putin can hold on.

And what caused this congressional hearing to turn into a wild shouting match today?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You should be ashamed of yourself.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't belong in this committee. You should get the hell out of here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:21:09]

BURNETT: Breaking news, Trump just disclosing that he's earned over a billion dollars from his crypto ventures. Now, this is according to an annual financial disclosure form that just came out, about 900 pages. So, there's a lot in there.

But it does include this, more than $526 million in income from World Liberty Financial. which is a crypto venture Trump co-founded with his sons.

So, take a look at this chart by top economic analyst Steve Rattner. He actually created this, Steve did, before tonight's disclosure. I was looking at it. Then this happened. It was like, wait, we got to look at this.

So let me tell you what it says. So, what Steve did is put in blue how much money Trump's family has gained from crypto. That's the upper line there. In red, that's the line of how much investors have lost, about the same amount, more than $2 billion.

OUTFRONT now, Ty Cobby is the former Trump White House lawyer.

Ty, pretty interesting there when you look at that chart and how much Trump has made and how much everyone else has lost. What is your reaction to the scale of what we're seeing in this disclosure, of how much Trump is earning from these crypto ventures? Over a billion dollars last year alone, right? This isn't a cumulative

number. It's in one year, an industry he's actively promoted and supported and done policy, executive orders related to, is it legal?

TY COBB, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: I don't believe so. Certainly, I don't think it was contemplated by the founders when they created the Emoluments Clause. I do think that one of the line items, of course, is the commemorative coins, several hundred million dollars of income related to those coins. How can that be anything other than trading on his image and likeness in violation of the Emoluments Clause?

With regard to the crypto, obviously that's, you know, it's a slimy industry. You know, certainly the way he's going around it, where he creates policies that can only enrich himself and his family, is something that I think the average American should be staggered by.

But you mentioned the scale, and I think the scale here is just -- it's intentional. There's no question. I mean, we are seeing the greatest onslaught of corruption in the history of mankind in the last 18 months. You know, we have the $1.8 billion that he and Todd Blanche tried to take from the American taxpayers through the phony settlement of a contrived controversy with which he was going to pay off his friends.

You know, this is -- this is somebody who every day is devoted to the accumulation of wealth and power. And, you know, this is, you said it's 900, I think it's 937 pages, I could be off by a few, but it's got to be the longest disclosure in the history of the American presidency.

And when you talk about, you know, the scale, you've got Hunter Biden, you know, who, you know, if they traced every dollar that he was accused of ever having, he couldn't ante in the game that Trump is playing. You know, Trump is playing with billions, you know, they were playing with millions.

And this disclosure, on top of the disclosure that he issued last month, where he listed recent trades up to $750 million in trades, many of which involve government contractors. So, the grift is on, it's stunning.

BURNETT: It's stunning, and you use the word, you know, staggering. And it truly is just the scale of it, as you point out, Ty.

I also want to point out "The New York Post", obviously, conservative editorial board there. And in a rare review, they've just published a column titled Hunter Biden Style Sleaze is just as slimy when the Trump boys do it. They go on to call what's happening here the shame of the nation. And they say it stinks to high heaven.

Now, specifically, what they're talking about, Ty, here because it's hard to keep track of all of these deals. This one that they're writing this editorial about is the billion-dollar mining deal we just found out between Trump and Kazakhstan that Trump's sons stand to profit from, according to "The New York Times". [19:25:08]

And "The New York Times" goes on to report that there are at least 14 companies, 14, tied to Trump and Howard Lutnick, his commerce secretary's son, actively working with the federal government right now on critical mining deals, making incredible amounts of money.

[19:25:25]

I mean, do you -- do you think that there that this -- I mean, I would imagine you agree that with "The New York Post" that it stinks to high heaven and it's the shame of the nation.

COBB: It is the shame of the nation and people should be paying attention. I mean, look back at the Iran war, you know, shouldn't have been started, but once it was started, what did we learn? We learned that the Trump sons have a drone company and become a huge government contractor.

You hear this Kazakhstan deal announced. It was announced in November of 2025 when in the $1.6 billion in financing was disclosed. What we didn't know was that the Trump sons, you know, just a few weeks earlier, actually just days before the deal was announced, had acquired an interest in a company that has substantial portion part of that deal. And they've got only got close -- they've only gotten closer corporately with the people that are involved in that deal.

So, we see the 14 companies that you were talking about, that the Trump sons or the Lutnick funds, you know, have an interest in, the amount of guaranteed financing from the United States government for those 14 -- for the 14 companies that are pursuing those deals, $9 billion.

So yes, people should pay attention. It is staggering. It does stink. And I think when the Democrats take Congress, which hopefully they will, we'll get some answers as to how this all came about, and hopefully people will start to pay attention.

BURNETT: I mean, $9 billion. Now, of course, what we hear from the Trump sons will not be surprising. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. told "The New York Times" they weren't involved in the specifics of this billion-dollar deal. Eric Trump says he's been a passive investor with absolutely no management role.

Now, "The New York Times", "The New York Post" says it comes after Don Jr. and other Republicans spent years obviously bashing Hunter Biden's work with Burisma.

But, you know, what I'm curious about, Ty, is when we keep hearing again and again from whether it's the Trump sons, Lutnick sons, they don't know the details. They're passive investors. It's not the first time we've heard this.

COBB: No, and just because that they're not wearing a hard hat with a lantern or using a pick, that doesn't mean that this isn't their deal. They're in line to make, you know, millions and millions of dollars. The Lutnicks have already made millions of dollars in terms of the fees that they've charged for financing this deal.

So, you know, they can try to deny their involvement all they want. But the reality is, their companies are in these deals, and they're benefiting from what the companies earn in terms of revenue and profit.

BURNETT: All right, thank you very much, Ty. I appreciate you.

COBB: Good to be with you, Erin.

BURNETT: And next, Republican Congressman Tom Kean says a depression diagnosis led to his mysterious absence from Congress. His opponent in this must-win race for Democrats, because it is in this race for the midterms, is not backing down when it comes to calling him out for not being present. She's next.

And breaking news, Moscow hit hard by Ukrainian killer drones today, a key satellite center taken out. Is Putin finally and actually running out of options?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:33:23]

BURNETT: New tonight, Republican Congressman Tom Kean back on Capitol Hill for the first time after a mysterious four-month absence. Kean, who is running for reelection in a closely watched toss-up race that will decide control of the House, announcing for the first time that he was battling severe depression, was hospitalized.

Now, Kean missed 142 different votes over 117 days during what was an unexplained leave.

Arlette Saenz is OUTFRONT.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

REP. TOM KEAN (R-NJ): This is not an easy speech for me to give. I am a private person by nature.

REPORTER: Where have you been?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For the first time in four months, New Jersey Congressman Tom Kane stepped onto the House floor and explained his mysterious absence.

KEAN: Several months ago, due to health concerns, I entered the hospital for some testing. I did not believe that this would result in a long-term stay. I was given the diagnosis of depression.

SAENZ (voice-over): Kean undergoing hospital treatment for depression, a diagnosis that impacts nearly three in 10 adults at some point in their life.

KEAN: Now, when people hear the word depression, many people think simply feel it means feeling sad, but depression is so much more than that. It is physical. It is emotional. And until you experience it yourself, it is difficult to fully understand how powerful this illness can be.

SAENZ (voice-over): But the Republican congressman has yet to answer why he kept his diagnosis secret from the public for so long.

SAENZ: Congressman Kean, why did you wait so long to di -- to disclose your diagnosis?

[19:35:00]

Should you have told the public sooner?

SAENZ (voice-over): Kean's reemergence on Capitol Hill caps off nearly four months of speculation about his whereabouts. Before today, Cain last appeared at the US Capitol on March 5th for votes. Over a month later, he revealed he was addressing a personal medical issue and looked forward to being back in the near future.

In mid-May, House Speaker Mike Johnson said the two had spoken as House Republicans grappled the narrow majority.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA), SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: He sounded great. He said he was, you know, out on a medical issue and he'll be back as soon as possible.

SAENZ (voice-over): And Kean's father, former New Jersey Governor Tom Kean Sr., assured CNN his son was fine and would be back soon, saying, "This won't linger. It's not some kind of disease that's going to incapacitate him in the future."

For months, various news outlets tried to track down Kean, checking at his main New Jersey residence and vacation home, but he couldn't be found. Both CNN and "The New York Times" finally spotted him at his Westfield home within the last week.

In all, Kean was away from Congress for 117 days, missing 142 votes and keeping his constituents and many colleagues in the dark.

KEAN: When I said I hope to return in a matter of weeks, I believed it. Those were the best estimates the doctors could provide. But as the over 48 million of my fellow Americans being treated for this illness have come to discover, there is no timeline for healing.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SAENZ: Congressman Tom Kean has represented New Jersey's seventh congressional district since 2023 and is running for re election. He officially secured his party's nomination running unopposed in the primary on June 2nd and is set to face off against Democratic candidate Rebecca Bennett in the fall. The question is whether his lack of initial transparency will factor into voters decisions as they decide who to vote for in this consequential House race in November -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right. Arlette, thank you very much. And consequential it is.

And OUTFRONT now is Rebecca Bennett, the Democrat who is running against Congressman Kaine in November in one of the top toss-up races that truly could decide which party controls the House. So, it is crucial.

And, Rebecca, I appreciate your time. So now we have seen Congressman Kean speak on the floor. You are not shying away from making his absence part of your campaign. Now that you know the reason he's been absent, what is your reaction?

REBECCA BENNETT, DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE FOR U.S. HOUSE IN NJ: Yeah, well, first of all, Erin, thank you so much for having me on.

And I'll just say that I am glad to hear that Congressman Kean is on the road to recovery. You know, mental health care is health care. And so, I'm really relieved and glad to hear that he's getting the care that he needs, and I hope he continues down the path to recovery.

But looking at his record, he has absolutely failed this district. He was the deciding vote on the one big, beautiful bill, which is why tens of thousands of people in our district are losing access to their health care. He was nowhere to be found when Donald Trump started yet another forever war in the Middle East, and he is continuing to trade stocks even while he was missing from Congress.

And in fact, tonight, he is holding a fundraiser in D.C. with D.C. lobbyists. And so, we are going to hold him accountable for his record. And we are going to flip this seat in November.

And, you know, when it comes to it, as Arlette was laying out, right, 142 votes, 117 days, that that's what he was missing from. And when he was absent, you had criticism for him on the campaign trail, right? You called that out on the trail and in interviews. Here's just a bit of what you said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENNETT: Tom Kean Jr., wherever you are, you have failed this district.

Tom Kean, Jr., just total empty suit. He just hasn't done anything. He really just does not show up for the district. And you all might have heard about it in the news recently because he's been missing since the beginning of March.

Tom Kean, Jr., I mean, yes, to your point, he's been missing since March. But even before that, he hasn't been on the ground. He's not been standing up for us. And so, you know, we deserve a representative that's going to be able to show up for us and be able to get things done in Washington.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: The last point you made there, that we deserve a representative who's going to be able to show up for us. I mean, do you stand by your criticism? Obviously, his illness was serious and one that many Americans can empathize with and are also enduring. But he did miss 142 votes while he dealt with it without telling anybody what was happening.

BENNETT: Yeah, and I'll just say my background, I'm a former Navy helicopter pilot. I served in the military for over 15 years, and I refer to my leadership as deck plate leadership.

And the reason that I call it that is because I was trained how to lead in the military. You have to show up. You have to be on the ground. You have to be present to hear directly about what issues people are facing to be able to have solutions to those problems.

[19:40:06]

And Tom Kean Jr. has never held a public town hall. He has not been present for us in the district in the way that we deserve. And so, that is a very different to how I plan to represent this district, which is showing up, listening and actually having solutions to problems.

And what I'm hearing most from people is we have to tackle our cost- of-living crisis, and we have got to get money out of politics. You know, I feel very strongly, we need to end Citizens United. We need to ban members of Congress from trading stocks. And so, we have got to make sure we are driving those changes, and that's what I'm going to focus on in office.

BURNETT: He also addressed the constituents that you both want to serve in this election. So, he addressed them directly today when he was speaking. Here he is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEAN: I am grateful that I accepted help, because today I stand before you healthier, stronger, and excited to return to the work that I love.

To my constituents, thank you. Thank you for your patience. Thank you for your understanding. Thank you for your prayers. And thank you for allowing me the honor of serving you.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: What's your reaction to that? And I guess the bottom line is, do you believe that he can fulfill the duties of the job?

BENNETT: So my reaction is that, as I said before, you know, I really sincerely believe that mental health care is health care, and I'm really glad that he's getting the care that he needs. And I, you know, I think everyone in the district echoes that concern of really sincerely hoping that he is okay.

But looking at his record and before this even happened in March, he is absolutely build this district and so that is going to be the choice that the voters have in November is whether they want to elect me to be able to be that servant leader to be able to show up and fight and deliver for all of us in the district or someone that is proven time and time again that he is not willing to stand up for us and whenever we need it.

BURNETT: All right. Rebecca Bennett, thank you very much. I appreciate your time tonight.

And I want everyone to know we did reach out repeatedly to Congressman Tom Kean's office for comment and to invite him on the program, as we have many times in recent weeks, and we did not receive a response.

OUTFRONT next, Ukraine unleashing one of the most devastating attacks ever on Moscow. A key satellite center has now been hit. Is this a crucial turning point in the war? Moscow under attack.

And a congressional hearing today truly went off the rails.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One word about it.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I did. I wrote a whole "New York Times" op-ed about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:47:27]

BURNETT: Breaking news, Ukraine launching a major wave of attacks on Moscow tonight, coming as Putin continues to face massive setbacks in the war. And he's coming under increasing pressure at home as a result, raising questions of whether he'll end the war or escalate.

Nick Paton Walsh begins our coverage OUTFRONT.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Hell is still nightly for Ukrainians.

Here are drones slamming into Zaporizhzhia, where strikes killed one, injured five. But again Monday night, while Ukraine was dragging its injured from the rubble, they fired about 250 more drones back at Russia than were fired at them.

Four hundred 419, 60 of them at Moscow, this video apparently showing the moment a drone impacted, near where Russian officials said a six- month-old baby was among the two Russian dead that night.

Very few images of the damage to Moscow emerged, where a space communications center was struck in Dubna. A lot of video actually came from Ukraine's president, flaunting the damage the Kremlin has instructed its law enforcement to hide, Russian city skies blighted more and more like Ukrainian cities, and scenes like this devastating attack on a Moscow oil refinery two weeks ago shattering the scents in the capital of Putin's war of choice being something far away that others fought, now forced to admit more times than he would ever like in the last month to the problems Russians already know about, like gas shortages.

PRESIDENT VLADIMIR PUTIN, RUSSIA (through translator): You are well aware that problems persist for both drivers and businesses. It's not always possible to find the required grade of fuel at present.

WALSH (voice-over): Ukraine released footage Tuesday of drone units who said they had targeted Moscow's specific anti-drone defenses, making the route to the capital easier.

But it is not just Moscow under pressure. The peninsula of Crimea battered hard. It's isolation, a key Ukrainian goal, achieved through blowing bridges, trains, roads, blackouts, and more gas queues.

The frontline, brutal battles remain, but the story has changed. Ukraine, less the victim, more the disruptor, hoping to keep Moscow off balance long enough until it falls.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WALSH: Erin, this is really about increasing pressure on Russian President Vladimir Putin, but to what end? Yes, Ukraine can isolate Crimea, the peninsula, unoccupied Ukraine. It can rain drones on Moscow and other parts of Russia.

But until Putin himself is vulnerable or feels political pressure, we're simply seeing an escalation on both sides.

[19:50:06]

Diplomacy, it seems, certainly frozen, although there are some hopes, perhaps, it may get another turn, Erin.

BURNETT: All right, Nick, thank you very much.

And let's go to Seth Jones right away. He's OUTFRONT now.

Seth, you know, these increasing number of strikes by Ukraine on Russia, Nick's reporting on causing major disruptions, right? The images that are coming out, honestly, even a year, 18 months ago were sort of unfathomable and now are daily of massive destruction inside Russia in the capital.

Just how big of a deal is this?

SETH JONES, PRESIDENT, DEFENSE & SECURITY DEPARTMENT, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Erin, this is a huge deal. We have some original data for you today. We've got over 20,000 incidents of Ukrainian strikes against Russian targets. They include everything from oil and gas facilities to these kinds of communications hubs and radar installations. In cities like Moscow and St. Petersburg, and as Nick just outlined, we're seeing huge numbers of attacks. In Crimea, where they've closed the beaches down. Schools are now closed in Crimea. People are now indoors.

The Russian population is feeling this war like they have not felt since the beginning of it. And it's because Russia is losing right now.

BURNETT: So, I mean, that's an incredible thing. You think about I'm hearing you, Seth, say Russia is losing two years ago, or at times when the war was at its nadir for Ukraine. It's incredible.

I know you have this new report coming out, and you're going to detail these 20,000 strikes by Ukraine inside Russia. What is the impact of that and what you're talking about? Kids not being able to go to school, beaches closed in Crimea, images of thick black smoke over Moscow regularly.

Is this making Putin's situation truly at risk?

JONES: Well, it's certainly not helping him, Erin. I mean, no war is ever linear, so it may not continue in this direction forever. But I think when you combine Russia's economic problems, high inflation, its economy is really struggling, particularly when you get out of the oil and gas sector.

And then when you look at the sheer number of casualties and fatalities, Russia's -- sorry, the British intelligence has reported upwards of 500,000 Russian fatalities since the war began. I mean, that is stunning. That is over four times larger than all U.S. fatalities in all U.S. wars combined since World War II.

And it's hard to see Putin continuing at these levels and to be popular in the country for it.

BURNETT: I mean, it is -- it is incredible. And that half a million number, stunning.

Seth, you know, there's also "Foreign Policy Magazine" citing a Russian military blogger's claim along those lines, that the life expectancy of an average Russian soldier in an assault operation is 20 to 35 minutes. That's it. You go in an assault operation, you're going to die in 20 to 35 minutes if you're an average Russian.

Ten days to three weeks is the lifespan of a soldier from training to combat. That's it. You go to -- you go into combat 10 days to three weeks.

I mean, we can't independently verify this. It's consistent with what you're talking about from British intelligence.

How long can Russia sustain losses on that scale, both just mathematically but also societally and in terms of Putin's hold on power? JONES: Yeah, Erin, there are some indications in that what you call the kill zone. It's about a 20 to 40-kilometer area between where the Russian and the Ukrainian front lines are, where a lot of these Russian casualties are happening.

I mean, our numbers are that for parts of the war, the Russians were losing two to one ratio to the Ukrainians. Now it's up to eight to one.

The challenge for Putin, if he mobilizes, is that it could impact people in Moscow and, you know, the sons of elites. And I think that's where he would have a problem.

BURNETT: All right, Seth Jones, I appreciate you. And, of course, I want everyone to know about your upcoming report where you're going to talk about so much of this, including those 20,000 strikes by Ukraine in Russia. Thank you, Seth.

And next, what caused two lawmakers to absolutely lose it on each other during a congressional hearing?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:59:15]

BURNETT: Tonight, a congressional hearing erupting into a screaming match between Republican Mike Lawler and Democrat Jamie Raskin. Lawler was supposed to be introducing a witness when he started criticizing sanctuary city policies. He was reminded he was violating the rules by not sticking to his introduction. And then this happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. MIKE LAWLER (R-NY): The same outrage you feel about Renee Goode and Alex Pretty, you should feel about Sheridan Gorman and Laken Riley and every Angel family in this country.

(CROSSTALK)

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): I do feel that outrage.

LAWLER: You do not. Because if you did, you would not support --

(CROSSTALK)

RASKIN: Do you feel the outrage about Alex Goode and Renee Goode?

LAWLER: You should be ashamed of yourself, Jamie.

RASKIN: You don't belong in this committee. You should get the hell out of here. You don't understand the rules of the committee.

You don't understand the rules of the committee. You don't understand the Constitution. You're just full of it.

(CROSSTALK) LAWLER: You're an absolute disgrace supporting sanctuary policies.

(CROSSTALK)

RASKIN: Say one word about Alex Pretti --

LAWLER: I did. I wrote a whole "New York Times" op-ed about it. You should be absolutely ashamed of yourself or not opposing sanctuary policies that resulted in their daughter's death.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The committee will be in order.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: Order was not restored. Lawler stormed out of the hearing room.

Thanks so much for joining us.

"AC360" starts now.