Return to Transcripts main page
Isa Soares Tonight
Gabbard Pushes Baseless 2016 Election Conspiracies; CNN Obtains Newly Uncovered Trump-Epstein Images; ICJ Says Climate Change is an "Existential Threat"; Secret Tunnel City Hidden Under Rome Revealed. More Than a 100 Aid Groups Warn of Starvation in Gaza; Russia and Ukraine Hold Third Round of Peace Talks in Istanbul; Bryan Kohberger Sentenced to Life in Prison for Idaho Murders Aired 2-3p ET
Aired July 23, 2025 - 14:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[14:00:00]
RICHARD QUEST, HOST, ISA SOARES TONIGHT: Warm welcome to all, I am Richard Quest in for ISA SOARES TONIGHT. More than a 100 aid groups are warning of
mass starvation in Gaza as Israel is accusing Hamas of engineering hunger. A new round of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.
The Kremlin downplays expectations and warns of difficult discussions. And a landmark climate ruling where the ICJ, International Court of Justice
says countries have a legal duty to tackle climate change. More on the people who brought the case for climate justice. Now, famine is banging
down the door in Gaza.
The chilling words from Oxfam's director and now echoed by more than a 100 humanitarian and various aid groups who are pleading with Israel to end its
blockade immediately and allow the free-flow of aid into Gaza, the besieged territory. There's the picture. Let's just watch here for a second or
three.
The chaotic scenes says it all. Massive crowds, desperate, hungry, rushing to get food for themselves and families. Gaza's Health Ministry says at
least another ten people have died from starvation in the last day. The situation is not only dire for millions of Palestinians, but for the
doctors, nurses and workers who are now also struggling to survive.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CAROLINE WILLEMEN, PROJECT COORDINATOR IN GAZA, MSF: There is simply not enough food for people to feed themselves, to feed their children. I have
been doing this work for nine years. Never in my life have I seen -- have I been in a place where my own colleagues come to work hungry. My colleagues
who have a job, who have a salary cannot find food.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Israeli officials are telling CNN it's Hamas and not Israel that's to blame for the manmade food shortages in Gaza. The U.S. officials say
special envoy Steve Witkoff is to travel to Europe and Doha this weekend or this week in an effort to jumpstart peace talks, which they hope will lead
to a ceasefire.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TAMMY BRUCE, SPOKESPERSON, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT: Any loss of life, of course, is horrible. This is a horrible dynamic. The food that goes in, in
this environment of a war zone will never be enough because the environment is abnormal and it's obscene. That's why we want the ceasefire.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: We're joined now by Ahmed Bayram; a senior adviser for the Norwegian Refugee Council. The pictures are awful. The stories are
horrific. And Israel maintains its position that they are not the ones. And I guess that you and I could spend sort of our next 3 or 4 minutes going
backwards and forwards on that, which would not be of much use. But what is it you need?
AHMED BAYRAM, SENIOR ADVISER, NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL: We need everything. We need everything, Richard. It's not just food, by the way. Of
course, food is top of the needs because the harrowing pictures that you've seen, and that you're reporting on, but we also need tents. We have 3,000
tents sitting there languishing in the heat.
You know, forget food for a moment. We need fuel for hospitals. We need medication for hospitals. We need shelter for people, shelter support.
People are literally sleeping on the street. They are dying on the street. They are homeless. Hundreds of thousands. We are talking about a million
people almost who have been displaced since the breakdown of this -- of the ceasefire. So yes, we need everything.
QUEST: You're not going to get it. And that's not just me being pessimistic or realistic. The reality is, these pictures are having
seemingly no effect on the Israeli government, which seems to be impervious to even when allies start putting pressure on it. Do you believe it's only
the United States that could put the necessary pressure?
BAYRAM: I think first and foremost, yes, probably upfront. It's probably the leader, of course, of any decision that could be made. We know that the
key is in Washington. It's also -- I mean, probably in London, of course, it's in Berlin, it's in Brussels. We see pressure coming. We see tweets, we
see angry statements.
We see statements in the Commons, et cetera. But we need -- we need action. And actually, Richard, we've seen it work in the ceasefire. We've seen that
diplomatic pressure when it's turned on in -- or at the right scale and the right level and the right people talking to each other, we see it. It
works, and it should work.
[14:05:00]
The decision probably is also in some Arab capitals, probably in the gulf, where they can also exert some pressure.
QUEST: Look --
BAYRAM: But we need that because there are people dying every single day.
QUEST: I know obviously you and others in your organization have not only condemned roundly the activities of October the 7th. So, we're not going to
-- we don't need to revisit that in the sense. But Israel says that this is the pressure necessary and even inflicting this, you know, Hamas is
inflicting this on their own people, and they still will not release either the hostages or the -- or the bodies of those dead.
Now, there is a -- it's a -- when I say there was an argument, you know what I mean. There is a position that would say, look, if Hamas really
wants to release the tension and ease for their people, they could release the hostages and this would be done.
BAYRAM: And that's what we want. We want the hostages released. As aid groups, we want that. We don't want any civilians harmed. We don't want the
hostages themselves harmed. But how is starving 2 million people helping in this case? How is closing the borders and the land crossings helping?
And at the same time, you look at Israel's -- I mean, Israel says they're turning the taps off and then they send GHF, so-called humanitarian
foundation in Gaza to actually give food and then shoot at people. And, you know, it's been documented. It's been well reported and well documented.
So, I think -- I think this is a vicious cycle, right? For everybody here, including the hostages, including the civilians. There's only one solution
here. And that is the ceasefire.
QUEST: And that -- the talks on that are going to take place in Turkey over the next few days. And I always get the feeling, everybody says they
want a ceasefire, but nobody really does.
BAYRAM: Yes, it seems so. It seems so. I mean, probably, you know, the Israeli Prime Minister doesn't want or the government or probably there are
extremist voices in his cabinet don't want that. We hear lots of, you know, protestations whenever there's something approaching or looming or starting
to get reported. But again, as aid organizations on the ground, this is --
QUEST: Right --
BAYRAM: Time wasted. This is time that we are losing every single day because we are losing lives. So, yes, we do -- we do want that to succeed
and we want people to be pulled back from that brink of starvation.
QUEST: Before we finish, let me just ask, how long have you been doing this sort of work?
BAYRAM: Honestly, have been in Gaza for, I think, for over 15 years --
QUEST: No, I guess what I'm -- I guess what I'm trying to say in terms of yourself, in terms of being involved in aid --
BAYRAM: Mash-up(ph) --
QUEST: Relief, in terms of that. You've been doing this quite a while. My -- the point I'm making is, have you ever seen anything like this before?
BAYRAM: Not really. I've been -- I've been to -- I was in Mosul in 2017 at the peak of the ISIS war, and I thought that was probably the worst thing
I've ever seen. But now, I see what I see. I see our screen probably surpasses that. And much of what I have seen in my ten years in this -- in
this sector, and yes, it's harrowing and sadly, it's 2025 and we're still seeing --
QUEST: Yes --
BAYRAM: This under the watch of the big powers in the world.
QUEST: We'll talk more. I'm grateful sir, thank you for taking the time tonight for joining us from Amman. As we continue, could it be third time
lucky for the Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Turkey? As delegations from Moscow and Kyiv hold a third round of negotiations in Istanbul in a moment.
And a new reaction from President Trump as newly-discovered video sheds light on his past ties with Jeffrey Epstein. In a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:10:00]
QUEST: Now, we're keeping a close watch on the latest Russia-Ukraine peace talks in Turkey where delegations from Moscow and Kyiv are holding third
rounds of face-to-face talks. These are the arrivals that have been taking place as various participants get ready for the talks. The Kremlin says it
isn't getting its hopes up for a ceasefire breakthrough yet.
It's worth noting previous rounds at least have managed to exchange thousands of prisoners of war, which of course, is to be most certainly
welcomed. A few hours before this evening's peace talks, the Ukrainian delegation met with President Erdogan and around 2,500 kilometers away in
Berlin, the leaders of Germany and France have been meeting, and they're expecting to discuss how to provide more aid and weapons for Kyiv.
For the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, there's a backlash at home in the form of the first major anti-government protests since the start of
the war. They erupted after he signed a bill to tighten restrictions on two of the country's anti-corruption bureaus. Two of their employees are
accused of working for Russia.
Fred Pleitgen is with me live from Berlin. This business on the anti- corruption and the laws that have been signed, is it a red herring? Where is it going?
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm not sure that's a red herring, Richard. In fact, I'm getting information just in the
past couple of minutes that apparently there are anti-government protests happening once again in Kyiv tonight, possibly also in other Ukrainian
cities, and that they appear to be actually even larger than the ones that we saw yesterday.
So, certainly, it seems as though as of right now, at least, it's not something that's necessarily going away for Ukraine's President Volodymyr
Zelenskyy. One of the interesting things that he did a couple of minutes ago in his evening address is that he said that he would possibly put
forward another supplemental bill to give more rights to those anti- corruption organizations.
However, people really have this or see this as a very touchy and very important topic to them. Fighting corruption is, of course, a big thing for
Ukraine. The country has dealt with massive corruption basically since it became independent in the 1990s, and fighting corruption, of course, not
just very important, obviously, for the people who live there in Ukraine, but also for Ukraine's perspective of getting into the European Union.
As you know, Richard, the European Union has made it a prerequisite for Ukraine to fight corruption, get serious about fighting corruption if it
wants to get into the European Union. And of course, one of the things that we've heard over the past couple of hours is various EU and European
officials coming out and criticizing this new bill that curbs the independence of those anti-corruption organizations. Certainly, some of
them saying that Ukraine is taking a step in the wrong direction.
QUEST: So, why is he doing it? What's behind it? I mean, and the reason I phrase it like that is Zelenskyy knows what the west, what the EU requires
in terms of anti-corruption measures. So, if he's doing something that people say is weakening the anti-corruption measures, he must realize he's
going to get roundly criticized.
PLEITGEN: Well, certainly, he will have -- he will have realized that. And it was interesting to see some of the reactions inside Ukraine, because
there were actually former cabinet ministers of the Zelenskyy government, like for instance, Dmytro Kuleba, of course, the former Foreign Minister
who came out and said that this was a big mistake, and this was Ukraine taking a step in the wrong direction.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy yesterday came out and claimed that this was actually to make the battle against corruption more effective than it has been
before. He claimed that there was Russian influence in that battle, and that is something that he wanted to curb.
[14:15:00]
So, that at least is the official reading that we're getting from Volodymyr Zelenskyy. It seems as though he might be backtracking a little bit on that
in the face of some of the protests that we're seeing, and possibly also in the face of the fact that protesters seem to be forming once again in Kyiv
--
QUEST: Right --
PLEITGEN: For another round of protests. So, certainly, this appears to at least be somewhat manifesting itself, and I think it's something that
Volodymyr Zelenskyy certainly will be very sensitive, to, Richard.
QUEST: Indeed, thank you, sir, I'm grateful, Fred Pleitgen in Berlin. The judge in the Idaho student murder trial says Bryan Kohberger is -- in his
words, a faceless coward. Judge Steven Hippler said their grisly deaths were an act of unspeakable evil, and the judge made those comments before
officially giving a sentence of life in prison.
Kohberger agreed to plead guilty to avoid the death penalty. Now, before the sentencing, families of the four students killed by him addressed the
court and described quite literally, the enormity of their loss.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today, we are here to finish what you started. Today, you've lost control. Today, we are here to prove to the world that you
picked the wrong families.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We will grow old without our only child. Our bright, beautiful friend and daughter.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: With me now is our legal analyst Joey Jackson. What elevates, in your view, what elevates this case out of the -- and I don't mean to be
disrespectful to those involved. The run of the mill sort of grisly, horrible murder cases.
JOEY JACKSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, Richard, this is instance where certainly any murder, to your point, and we're not at all devaluing
it, but any murder is certainly horrible. It's horrible to the families, horrible to everyone that they represent, their friends, their communities,
et cetera. I think when you have an instance where you have students who are simply going to school and simply attempting to become better human
beings, to elevate and to educate themselves, and they're sleeping after a nice night out.
And there are, you know, rooms and apartments, and you just have someone who kills them senselessly and then leaves and leaves two other roommates
unaffected, unimpaired. And then you have a wow, well, how could this happen, and who did this? And then you learn that it's a person studying
criminology, and there's no really underlying motivation, Richard, that we've come to know as to why he would engage in this type of behavior.
Today, he would have had an opportunity to explain himself as the judge noted, not that we could have thought that he would have told the truth if
he did say something. So, maybe we'll never know. But it's just one of those things where, yes, there's murders, there's crime, and everyone is,
you know, sad and unfortunate and just, you know, gut-wrenching.
But when you have members of a community just trying to go to school, educate themselves, their families brought them there for a better future,
they end up dead. And you have this person having no basis or reason to commit the act. It just leaves you scratching your head and wondering the
world in which we live. Wow, what an unsafe, dangerous place, and things happen when you least expect it.
QUEST: Which of course, there -- you know, look, anyone who has practiced in the criminal courts for any length of time is regretfully familiar with
the appallingness of some people's behavior to others.
JACKSON: Yes, there's no question about that. And you know, it's interesting, Richard, because as you looked at these victim-impact
statements --
QUEST: Yes --
JACKSON: And at a sentencing, you have an opportunity, if you're a family members to talk about what your loved ones mean to you, what the loss in
the whole means in your life, what their future that was taken away could have been, that's not going to happen. And when you listen to that,
certainly, it's hard to hear.
But what we saw today was the prosecutor becoming emotional, the judge crying and becoming emotional himself. And it just really shows you that
when you're talking about justice and systems of justice in courtrooms --
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: You're talking about faces behind those who --
QUEST: Can I --
JACKSON: Have been slain. And that's really a -- it's just -- it's a tough thing, but it's a reminder, a stark reminder about what we do in court
every day and what crimes do to families, people and communities.
QUEST: One question does occur to me, this idea that he avoided the death penalty by pleading guilty. I've always been a bit troubled by that,
because I mean not the death penalty per se, that's a different issue, but it always strikes me that if a crime is in -- for those who support the
death penalty, if a crime is meritorious of the ultimate punishment, then pleading guilty shouldn't negate that.
JACKSON: Yes, I think that's a great point to be made, Richard. I think prosecutors have some soul-searching to do in this and in other cases, and
you saw some of the families who were not very well pleased with regard to any plea deal being reached. Sometimes there's good reason to have a plea
deal here. You could question why there would be.
[14:20:00]
I mean, to be clear, you don't put the family through the trauma. There's not the evidence that's presented. You're not reliving the loss of your
loved one. It presents certainly challenges to have week after week where you have these trials. And so, resources are committed. So, if a person is
going to plead guilty, OK. But in this case, he certainly wasn't doing anyone any favors. There was compelling evidence with regard to --
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: DNA, compelling evidence, you know, cellphone data and other things pointing to him. And so, it was a cop --
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: Out --
QUEST: Joey --
JACKSON: That he would take the plea to save his life.
QUEST: Joey, all right, I've just had this given to me in my ear, you're going to get it into your ear as well. We're just hearing that a judge in
Florida has rejected the DOJ's attempt to unseal the grand jury testimony in the Epstein cases. The judge -- the grand jury transcripts. So, I mean,
you -- I owe you one because I'm just throwing this at you --
JACKSON: It's OK --
QUEST: After -- I guess, you know, to unseal transcripts of grand jury proceedings, they're almost sacrosanct in so many ways. So, perhaps that's
not unusual. Are you surprised at this first instance that a judge would reject it?
JACKSON: So, Richard, it's not unusual, and I'll explain why. But before I do, I just have to say that this whole grand jury unsealing and the motion
by the Department of Justice to unseal these records is a farce. It's disingenuous and it's meaningless. Why do I take such a hard stance on
this? What you're attempting to do if you're a White House is saying, hey, we're committed to transparency.
We want the world to see what happened here, and therefore, the secretive proceeding grand jury, we're going to let you know what happened. Stop.
Don't insult a person's intelligence. If you want to be transparent, you don't do it by unsealing records of a grand jury. You do it by releasing
the files. Why? A grand jury proceeding, Richard, is not a determination of guilt versus innocence.
It's not a presentation of every e-mail, of every document, of every record, of every video, of every surveillance, of any document. What it is,
is a bare bones presentation that prosecutors make. I was one, did it many times. And when I say bare bones, you give the grand jury just enough, just
enough to decide two things.
One, is there reasonable cause to believe that a crime was committed, and two, that specific individual committed it? And so, what are we talking
about in terms of the release of grand jury information? It's going to give the public all it needs to know about what Epstein was doing, no, it's not.
It's going to give you the information that prosecutors presented to that specific grand jury to get an indictment of him.
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: If you want the world to know who was involved with Epstein, who were his associates, what was he doing? When was he doing it? Who enabled
him? You release the files. And so, this whole issue about, oh, it's in the public interest. And our motion Department of Justice says it's asking the
judge, we know it's a sacrosanct proceeding, we know it's secretive.
We want to protect witnesses. We want to protect victims. We want -- don't want the defendant to run away, so we're going to have the secret grand
jury proceeding, but this time we're going to release it --
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: To the public. It's ridiculous, because that would have told us nothing. And so, this ruling --
QUEST: Right --
JACKSON: That the judge says, no, OK, whatever, if you want the public to know what happened with Epstein, release the real records that you have
control --
QUEST: OK --
JACKSON: Over, that you don't need a judge to grant any permission for the public to see.
QUEST: Something tells me, Joey, you'll be able to finish this quote from 1985. Sol Wachtler; the Chief Justice of the New York Supreme Court said,
any good prosecutor can --
JACKSON: Ham Sandwich --
QUEST: Thank you, you got -- let me finish the quote! Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict --
JACKSON: A ham sandwich.
QUEST: That's -- thank you. I knew you'd get it. This is a serious stuff I know we're talking about, but that -- but it makes the point that you did
elegantly. Great, good to have you, sir, I'm always -- thank you very much. I owe you one --
JACKSON: Thanks, Richard --
QUEST: Buy you a drink for that one, thank you --
JACKSON: Any time.
QUEST: In a moment, we'll stay with the Epstein saga. A picture is worth a thousand words. What does these pictures mean? In a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:25:00]
QUEST: A weak attempt at distraction. Those are the words from the spokesman for the former U.S. President Barack Obama, who he, along with
many other critics, accused Donald Trump of trying to take the spotlight off the Jeffrey Epstein scandal by going after Mr. Obama.
Instead, on Tuesday, President Trump baselessly accused the former President of treason. He said he weaponizing Intelligence and leading to an
effort to interfere in the 2016 election. Stephen Collinson joins us now from Washington. So, here's the problem, Stephen, here is the problem.
We can spend a lot of time talking about the weaponization and treason and this and that and the other, which is what we're doing, in which case Mr.
Trump has succeeded, and there's the shiny object over there.
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: Yes, that's right. I would say that throughout this now two-week pseudo scandal over Epstein,
he's been unable to use his normal tools of distraction to any effect because it keeps on rolling on. What we have seen today, Richard, was an
extraordinary appearance in the White House briefing room by the Chief Intelligence officer in the United States Tulsi Gabbard.
And she basically released some documents which she says prove that President Obama manipulated Intelligence to create the impression that
Russia interfered in the U.S. election in 2016 to help Trump, which is actually what did happen. I think what the White House is trying to do here
is to create a tsunami of misinformation that will fill those conservative news channels and the MAGA media, and try to sweep the whole issue of
Epstein away --
QUEST: Yes --
COLLINSON: And give the President some relief here.
QUEST: One question that I just do not -- or one point I cannot fully understand and hopefully you'll explain it. Why does MAGA care so much
about this Epstein case, which of course is extremely serious, particularly if they know that the President may in some way be implicated. The man that
they support is telling them not to be. So, why are the MAGA lot continuing to do it?!
COLLINSON: I think the reason is because deep in the DNA of the MAGA movement, and this is -- we're talking about certain of the most loud and
conspiratorial members of that movement, not necessarily every Trump voter, there is a belief, and this has been whipped up by Trump year after year
after year, that the U.S. government is hostage to a cabal of elites and deep state intelligence officers who are secretly running the U.S.
government and are suppressing the truth.
So, you have these Trump cabinet officials, like the attorney general, Pam Bondi, the FBI chief, Kash Patel, who spent years pushing these
conspiracies, monetizing them in some cases on their own MAGA media shows. And when they get into office and turn around and say, actually, there's
nothing to see here. Epstein did die by suicide. There's no client list. Those same MAGA conspiracists see that not as proof that nothing happened,
but as actual proof of their underlying theory in the first place.
RICHARD QUEST, CNN BUSINESS EDITOR-AT-LARGE AND CNN ANCHOR, QUEST MEANS BUSINESS: Indeed. A fascinating point. And by the way, Tulsi Gabbard did
not go as far as her boss and accuse the former President Obama of treason. I'm grateful to you, Stephen. Thank you very much.
COLLINSON: Right.
QUEST: Because that point that Stephen was saying about these so-called elite, the deep state, well, Donald Trump has been at the center of power
in some shape or form for the last three decades, as a businessman, as a leader, as a property developer, he certainly played his full role. And
newly uncovered images obtained exclusively by us are revealing a fresh look at President Trump's past ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
So, 1993, here you go. It shows Epstein at Mr. Trump's wedding to Marla in Maples. Now, Epstein's attendance at the wedding was not widely known until
now. CNN's KFILE also found this footage showing the two of them at a 1999 Victoria's Secret fashion show. All of these were taken long before Epstein
was accused of sexual abuse in such a way.
Kevin Liptak is live at the White House. And I'm guessing the White House is going to point out and say, look, Donald Trump was a player in New York
for decades, it is natural that he would've been at these events with these people. They're all sort of the elites of the time.
KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes. That is more or less what they're saying. And you know, a lot of celebrities of that era were
friends with Jeffrey Epstein, who was someone who cultivated the rich and powerful as part of his career and part of building his aura, and Donald
Trump was certainly one of them.
But the reason that I think these images and photos are so noteworthy is that they do fill in some of the gaps. You know, President Trump has been
pretty veiled about what exactly his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein was. And I think that is one of the underlying questions as this scandal that is
now entering its third week, is what exactly the files that the administration says that they won't release say about Donald Trump.
Now, he has said specifically that no, the attorney general has not told him that his name appears in them, but that hasn't necessarily quieted the
speculation about what exactly some of this information might unearth about Trump himself and that, according to Trump's critics, it is one of the
reasons that he just wants all of this to die away.
And so, that's why I think these images are so interesting and are so notable. The White House says that they're nothing more than out of
context, frame grabs of innocuous videos and pictures of widely attended events, which I think is important to get out there, important to put out
what the White House is saying about them.
But certainly, I don't think it's helpful for Trump in any way as he tries to tamp down on this ongoing scandal to see photos of himself out there
circulating with Jeffrey Epstein.
QUEST: And it -- but it -- you know, developed what Stephen Collinson was just saying a second or two ago. Because by right, you know, his close
supporters who seem to want to -- will walk over hot coals for him and run a million miles, are not giving up on this because they do believe that
there is this, quote, "a deep state," there is something smelly about the whole thing.
LIPTAK: Yes, and I think the thing about the MAGA movement that's important is that it's not -- like any political movement, it's not
monolithic. There are people in this group who have been with him since 2015 who are going to be with him until the end. You know, I think of kind
of like the rural middle to lower class voters who kind of voted for him and will be with him forever.
But there were a lot of people who voted in last year's election who were not that group of people, maybe they voted for the first time, maybe they
weren't voting for Donald Trump, but they were voting against Kamala Harris. These are people for whom Donald Trump does not necessarily have an
iron grip upon. A lot of them were first time voters. A lot of them are young men for whom this issue is actually quite a big deal.
[14:35:00]
And you hear that in some of the right-wing media, things like the Theo Von Podcast or some of the man -- so-called manosphere, people for whom Donald
Trump is not the end all, be all of politics. They don't necessarily feel a great allegiance to him as a man, and they do want to know more about these
Epstein files, about these Epstein cases. That's the group of people that I think aren't necessarily going to let this go anytime soon, at least,
despite all of the administration's efforts to put out more information, trying to get the grand jury records out, try and interview Ghislaine
Maxwell, which has not gone over particularly well with some of that subset of people.
And so, I think that's the thing to watch going forward is what subset of the MAGA movement stays with Trump and what part decides that this is kind
of the last straw.
QUEST: I'm grateful. Kevin, thank you very much indeed. Thank you.
Delta, Delta Airlines is now being questioned about its potential use of A.I. in the setting of ticket prices. In a letter to Delta's chief
executive, three U.S. senators have questioned the plans and potential data privacy concerns. Recently Delta has said it will use an A.I.-based revenue
management to forecast demand for specific routes and flights. Investors were told the technology is capable of predicting how much an individual
would pay and setting prices based upon it. It's a massive enhancement, if you will, of dynamic pricing. Delta has said it's nothing to do with
individuals per se, and that individual information, they're not about to do individual pricing.
The rankings are out for the world's most powerful passports, and three Asian nations are top of the list. It's the Henley Passport Index. Now,
Singapore is number one. South Korea moved to join Japan in the number two spot. The U.K. continued its downward trend coming in at six, and the U.S.
has dropped to its lowest level landing in at 10th.
It ranks the world's passports according to the number of destinations and all of the variety of things without prior visas, restrictions, you name
it. It's -- basically, it's easability of use of passports.
Still to come with you and I tonight, the landmark opinion from The Hague. The world's top court says countries must address urgent and existential
threat of climate change. A campaigner from the Solomon Islands in a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[14:40:00]
QUEST: In a landmark opinion, the world's top court says countries must address the urgent and existential threat of climate change. Failure to
meet climate goals and curb emissions could lead to reparations, according to the International Court of Justice. Although, it's non-binding, it was
immediately welcomed by environmental groups.
Legal experts branded it a victory for the small island nations in the face of rising sea levels and skyrocketing temperatures. The court's president
made clear what is at stake.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
YUJI IWASAWA, PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: The court notes that the consequences of climate change as severe and far-reaching. They
affect both natural ecosystems and human populations. These consequences underscore the urgent and existential threat caused by climate change.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
QUEST: Now, Cynthia Houniuhi is the climate campaigner from the Solomon Islands and the president of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate
Change. Cynthia is with me now. Good to -- congratulations on the victory as such.
But you see, I just wonder how do you prevent it being a pyrrhic victory where everybody says, oh, yes. Really well done. Yes, yes, yes. But nothing
actually follows on and actually happens. That, of course, is the ultimate difficulty with this decision.
CYNTHIA HOUNIUHI, PRESIDENT, PACIFIC ISLANDS STUDENTS FIGHTING CLIMATE CHANGE: Yes. So, for us, it's been six years to get here, and this is just
the start. This is something that we can build on. We envision the next phase. We still have a long way to go as well. So, we're in it for the long
run. And because the motivation is not just legal exercise, exploring powerful legal too, we are -- actually, this is our hope as coming from
frontline communities.
QUEST: The problem is that all the major countries -- well, a lot of the major countries, for example, the United States only accepts ICJ on certain
cases, in certain circumstances. It doesn't have a general acceptance of it. How are you going to get the recalcitrant to follow it?
HOUNIUHI: Yes. So, the wonderful thing about the AAO ruling that just happened today is that it affirms that the legal obligations in terms of
climate change does not just -- is not just limited to the climate treaties that you have to sign up to, it also extends to well established
international customary law, which can in, more or less, affect countries that do not recognize or are not -- non-member states to these treaties and
climate treaties.
QUEST: Why did you bring the case in a sense? I've been to a lot of the Pacific Island. In fact, I was -- I did the Island Hopper only a few months
ago. So, I hopped my way across the Pacific and saw it firsthand, the low- lying nature of your beautiful homes. But it's still quite an achievement of taking it all the way to the ICJ.
HOUNIUHI: Yes, the journey itself would -- will inspire more actions such as this to come out, because it started with -- I was in a classroom 26
years ago and we wanted to explore avenues. And so, this is our livelihood at stake. We do not wish this on other people. And the nature of climate
change is that it affects all of us just differently. We may be at the frontline now, but if we continue business as usual, we would not risk that
on someone else.
QUEST: Are you seeing -- and tell me the evidence that you are. the effects of it in your home.
HOUNIUHI: Yes, I grew up in an island, and it's in the Solomon. So, that's where I'm from. And in Malaita there is an island that people have started
to relocate because the seas kept coming in and coming in. And when there's high tide, it comes into the village. So, it's not habitable anymore. So,
people have had to move. But this connection to land is very important to us as indigenous people, Solomons.
And so, how do you navigate those, who gets to help out here because it costs to relocate and the right to stay in --
QUEST: It's a long way from the Solomon Islands to The Hague in the Netherlands. I mean -- and yet, at the same time, it's the courts are for
everybody. So, what does it feel like today for you? Because you'll be thinking of your friends, your families back home with their customs and
traditions and all gathering round and there you are in the midst of The Hague, in the middle of a -- probably a bit of a heat wave in Europe at the
moment, but you get my point. What's it feels like to be there?
[14:45:00]
HOUNIUHI: Yes, it feels, for me, I wish my people could be here to tell their stories. They lived realities that they have. So, it's very emotional
to be here knowing that I represent people who could not be here. It's very emotional. And then you're sweating as well because the heat is there, but
also sitting inside court and then, listening to the judges, just you think about the hope that people have placed in this campaign for six years and
the promises and then that people have talked about and you want to go back home to your people and give them, look, something that we can build on.
So, I wanted this so bad so to happen the way it happened, and it was beyond what I expected as well.
QUEST: Cynthia, I'm grateful. Thank you very much. I mean, extraordinary achievements and Godspeed and safe journey home. Thank you.
Now, as we continue, you and I --
HOUNIUHI: Thank you.
QUEST: -- Isa is not here, but I promise you I've still got a good book, a summer of love saucy books. Isa loves a good page and a good bodice ripper.
London's first romance-only bookshop fast becoming the go-to destinations for a passionate story. Oh, a smut hut. There's a thought.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
QUEST: It is a very hot summer in London, but temperatures are rising in a different way at the Saucy Books, which is London's first bookstore
dedicated to love stories. It's their pride and prejudice. And Bridget Jones' diary, romance is long being the popular genre. And while critics
often dismiss it as smut, business is booming. Isa has been to find out.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ISA SOARES, CNN ANCHOR AND CORRESPONDENT: Are you looking for romance? Well, this could be just the place for you. This is London's first romance-
only bookshop. Come with me.
SOARES (voice-over): Here, you can swoon, sigh, and daydream to your heart's content. There's the classics, of course, but this isn't your
grandmother's romance section. There's romantasy, cowboy romance, hockey romance, fiery enemies to lover stories, and even, yes, slightly saucier
and steamier ones.
But founder Sarah Maxwell tells me there's nothing to blush about.
SARAH MAXWELL, FOUNDER, SAUCY BOOKS: So, many of these amazing books have been sort of dubbed as, quote/unquote, "smut," and I think that's really
unfair because they have, you know, great character building, amazing plot, a lot of time it's very political. There's a -- it's not -- you know, it
isn't smut. So, I felt like we should reclaim that word. So, we have a smut hut.
[14:50:00]
Which is where the destination for all the most popular books, actually.
SOARES (voice-over): Saucy Books is part of a growing trend. Romance-only bookstores popping up across the U.K., the U.S. and Canada.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I've always been a little bit, not ashamed, but shy about kind of saying that I like reading romance because it feels then that
people will not take you seriously as a reader.
SOARES (voice-over): The appetite is voracious. Romance sales in the U.K. alone total more than $90 million last year. A search partly fueled by
BookTok.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I love this book because it's so relatable. It's not a fluffy romance book.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This book is the blueprint for good romance.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, for fantasy romance, I would recommend that you start with either the "Powerless" trilogy or the "Crimson Moth" duology.
SOARES (voice-over): Which is brought in a wave of new younger readers.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nowadays, people are coming out about it more and being able to connect and bond, and I know that's one of the reasons why I
love romance so much as being able to talk with friends and like analyze the plot. And it's really a community building aspect.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Dearest, gentle reader --
SOARES (voice-over): Adding to the success, hit TV adaptations like "Bridgeton."
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There is nothing that makes me happier than being with you.
SOARES (voice-over): And rivals.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Makes life much more exciting.
SOARES (voice-over): From the screen to the page, modern romance, it seems is blooming.
MAXWELL: I think people really recognize themselves in these characters and they feel very empowered by them. And so, they are almost proud to
acknowledge that they have read that book.
SOARES (voice-over): And as author Jack Strange who writes gay romance novels points out, it's also relatable.
JACK STRANGE, AUTHOR: And from my perspective, being able to write like more diverse stories for people, because people want those stories.
SOARES: Yes.
STRANGE: And especially now, like with everything going on, we want fun and we want excitement and escapism.
SOARES (voice-over): And readers are lapping it up.
Isa Soares, CNN, Notting Hill, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
QUEST: And so, to Italy now where we've gained an exclusive look at what's hiding beneath the surface of the City of Rome. Now, there are the caves
and the tunnels and they're deep below ground and it shed lights on what was once the heart of the ancient city, including its secrets,
infrastructure, and more. CNN's Ben Wedeman, who knows Rome better than most, explores the iconic capital lying grotto.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): There is the Rome above, its ruins teaming with tourists in the midday summer sun.
And then, there's the Rome below. A sprawling network of tunnels, tombs, catacombs, and caves.
Chief archeologist Ersilia D'Ambrosio gave us an exclusive peak at a part of that cool dark underworld, still off limits to the public.
We're 20 meters below the surface, she says, and it goes deeper still.
WEDEMAN: We are underneath the Capitoline Hill, the Mons Capitolinus as it's known in Latin, one of the seven hills of Ancient Rome. How ancient?
Well, you get an idea because if you look up there, that white stone is the foundation to the Temple of Jupiter that was built in the sixth century
B.C.
WEDEMAN (voice-over): Chiseled out of the soft volcanic stone, known in Italian as tufo, these corridors in the rooms off of them were an integral
organic part of the city with shops, store rooms, workshops, and taverns, some of the old wine jugs are still here.
The parts where you see bricks are from the 1800s intended to shore up the structure, Ersilia says. Clearly, the tunnels in the tufo are much older,
starting in Roman times. This was a hive of activity until early last century.
Between the '20s and 1940 during the fascist era, Ersilia tells me, the old working class neighborhoods around the Capitoline Hill were demolished as
part of an effort to modernize the city. And when war came to the capitol, this subterranean world served another new purpose.
WEDEMAN: Here, have a look at this. Here. Cabinetto, means toilet. This was done during the Second World War when this entire complex was used as a
bomb shelter while Rome was being bombed by the Allies.
WEDEMAN (voice-over): Now, some 80 or so years later, this underground warren is being prepared to welcome visitors sometime late next year or
early in 2027.
[14:55:00]
The eternal city still holds many secrets above and below.
Ben Wedeman, CNN, under Rome.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
QUEST: And finally, this are the legendary musicians, Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham of Fleetwood Mac are back much to the fan's delight.
According to a new release, they will be releasing a reissue of Buckingham Nicks, their first and only studio album they put out in as a duo in 1973.
This comes as the famously on again, off again collaborators have recently been teasing a reunion of sorts. They had both posted lyrics to their song
"Frozen Love" of Buckingham Nicks on social media.
You're up to date. Stay with CNN. "What We Know" with Christina Macfarlane is next. I will have "Quest Means Business" on the other side of that.
There's a lot more. Have a good evening.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:00:00]
END
