♪ today, my friend you did it, you did it, you did it... ♪ centrum silver is now clinically shown to support cognitive health in older adults.

it's one more step towards taking charge of your health. so every day, you can say, ♪ youuu did it! ♪ with centrum silver. the u.s. is expected to announce that it will include cluster munitions in its newest military aid package for ukraine. russia calls it, kwquote, a mov of destination, though it uses cluster munitions itself. we are standing by for the white house and pentagon briefings this hour. plus, a cnn exclusive on where the special counsel is now focusing its investigation into election interference. it is that oval office meeting where former president donald trump heard some wild options about how to hold on to power. cnn's exclusive reporting is coming up. and the u.s. job market is

cooling off slightly. we will break down the june jobs report and whether it is enough for fed chair jerome powell to change his plan on interest rate hikes. we are following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to "cnn news central." in moments, the white house briefing set to begin. we may hear why president biden is taking an unprecedented step in russia's war in ukraine. defense officials say the administration will supply ukraine for the first time with cluster munitions. this weapon is banned in nearly all western nations because of a risk to civilians. a cluster munition made up of a canister that contains anywhere from dozens to hundreds of smaller bombs. danger is, oftentimes for a small percentage, those bombs do not detonate immediately. as you see in this attack that

russia launched in kharkiv, ukraine, last year. that could pose a danger to civilians for many years to come. russia and ukraine have used cluster munitions in this conflict. as we wait for the briefing to begin, let's turn to cnn's nada bashir in london. the issue here seems to be the western view is ukraine needs the munitions to break through the entrenched russian lines, multiple lines of defense, minefields, trenches, et cetera. how are ukrainian officials and now western officials making that case? >> reporter: well, look, this is something that has been under consideration by the biden administration for some time now. it's something that president zelenskyy has been pushing for and requesting for some time now. but this anticipated turnaround by the biden administration, it's really coming in response to the situation on the gruound. we know ukraine is in the midst of the weeks' long counteroffensive.

it is, a, not going as quickly as western allies anticipated, and also the gains being made by the ukrainian armed forces simply aren't as substantial as the u.s. and other allies has hoped. we know ukraine is burning through its weapons stockpile, and that is a significant concern because that is, of course, simply not sustainable. that, as you mentioned, is something that russian officials themselves have picked up on, have pointed out. we've heard from the russian ambassador to belarus speaking about this. he said the hawks in the west have realized that the much-advertised counteroffensive of the ukrainian armed forces did not go according to plan, so they are trying at all costs to give at least some impetus to it. in fact, it is a move of desperation. now, of course, the u.s. administration actually phased out these cluster munitions in 2016. they do have a large stockpile. as you mentioned, this would be a deeply controversial move. these weapons have been outlawed by more than 100 countries, including some of the u.s.'s

closest nato allies. that is because of the significant, long-term risk these weapons can pose to civilians. we've seen cluster munitions used to devastating effect by the russian armed forces in the past in syria. we know both ukraine and russia are currently using these munitions on the battlefield in ukraine. ukraine is currently being supplied cluster munitions by turkey. however, they do want those u.s. cluster munitions which they can use with those u.s.-made weapons supplied by the biden administration. as you mentioned, as well, these are really risky. there is a significant case around the civilian risk because many of these don't detonate and give the long-term risk. 10% to 20% of the bomblets distributed by the canisters do not detonate, so it is a hugely controversial matter. of course, this would mark a significant turnaround by the biden administration if, indeed, it is approved. >> yeah, and u.s. defense

officials say the fail rate or dead rate of the kmunitions they're supplying they're aiming for 2% or 2 p.5%, lower than in other cases. we'll see if it maintains that standard. nada bashir in london, thank you so much. the biden administration's decision is called a move of desperation amid ukraine's ongoing counteroffensive. ukraine has been asking for these cluster munitions for some time now. we have cnn's natasha bertrand live at the pentagon. natasha, what changed? >> reporter: this is the result of the realities on the ground in ukraine right now. u.s. officials had not necessarily been considering providing these cluster munitions to ukraine in a serious way up until a few weeks ago, when ukraine did launch its counteroffensive. u.s. officials began to realize that ukraine might not have enough ammunition to sustain it through the end of their counteroffensive, enough to get them through the war in ukraine. now, the reality, though, is

that the u.s. has these munitions in its stockpile, but they also only have so many of those munitions. so it is unclear whether this is simply going to be a temporary measure to hold them over until more ammunition is supplied to them, more conventional ammunition, so they don't need to use these cluster ammunitions, or whether this is a more long-term solution. but it is a very controversial move, and it took the biden administration quite a long time to get to this point. ukraine had been asking for months and months for this ammunition, saying that the russians are using it, therefore, they should also be able to use it, and arguing they would not use it in civilian areas. but, they say, it could really have a big impact in their operations on the battlefield. they do believe that because you can hit larger areas and more concentrated targets of russian troops with these munitions, it could help them break through those russian defensive lines. now, u.s. officials do seem to agree. pentagon press secretary patrick ry ryder, he said yesterday he believes need could have a significant impact in allowing ukrainian forces to hit russian

personnel and also engage in anti-tank attacks. this is something the administration has kind of come around to, but it's mostly been by necessity. the ukrainians are burning through artillery ammunition, and the u.s. has a very large stockpile of the cluster munitions. now, they are looking to tap into the stockpile. of course, u.s. allies, not necessarily thrilled by it, but u.s. officials also say they have had extensive conversations behind the scenes with some of those allies who have signed on to that ban on cluster munitions, and they say they have managed to aleleviate some of their concerns. >> they've alleviated some of their concerns. you have the nato summit coming up here soon where you have many european allies of ukraine and the u.s. who have signed on to this ban on these munitions. do you think that there will be any pushback, any folks whose concerns have not opiniobeen alleviated? >> reporter: we're already hearing a little bit of dissent from some u.s. allies, notably the u.n. secretary general, his

spokesperson said he does remain opposed still to the use of cluster munitions because he supports the ban on cluster munitions that was signed in 2010. we also heard from germany which did not necessarily give a full-fu full-throated defense of the united states' decision to send these munitions with the german defense minister saying this morning it is not an option for berlin to send the cluster munitions themselves because they are signatory to this ban. beyond that, he said he couldn't comment. obviously, allies are approaching this with some trepidation, but u.s. officials don't believe this is going to cause a lot of disunity or heartburn going into next week's summit. >> all right. natasha bertrand at the pentagon, thank you for that report. boris. let's dig deeper on this issue and others with cnn global affairs dozier, senior managing editor at "the military times."

heads-up, we are monitoring jake sullivan who is giving a press conference, and we could cut in if he talks about these munitions. we know some 94% of cluster bomb casualties are actually civilians. i'm wondering from your perspective, what kind of ethical questions and considerations this raises for the white house. >> well, the questions it raises for the white house are the same ones it raises for the ukrainians. this is short term gain for long term risk to civilians later, especially since this is territorial that ukraine is trying to take back. but tactically, as natasha mentioned, the ukrainians in this offensive are burning through ammunition faster almost than nato countries can supply it. so this could give them as much as another month of fighting time before the winter sets in. that can be crucial in terms of

winning back square miles on the battlefield. long term, it also gives them the opportunity to take back more territory by the way these ope operate. the same artillery munitions that are right now launching and hitting one discreet area, instead, these multiple, little bomblets spread out, can punch through armor, take out more personnel. from the ukrainian perspective, the more that they gain, the more likely that nato countries are to stop saying, "oh, this counteroffensive is going really slow," and the more likely they are to make long-term pledges to keep this battle going. >> so in your mind, is this a sign that the west and ukraine itself is concerned about the pace of the counteroffensive? >> look, even president zelenskyy said the counteroffensive is going slower

than they expected, but you have to look at what they're up against. russia knew where they were going to be coming for and has heavily mined a lot of those areas to protect its troops. it's always easier as the wisdom of war goes to defend than to attack. the other thing that the russians did was they allegedly took out that bomb in the -- that dam in the south, which flooded a large area. the russians no longer had more forces north, so ukraine is facing an entrenched enemy that is reinforced. moscow just said it is going to be calling up tens of thousands of reserves. >> kim, for a moment, stand by because we're going to the national security adviser at the podium at the white house. here's jake sullivan. >> to go into the details of that drawdown package and the specifics on the types of munitions being provided, but i will use this opportunity today to make a few points.

first, we base our security assistance decision on ukraine's needs on the ground. ukraine needs artillery to sustain its offensive and defensive operations. artillery is at the core of this conflict. ukraine is firing thousands of rounds a day to defend against russian efforts to advance and also to support its own efforts to retake its sovereign territory. we have provided ukraine with a historic amount of unitary artillery rounds, and we are ramping up domestic production of these rounds. we've already seen substantial increases in production, but this process will continue to take time. it will be critical to provide ukraine with a bridge of supplies while our domestic production is ramped up. we will not leave ukraine defenseless at any point in this conflict, period. second, russia has been using cluster munitions since the start of this war to attack ukraine. russia has been using cluster

munitions with high dud or failure rates of between 30% and 40%. in this environment, ukraine has been requesting cluster munitions in order to defend its own sovereign territory. the cluster munitions that we would provide have dud rates far below what russia is doing, is providing, not higher than 2.5%. third, we are closely coordinating with ukraine as it has requested these munitions. ukraine is committed to post-conflict demining efforts to mitigate any potential harm to civilians, and this will be necessary regardless of whether the united states provides these munitions or not because of russia's widespread use of munitions. we will have to continue to assist ukraine with de-mining efforts no matter what, given the significant use of cluster munitions already perpetrated by russia. so the bottom line is this, we recognize the cluster munitions create a risk of civilian harm

from unexploded ordinates. this is why we have deferred the decision for as long as we could. but there is also a massive risk of civilian harm if russian troops and tanks roll over ukrainian positions and take more ukrainian territory and subjugate more ukrainian civilians because ukraine doesn't have enough artillery. that is intolerable to us. ukraine would not be using these munitions in some foreign land. this is their country they're defending. these are their citizens they're protecting. they are motivated to use any weapon system they have in a way that minimizes risks to those citizens. so with that, i would be happy to take your questions. >> thank you so much. le "wall street journal." i was hoping you could comment on news earlier this week that the russians may be open to a prisoner swap for evan gershkovich. i also had a question for you about how the uprising by the wagner group may, in your view,

impact russia's leaders' willingness or lack of willingness to make a deal that would release evan. >> first, as karine mentioned before, today is the 100th day of evan's unlawful and unjust def dete detention. for those 100 days, president biden, the national security team, our embassy in moscow, secretary of state, myself personally have been invested in trying to bring him home safely. second, i had the opportunity this morning to meet with evan's employers at "the wall street journal" and the personal representatives of his family to talk about the latest status in his case and our efforts to bring evan home. third, we did see the comments from the kremlin that there have been contacts between the u.s. and russia regarding evan and other unjustly detained americans. it is true, and we have said that we remain in contact with russian authorities at high

levels on these cases to try to figure out a way to bring unjustly detained americans home, including evan. we have also made clear for months now, even before evan was detained, as we were dealing with paul whelan, that we are prepared to do hard things in order to get our citizens home, including getting evan home. i do not want to give false hope. what the kremlin said earlier this week is correct, there have been discussions. but those discussions have not produced a clear pathway to a resolution. so i cannot stand here today and tell you that we have a clear answer to how we are going to get evan home. all i can tell you is we have a conviction that we will do everything possible to bring evan home. with respect to the question of whether the recent actions by prigozhin and the fallout from that creates new openings or opportunities, i can't say that i have perceived that directly. but, of course, this is a story that continues to be written day by day, so we will have to see

how things continue to play out in moscow. in the meantime, we're going to stay laser focused on doing everything we can, both directly with the russians and then with other allies and partners around the world who are invested in his safe return, to try to get him out as soon as possible. >> president zelenskyy senaid a invitation for ukraine to join nato would be an ideal outcome for the summit. why is that not an outcome for the summit? >> the united states supports the open door policy, which says that ukraine and nato can make a decision together about its pathway toward membership. vilnius will be an important pathway on the way to membership. our nato allies will have the opportunity to discuss reforms still necessary for ukraine to come up to nato standards. this will, in fact, be a milestone, but ukraine still has further steps it needs to take before membership in nato. >> no invitation coming at this summit? >> ukraine will not be joining

nato coming out of this summit. we will discuss what steps are necessary as it continues along its path. >> cluster munitions, what convinced president biden this is the right time for cluster munitions given concerns? did allies express concerns? are you suggesting the reason you are providing munitions is ukraine is running out of artillery rounds? is that the fact of it? >> first, we have been looking at this for quite some time. what we have been weighing is this basic question of civilian harm. the challenge of cluster munitions, as you know, is even at low dud rates, there are some unexploded ordinates that are left, and that could potentially pose a risk to civilians down the road. so we did not immediately come out of the gate and prosvide this. we had to balance this against the risk of civilian harm if ukraine didn't have sufficient artillery ammunition. we are reaching a point in this conflict because of the dramatically high expenditure rates of artillery by ukraine and by russia, where we need to

build a bridge from where we are today to when we have enough monthly production of unitary rounds, that unitary rounds alone will suffice to give ukraine what it needs. as a result, this is the moment to begin the construction of that bridge so that there isn't any period over the summer or heading into this fall when ukraine is short on artillery. being short on artillery, it is vulnerable to russian counterattacks that could s subjugate more ukrainian civilians. that's the thinking behind our decision. we consulted closely with allies in deciding to do this. some allies who are not ci signatories to the oslo convention embraced it with open arms, said this is absolutely the right thing to do. even allies who were signatories to the oslo convention, while they cannot formally support something they've signed up to a convention against, have indicated both privately and many of them publicly over the course of today, that they understand our decision and,

fundamentally, they recognize the difference between russia using its cluster munitions to attack ukraine and ukraine using cluster munitions to defend itself, its citizens and its sovereign territory. so we feel that this will in no way disrupt the very strong, firm unity that we have heading into the nato summit in vilnius next week. >> thanks, jake. to follow up on the cluster munitions, last year in march, the u.s. ambassador to the united nations, she describes those munitions as, quote, exceptionally lethal weaponry which has no place on the battlefield. how do you square those comments with this decision? secondly, has ukraine provided you with any assurances or guarantees in terms of their use in civilian areas, that they won't use them within a certain radius of civilians, for example? >> ukraine has provided written assurances it is going to use these in a very careful way that is aimed at minimizing any risk to civilians. by the way, ukraine, the democratically elected government of ukraine has every incentive to minimize risk to

civilians because it's their civilians. it's ukrainians who they are trying to protect and defend. this is not ukraine taking these and using them in the middle east, southeast asia or some faraway land. they're using them on their territory to defend their territory. we believe they are highly motivated to do this. beyond being highly motivated, they have, to directly answer your questions, provided these assurances to us. in terms of the ambassador's comments and other comments that have been bandied about, let me just say, the use of cluster munitions by russia in this conflict is completely unacceptable on multiple counts. first, they're using them to attack a sovereign country in flagrant violation of international law. secondly, they're using them specifically to strike after civilian targets, not only military target , also in flagrant violation of international law. with this weapon system as well as other weapon systems, we have identified war crimes committed

by the russians. third and critically, there is a big difference between the type of cluster munition being used by russia and the type that we would provide to you caukraine. as mentioned before, ours have a maximum of 2.5% dud rate. the dud rate of the russian munitions is between 30% and 40%. just so i don't get this wrong, i will read it to you. the department of defense assesses that during the first year of the conflict alone, russia fired cluster munitions deployed from a range of weapon systems likely expended tens of millions of sub munitions or bomblets in ukraine. final point, and this is an important point, when i talk about what russia is doing with cluster munitions, i'm not making an argument which says they do it so we'll don't. t -- do it. the argument i'm making is russia has already spread tens of millions of these bomblets across ukrainian territory. we have to ask ourselves, is

ukraine's use of the munitions on the same land that much of an addition of civilian harm, given that area has to be de-mined regardless? that's why when we look at the situation today opposed to a year ago, and when we look at what ukraine would be doing with these weapons opposed to what russia is doing with these weapons, we see a substantial difference. it doesn't make it an easy deings dec decision, and i'm not going to stand up here and say it is. it was a decision we deferred. it required a real hard look at the potential harm to civilians. >> jake -- >> when we put all of this together, there was a unanimous recommendation from the national security team and president biden who ultimately decided in consultation with allies and partners and in consultation with members of congress to move forward on this step. >> jake, are you satisfied with the pace and progress of the ukrainian counteroffensive so far? >> we get this question a lot. i'm not judging or grading the ukrainian count ofer offensive. i'm in washington d.c.

i'm not in the battlefield. my life isn't on the line. to say i'm satisfied or not, what i'll say, it is hard going. the russians are dug in. they have thrown a lot of defense, manpower and munitions at this, and the ukrainians have bravely, systematically been punching, pushing forward and continue to do so. the ukrainians also have a substantial amount of capacity they have not yet committed to this fight. the story of this counteroffensive is far from written, and we will continue to support ukraine along the way. >> jake, you said that ukraine provided written assurances for how they would use these munitions. when was that provided? also, can you provide more details on what are those assurances? does that -- >> they provided them in the context of their written refquet to us for these munitions. they reached out and requested them. i couldn't give you the date, but some weeks ago. in doing so, the assurance they provided is they intend to use these munitions in a way to minimize the exposure of civilians, so outside of civilian areas and outside of

areas that civilians traffic. that is to say, on the battlefield where they're presently both trying to defend their territory and to move forward. >> are there specific locations, red lines in the assurances? did the administration advise them, you know, only use these munitions in these specific locations? >> this is going to be an ongoing conversation because, obviously, the battlefield is shifting at all times. it is impossible to set down a map and define this with the level of specificity that maybe your question implies. but it does mean that this conversation needs to be ongoing. just as it is with every other weapon system we are providing ukraine. so far, we have found that when ukraine provides assurances to the united states about the use of its munitions, it is followed through on that in terms of the limitations and constraints it has placed on those. we expect the same in this case. i want to underscore again, i know i sound like a broken record, but the idea that ukrainian men and women fighting for the armed forces of ukraine want to willy-nilly use these in a way that will harm ukrainian

civilians, which is somewhat implied in the questions, i find, you know, at odds with their fundamental desire to protect their country men and their willingness to put their lives on the line to protect their countrymen. >> do you know prigozhin's location. >> i do not. >> followup on ukraine, and then i have a second question related to that. is it the u.s. view that president zelenskyy should attend the nato summit, and how might his presence affect the outcome of the discussions? >> we would welcome president zelenskyy at the nato summit. president biden would welcome the opportunity to meet with president zelenskyy at the nato summit. the nato summit will dive into the question of nato's relationship with ukraine. both the question of its pathway toward future membership and the question of an ongoing partnership that has existed for several years. there will be important, practical announcements in that regard at the summit, so president zelenskyy's attendance at it would be very much

welcome. >> with respect to belarus, i'm sorry, eastern european nations, want nato allies to beef up their security on the eastern flank, especially with mr. prigozhin's expected exile, the wagner group's exile into belarus, sharing a border with lithuania. is the u.s. planning any security guarantees to be announced at the summit? >> we have the ultimate guarantee, and it is article v of nato. we intend to defend every inch of nato territory. we also put our money where our mouth is in terms of enhanced u.s. deployments in both poland and the pal tibaltic states, as as other eastern flank allies. i met with my counterpart from po poland, the polish national security adviser. the first and main topic of conversation was the evolumving threat from belarus. whether prigozhin will end up there is an open question.

also, the deployments of nuclear weapons on the territory of belarus, and the role of belarus and complicity of belarus in russia's aggression in ukraine. these are all things we have been taking account of going back to the start of this conflict. we constantly look at everything from the positioning of nato forces to the prepositioning of various stocks and ammunition in the eastern flank. that will be a continued discussion at vilnius. but this is an evolving picture, and so i don't think vilnius is going to be the place where we put the final storyline down. it'll continue to evolve as we go forward. >> thanks, jake. does the u.s. support eliminating the need for ukraine to full up a membership action plan that establishes benchmarks that they have to meet for nato membership? >> we're looking at that question. that is an active discussion among allies right now, whether ukraine has, in fact, moved beyond the need for map. i won't get ahead of where leaders will end up at the

summit, but it is under active consideration. >> quickly, one on a bilat with erdogan, is this going to be a pull-aside the president is planning to have, or will it be a full-blown bilateral meeting to discuss sweden's membership? >> i have nothing to announce today, but you can expect president biden and president erdogan will talk in vilnius. what format it'll take remains to be seen. >> two questions. fis first on munitions. germany opposed them. does that suggest any cracks in the alliance to you? what do you make of the opposition? >> first, what i saw germany say today was three things. number one, they're confident the united states took this decision carefully and after weighing all considerations. number two, russia has used these in an intolerable way to attack ukraine. three, every weapon system ukraine is using, they're using to defend its people and to retake its own sovereign territory. if you read what the german

chancellor and spokesperson put out today, they are a signatory to oslo. they don't transfer -- they don't have or transfer cluster munitions. but nothing in what they have said today suggests there are any cracks in nato unity, quite the contrary. there is deep understanding, we believe, across the alliance about the fundamental challenge ukraine faces and about our collective desire to ensure we are providing ukraine with what it needs to defend itself. >> sorry. when it comes to -- >> please. >> can you tell us specifically when the president signed the authorization? also, we have seen over the course of this war how there were some no-go topics, f-16s, cluster munitions. both of those are moving forward. is there a line where the u.s. won't cross? obviously, the president has said no u.s. personnel inside ukraine. is there some other limit, or does this suggest to president zelenskyy that whatever he needs ultimately he will get? >> the president has been very clear from the very beginning of this conflict about two things

that have been unwavering. first, the united states is not going to war with russia in united ukraine. second, the united states is not providing weapons to attack russia. we don't encourage or enable attacks on russian territory from ukraine. the question of weapon systems has evolved as the conflict evolved. those two fundamental presceps were true from the start and will remain. >> would you sign it? >> i can't give the specifics on that because, you know, i'll let the internal processes kind of have their sanctity. but he approved it, as i said, after a unanimous recommendation from his national security team. >> you said that nato is stronger than ever at this point. what does it say that there are two nato members who have been holding up sweden's ability to join the alliance for more than a year now? >> so the last nato ally to come into the alliance before

finland, i believe it was montenegro, and i think it took something like 19 months for them to come in. i think a lot of people's perceptions about the process have been shaped by just how fast we moved to get sweden and finland ratified here in the united states on a bipartisan basis, how fast finland came in, and then how it has only been a year since sweden sought membership. we are confident that sweden will come in in the not-too-distant future, and there will be unanimous support for that. i would go beyond that to say in terms of what it says about nato's strength, here you have two historically non-aligned countries, who for decades did not join nato, seeking to join nato. i think there is no clearer indication of the strength, attraction and cohesion of nato than that. >> thank you, jake. so i understand your point about requirements ukraine still needs

to do in order to fast track its membership. also, your point on map. but just going broader from that, my understanding is that the president believes that a fast track membership for ukraine is an invitation rather than a deterrence to war with russia. he has several times expressed his concern for nuclear escalation. can you first confirm whether my understanding is correct? and, if so, can you explain the calculus behind the president's decision on that, what led him to that conclusion? >> the president has repeatedly said that there is an open door, that there is a pathway for ukraine, and that ukraine needs to take additional reforms to complete its work toward nato membership. that has been his position from the beginning. that remains true today. that will remain true at vilnius. the president also has been clear that we are going to support ukraine for as long as it takes and provide them an exceptional quantity of arms and capabilities, both from ourselves and facilitating those

from allies and partners, but that we are not seeking to start world war iii. that is the course we've been on since the start of this conflict. that is the course we remain on today. we believe we have been able to mount a vigorous, concerted, effective, dynamic response to russia's aggression in support of the brave people of ukraine. >> one more. can you confirm that the former u.s. officials have held secret talks with ukraine, with prominent russians, to lay the groundwork for a negotiation toward a peace deal? >> i actually appreciate this question because i think that the reporting suggested something that, in fact, has not happened.y m understanding is t meeting with the foreign leader of russia. it didn't include the united states government. the united states government didn't pass messages through the meeting. the united states didn't pursue gl diplomacy, indirect or direct,

period. between civilians, americans and russians, that's been happening for time in memorial. the united states government is not using any of those contacts to pass messages, to promote diplomacy, direct, indirect or otherwise, and any suggestion to the contrary is simply untrue. >> thank you, jake. i have two questions. japanese prime minister kishida with this talk of contaminated water at the -- yesterday, iaea secretary general grosse visited south ko korea, and he said he will not take the responsibility for this charge of contaminated waters. what is the united states' position on the iaea's report on

this charge of contaminated water in fukushima? then i have a second question. >> from our perspective, the iaea secretary general's report was based on the professional analysis of the international institution, and i'll leave it at that. i'd say the rok government made its own statements and reactions to that, which we thought were constructive. >> south korea's meeting, nuclear conservative meeting, we heard in seoul -- do you have any contents of the meeting, who is going to be attending this meeting? >> i don't have anything to announce today. i will say, though, that i spoke with my south korean counterpart last evening to discuss preparations for that meeting. it will be an important meeting. there will be high-level participation by the united states because this is an important issue on which we place priority. launching the nuclear consultative group is an outcome

of the washington summit between president yoon and president biden, an outcome of the washington declaration, and you'll see in this meeting we are serious about taking this effort forward. last question. >> jake, five days after cocaine was found in the washington, congressional republicans seem they're very close to launching some sort of formal investigation. i'm curious, from a national security perspective, what was your reaction when the drugs were found? b, was there any risk to security, either to the president, to your staff, anybody that worked near, for this stuff to be so close to where you were? >> i would refer to the secret service. i won't speak to the secret of the president. second, i'll make a point about the situation room. there's been questionable reporting on this. situation room is not in use and has not been for months because it is currently under construction. we are using an alternate situation room in the eisenhower executive office building. the only people coming in and out of the sit room in this period have been workers who are getting it ready to go. by the way, it is on time and on

schedule to be back on station here in the not-too-distant future. but, no, there was no issue with the situation room relative to this. finally, look, we have rigorous drug testing policies at the white house. we have rigorous drug use policies here at the white house. we take those extremely seriously. so we'll let the investigation unfold. if it involves someone from the white house, the appropriate consequences will ensue. if it involves some visitor who came in and left it, then that's a different matter that raises a different set of questions that are less relevant to my line of work. so i will leave it at that. but i do not believe, at present, as things stand here at the podium today, that we are facing some national security threat, ongoing national security threat. we're facing other national security threats. >> last one.

>> after the meeting yesterday, it was said there is good progress toward sweden joining nato but there is a gap. how do you describe an agreement on nato membership? >> i'll say president biden had the opportunity to meet with the swedish prime minister in washington to express his solidarity with sweden, for its application for membership. we believe sweden should be in nato as soon as possible. we would love to see it happen at vilnius. it is possible it does. it is possible it doesn't happen until some period after. we believe it'll happen in the not-too-distant future and gaps can be closed, everything can be resolved. there is fundamentally goodwill for all parties to get this done. it is a question of time, and i can't predict whether it'll happen next week or the ensuing weeks. with that, it was my last question. thank you, guys. >> we have been listening to the national security adviser jake sullivan from the press rookm a

the white house, answering questions on an array of issues. we specifically talked about what he described as a difficult decision that the white house was weighing for some time, providing cluster munitions to ukraine. he said the white house studied the potential for civilian harm, but the facts on the ground led them to this decision because of the extremely high rate of use of artillery in ukraine. he said that ukraine was essentially burning through much of its supply, and the united states needed to provide a bridge as it built its own domestic supply, arguing that it would be intolerable for russia to gain ground in ukraine at a potential point of weakness. he also argued that because russia has used these cluster munitions in ukraine, ukraine would be using it to defend its own territory. and he made clear that ukraine provided the united states with written agreement of accountability for using these munitions in safe areas, areas where there are no civilians. he also said that these areas would require extensive

de-mining after the conflict between russia and ukraine is over. kim dozer dozier is back with u. you've been watching the alongside us. what stood out to you from jake sullivan? >> that this was a decision they came to with great reluctance. but as sullivan said, it's a bridging measure, that they simply can't produce enough artillery to keep ukraine going without pulling some of these stocks out of storage and sending them to the battlefield. he did say they weren't trying to say that this is relative, that just because russia is using it, ukraine should have the right to use it. but he made the argument that ukraine is already littered with tens of thousands of cluster bomb drops -- or bomblets as they're called, from russia's use and, therefore, the country will have to be de-mined anyway. so ukraine needs them, too.

>> kim dozier, we appreciate your analysis. quickly, before we go, i wanted to acknowledge that sullivan confirmed there have been discussions between the white house and the kremlin over a prisoner swap, a potential prisoner swap for "wall street journal"'sgershkovich, the 100th day of his incarceration. stay with "cnn news central." we're covering a lot love stostory -- lot of stories and will be back in a fefew minutes. ♪ when you have chronicc kidney disease... there e are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not souch here. if you havchronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep livg life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and rxiga reduces e risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration,

urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men, and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪ i'm jonathan lawson here to tell you about life insurance through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85, and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three ps.

what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information

and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information. i've been telling everyone. the secret to great teeth... ...is having healthy gums. crest advanced gum restore detoxifies below the gum line and restores by helping heal gums in as little as 7 days.

crest. a chaotic conversation about keeping former president trump in office after his election loss is now the focus of the special counsel investigation into 2020 election interference schemes. cnn has exclusively learned that jack smith is zeroing in on this infamous oval office meeting from december 18th of 2020. one-time national security adviser michael flynn and election conspiracy pusher and one-time trump lawyer sidney powell were among the outside advisers there who urged trump

to take radical action to remain in power. such as declaring martial law or having the military seize voting machines. cnn's paula reid helped break this story. paula, this is a well documented meeting, but this is something, perhaps no surprise, the special counsel is really interested in. >> they are interested in this. this is well documented. we heard a lot about this during the january 6th hearings, and it sort of bubbles up again every six months. people renew their focus. here, our reporting indicates that in recent months, prosecutors have been asking specifically about this meeting. we know they asked several witnesses in recent months about this meeting and, most notably in recent weeks, they talked to rudy giuliani about this. he sat for a voluntary interview. he hasn't gone before the grand jury. let's remember the role rudy giuliani played in this meeting. this is widely considered to be the most chaotic and crazy meeting of the trump administration. that's really saying something. we've learned in our reporting that on one side of this meeting, you had trump's white

house counsel, other lawyers saying, look, there was no fraud. on the other side of this meeting, you had the sort of rogue advisers, sydidney powe, the overstock ceo, and mike flynn, insisting there was fraud, suggesting they should have the military seize voting machines. there was even talk of making sidney powell a special counsel. the former president allegedly calls rudy giuliani to come in and mediate this. i mean, imagine that. rudy giuliani is the voice of reason here. incredibly chaotic but critical moment in this investigation. it appears that prosecutors are looking for more information about this meeting to start to establish or to really finally establish a pattern of lies and efforts to try to overturn the election. >> because this is a meeting where the then president is watching white house lawyers make swiss cheese of all of these kind of cuckoo ideas that these outside advisers have. but put this, paula, into a broader context for us, because it seems that the special counsel is looking at a time period from a little before

this, mid december until january 6th. >> exactly. what happens in >> bill barr says i looked into this and there is no fraud. you should concede. he's on notice his top law enforcement official is getting this advice. they're looking at not only what the people in that meeting were saying but what was trump doing after this? he continued to push this lie about there being election fraud, was that to fund raise or pressure states, other officials. that's all part of what the special counsel is looking into. >> that's the day he sends out the tweet after this, right, telling people -- >> yes. >> -- to come to washington, d.c. on the 6th, it will be wild is the quote everyone sort of looks back to. >> yes. >> really interesting. jim? >> the temperature is coming down slightly on the red-hot labor market.

could bit the goldilocks temperature the federal reserve is looking for? irls. i never thought twice about feeding her kibble. but about two years ago, i rerealized she was overweigh. she was always outut of breath. that's when i decided to introduce the farmer's dog to her diet. itit's just so fresh that she litererally gets bubbles in her mouth. now she's a lot more active, she's able to join us on our adventures. and we're all able to do things as a family. ♪ get started at betterforthem.com

bold. daring. expressive. contra costa college allows me to be whoever and whatever i want to be, providing the stage, the canvas,

the tools to use my voice and write my story. find your passion and create your future at contra costa college. start today at contracosta.edu

one more measure of the u.s. economy is out today. we're learning that 209,000 jobs were created in june, strong number, slightly less than expected. the big question is could this be a goldilocks moment? matt egan joins us now. everyone looking for the goldilocks moment. where does this number stand? >> jim, we are still in this weird place where cooling job growth is actually good news. the jobs market has been simply on fire, so much so that wall street, the federal reserve, and even the white house wants it to chill out so it doesn't overheat the economy. it seems like we got that healthy cooling this month, 209,000 jobs added in june. as you can see on the screen with the chart, job growth is still solid, it's slow bug not falling off the cliff. the unemployment rate, 3.6%,

that is miles away from that spike to nearly 15% back in 2020. this is historically very low. so, yes, it does feel like we got the goldilocks number we were looking for, but the fed is still likely to raise interest rates later this month. but hopefully they're closer to the end of this rate-hiking cycle. >> remember people used to speak of 6% as maximum employment? here we are a little below 4%. what about labor force participation? this is this other number of folks not measured in unemployment figures because they're not trying to find a job. that seems to be presenting good news here. >> that is very good news. we're talk about the supply of workers, and that's started to really improve. there are two reasons. one, immigration has picked up, and the other factor is more and more women are coming off the sidelines. we know that millions of women were pushed out during covid, but now we see that the labor

participation rate for women aged 25 to 54 is at a record high for the third month in a row. jim, that is very encouraging news. >> no question. matt egan in new york, than so much. still to come, donald trump back on the campaign trail with a rally today in iowa. we'll take you live to council bluffs for latest on the 2024 race for the white house. if you're age 50 to 85, and d looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, rememember the three ps. what are the three ps? the three ps of life insurance on a a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54, what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications. what's my price? also $9.95 a month.

i just turned 80, what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. it has an affordable rate starting at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate lock so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling. so call now for free information.