[0:00]It's the first time I've had to use a microphone because the mariachi band just started. >> [laughter] >> I don't believe that I have to tell you. I don't believe it. >> That's actually No, nope, that's
[0:09]actually a first. >> Hey everybody and welcome to Here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin De Sugden. The excitement is everywhere
[0:20]today in Mexico City for the World Cup kickoff tonight. Our correspondent Stephanie Gosk is on the ground with the crowds and the music. Plus Bill Gates testified about his connections to Jeffrey Epstein before the House
[0:32]Oversight Committee this week. We're going to dive into what we learned and whether victims are going to see accountability. Up first though, we have had a day of stunning social media post from
[0:43]President Trump. First, he said that he was going to hit Iran {quote} very hard and take control of Kharg Island, a key location for Iran's oil production. Then, in this
[0:54]huge reversal, the president announced on Truth Social that he's calling off said strikes against Iran because, as he wrote, discussions with the Islamic Republic have been brought to the
[1:05]highest level of Iranian leadership and approved. And then he went on to say, "Time and place of the signing to be announced shortly." Okay.
[1:15]But here's the caveat. He also said, {quote} "The naval blockade will remain in full force and effect until this transaction is finalized."
[1:27]So, is the war over? And what does this head-spinning back and forth actually mean? Also, is Iran on board? For this, I want to talk to Courtney Kube, NBC
[1:38]News International Security Correspondent. Hey Court. >> Hi. >> All right, earlier today it looked like the ceasefire was in fact dead and now the president has said he's calling off
[1:49]the strikes tonight and that a deal could be coming, a signing TBA, somewhere maybe happening. Um is it real this time because we've heard something like this before?
[2:00]>> I don't know how we're supposed to know when it's real and when it's not until the the the administration presents us with some sort of a written plan or
[2:10]agreement or proposal even and says the president has agreed to this and Iran has agreed to this. I don't know how we can take this as anything more than more bluster out of President Trump about the
[2:21]situation with Iran. >> Do we know anything about why it is he decided to abruptly call off the literal strikes? >> We've been asking the question. I mean,
[2:30]look, the reality is strikes on Kharg Island are possible. The US military has done those. They did them during during the major combat operations phase of the
[2:39]war. Um, but some sort of taking of Kharg Island which we're hearing hearing more and more about from people who want to restart the war, the the actual major
[2:50]combat operation phase of a war. Uh, taking of Kharg Island would be extremely difficult. It's still militarized. Even though the US has taken out quite a bit of the military infrastructure there, they still
[3:02]maintain a a relatively robust presence of air defenses. They have some of their stockpiles still there. They have batteries, the ability to fire from there. So, if the US were air strikes
[3:14]there alone are dangerous, but if the US were to try to actually bring forces ashore, it would just be an extremely dangerous endeavor. >> The president also said in this post
[3:25]that the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz will remain in place, um, essentially until further notice, until a deal is officially signed. Do we know what a potential exit plan would look like if, and that's the key word here,
[3:37]if a deal is signed? >> So, we've heard in the past about some sort of alternate security structure that could exist when it comes to the Strait of Hormuz and it would potentially involve some US ally. People
[3:48]have thrown out the idea of Oman just because because location, frankly, uh, where they would ensure that there was safe passage and maybe even bring in other countries, potentially not even from the region, that would ensure their
[4:00]safe open waterways, safe passage for commercial commercial vessels. I've not heard anything like that actually moving into action though, but those are the sorts of ideas that that have been
[4:10]possible. And by the way, I mean, if the as long as the US military blockade remains there, we're going to continue to have these escalations, these these
[4:21]one-off actions between again the US military >> Exactly, the love taps. We're going to continue to have those and as we have seen happen over and over again over the
[4:31]last several weeks, they escalate up till both sides are firing at one another. >> And I think it's important to clarify for folks, Court, about our the United States presence militarily in the region right now. I mean, it doesn't seem
[4:43]necessarily like the president has a plan to for instance pull out the troops that are awaiting possibly being deployed to Iran. >> Yeah, you know, a lot of people missed this in the fantastic interview that
[4:54]Kristen Welker did with President Trump a little over a week or about a week ago. She asked that when she he said about she was asking about whether the war is over and she said, "Well, are you going to start bringing the troops home?" And he said, "No, it's not that
[5:05]big of a footprint and they're not at any risk there anyway." And you know, notably after he said that a US helicopter was downed by an Iranian drone and we had two two pilots floating in the the Strait of Hormuz, and
[5:17]fortunately rescued safely, but but but we forget President Trump was specifically asked by Kristen only a few days ago whether he plans to bring the troops home and he said no. The presence
[5:27]there it has stayed relatively stable throughout the course of the ceasefire. The one difference is they've rotated people in and out, so they've replaced certain assets like aircraft. They've
[5:38]they've brought in an old additional carrier strike group, they took one out. There's fresh aircraft there. I mean, the president himself told Fox News that
[5:47]the US fired 49 Tomahawks as part of the strikes last night. That in and of itself is remarkable. 49 Tomahawks, we haven't seen that kind of that level of
[5:58]fire of of Tomahawks since the major combat operations were underway. >> So, amidst all of this, Courtney, and a potential end to this war, but again, we don't know.
[6:09]Um, you published an exclusive this week that the president was plotting to meet with leaders from the defense industry over concerns that the US missile supplies are in fact shrinking.
[6:21]What does the stockpile actually look like currently? I mean, how how bad off are they? Or are they not that bad off? >> So, it depends on what what system you're talking about. Like, if you kind
[6:32]of group things together and talk about things like long-range fires like the Tomahawks that we mentioned. Like, that's why I was so astonished to hear the president say that the US launched off about 50 of these these last night.
[6:42]I mean, that's a huge portion of the stockpile for for for example, most of the ships that are there probably carry about 90 to 96 of them depending on the ship. Uh, so, they fired off half of
[6:54]what they had on that on one of those ships last night. It's astonishing. But, but that's just one metric. If you look at what the US has been using over the course since since last June of 2025
[7:05]during Operation Midnight Hammer, during the the defenses and the offensive operations during the 12-day war, and then of course, during the 37 days or so of the offensive operations of this war. The US expended a huge amount of things
[7:17]like those Tomahawks, and that's not even the biggest concern, the long-range fires. The big concern are air defenses. So, the kinds of things that are intercepting incoming ballistic missiles from places like Iran.
[7:29]The Republicans, and particularly the president and those around him, would argue that the US gave too many of them to to Ukraine, and that's why the US is in a has a real concern about their
[7:40]stockpile right now. But, the reality is, yes, the US did give some to Ukraine, but they've also used a tremendous number in the last 12 plus months or so. And and so the stockpiles
[7:50]are at a level where there is real concern among the US military. >> Well, could this dwindling stockpile have affected the trajectory of this war or how long the United States wanted to be involved in this war? >> You know, no one is telling us that
[8:02]directly, but you have to assume that that would be part of the the briefings that the president would be getting. That he that is his senior advisors like the chairman of the Joint Chiefs would be warning him, "Mr. President, we can
[8:13]do this." And and they can. There's always going to be something that they can use to carry out a war. It's just the level of danger that the the US service members who are
[8:23]carrying out the the the operations, it's the level of danger that they will face based on what what the stockpile looks like. >> Courtney Kube, thank you. >> Thanks.
[8:35]>> So, we haven't seen any new Epstein files for a while, but Congress is still searching through what is already out there. The House Oversight Committee invited
[8:45]billionaire Bill Gates to testify about his relationship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. And this week, he showed up. But before his 6-hour closed-door
[8:56]testimony, Gates told reporters that he was, quote, "Glad to be here voluntarily." >> I hope my testimony is helpful to the work important work of the committee to
[9:06]find justice for the victims. >> So, we have known about Gates's connection to Epstein for a while. The Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist appears thousands of
[9:16]times in messages and photos throughout the Justice Department's Epstein files. That said, Bill Gates has never been charged with a crime or been accused of
[9:26]any kind of wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. So, did we actually learn anything new from him? And does this mean any further accountability for the survivors of Epstein's abuse?
[9:38]>> For this, I want to bring in NBC News anchor and senior Washington correspondent Hallie Jackson. Hey, Hallie. >> Hey, Yas. Good to be with you. >> Great to have you. So, Bill Gates was one of the high-profile people in Jeffrey Epstein's orbit. What did we
[9:50]learn from his testimony about their relationship, both Bill Gates and Jeffrey Epstein? >> Okay, so I would put this I think I think that's such an interesting question, and there's maybe two different buckets. I think the first one that you're asking, what do we learn
[10:01]about the relationship? What do we learn that's new, right? One of the biggest headlines was more details about why Gates says the two connected in the first place. Because remember, Yasmin, they connected in
[10:11]2011. That's years, 3 years after that controversial Florida so-called sweetheart deal, where Epstein ended up serving the 13 months, but it was, you know, work release, basically, very,
[10:23]very controversial. This was after that that Gates begins meeting with Epstein. Now, Gates says it was to basically work to solicit more money for his charitable organizations. It was in the pursuit of
[10:35]these global health initiatives that Gates, you know, has the Gates Foundation on, works on, etc. That's why he met Epstein, right? That's what he says. That's the nature of their relationship. Gates told lawmakers that,
[10:46]in fact, Epstein wanted to make the relationship more personal, but Gates says he resisted that. Now, Gates says it became clear that this philanthropic pursuit, you know, related to Epstein was going to be a dead end. That's his
[10:57]words, a dead end. So, Gates basically cuts off Epstein in his telling. This is what he says to lawmakers, cut cuts him off. However, Gates says that around this
[11:07]time, right, in this time period now, Epstein learns about what Gates called private or personal information, basically, the affairs that Gates acknowledged he had while he was
[11:18]married. Epstein finds out about this, and in Gates's telling, Epstein used those infidelities to try to pressure Gates to re-engage, along with what Gates describes as other lies layered on top.
[11:30]Essentially, this was potential blackmail. That's what Gates is accusing Epstein of. And that's what he told lawmakers, and that's what the line of several lines of questioning were in lawmakers telling. Other things we
[11:40]learned that were sort of new. Lawmakers really apparently pressed on why Gates befriended Epstein, or at least took these meetings with Epstein starting in 2011. One lawmaker tells NBC News that
[11:51]Gates said he knew that there was some sort of conviction or misconduct in Epstein's past, but he didn't do much more research on it and regretted do not
[12:01]doing more research on what that was. And that was another theme of this, Yasmine. Again, in the telling, we're going to see the transcripts eventually at some point. We don't know when. It's not out yet, but we'll see all of this based on what the House Oversight
[12:12]Committee typically releases. But from what lawmakers are telling us, Gates, you know, acknowledged errors in judgment, grave errors in judgment. We know that from Gates' opening statement. And then there was something else, too.
[12:23]These emails got a lot of attention. Epstein in 2013, based on the DOJ's Epstein files, drafted a couple of emails to himself. And in them, he talks
[12:32]about seeking to procure drugs for Bill and and in a reference to Gates, sex with Russian girls. These are allegations that Gates denies. He then told lawmakers, based on what we heard
[12:44]on Capitol Hill, that you know, he believed that Epstein would write emails that contained things that weren't true. >> Did he suggest as to what was the purpose of writing these emails that
[12:54]were were not true? >> Um, you know, I think that Gates is pretty clear that he thinks Epstein is a liar. I mean, he made that very clear and even in his opening statement to lawmakers that he's just somebody who
[13:06]lies. And so, that was encapsulated in a lot of what Gates said. I think the tone of it was interesting, too. One lawmaker said Gates appeared Gates appeared stressed and worn out at various points. Another lawmaker said there were times
[13:17]when he was a bit combative. He was mostly cooperative, and Gates came out after in a statement and said that he answered all the questions that the House Oversight Committee had. So, >> Bill Gates is not the only person that testified on the hill this week with
[13:28]regards to Jeffrey Epstein. So did Epstein's former assistant Leslie Groff. Here's what committee chair Republican Congressman James Comer said about the hearings.
[13:38]>> This is about the survivors of Epstein and Maxwell. This is about trying to figure out how the government failed.
[13:48]>> What does Comer mean by how the government failed? I think we're trying to drill down on the ultimate objective of these ongoing
[13:59]hearings. What it actually is leading to or what they're hoping it will lead to. >> So So I think that's interesting. When you talk about the the potential failures here, I think survivors will tell you there were multiple points of
[14:10]failure across many decades, across many years here, dating back to I'm thinking the mid-90s when um you know allegations lodged with the FBI, right?
[14:21]These these abuse instances were told to the FBI and then there was basically no follow-up. There was obviously the 2008 plea deal. Like I think there's a survivors who see that as a part of the
[14:32]failure, too. Flash forward, the failure around the release of the files, the the way that the case was handled in the first place. So I think there are various points of failure here. As for what these hearings could do, I think survivors, many of them that I've talked
[14:43]to, hope that there is some degree of accountability, that there is maybe something that can be revealed through these conversations that will lead to further accountability for people who they believe deserve that.
[14:53]>> So with that in mind, then who's next to be called to testify on the hill because there are so many high-profile folks that we have seen both pictured and named in the millions of pages that have been released in these Epstein files.
[15:04]>> 100% including people I'm thinking of Kathy Ruemmler who served obviously in the White House under former President Obama who had connections to Epstein and appeared in the files. Leon Black,
[15:14]financier, money man if you will. You know, and questions around his connections to Epstein. But I'll tell you who I'm looking to. The possibility that the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, may come and testify. You had
[15:25]Democrats who really wanted to see that happen. You now have, just in the last, you know, 24-48 hours or so, the top Republican on that committee saying, "Yes, we want Blanche to come in." Why does Blanche matter, Yasmin? Remember, he's the one who last summer went and
[15:36]interviewed convicted co-conspirator of Epstein's, Ghislaine Maxwell, in that controversial prison interview. He's the one who his former boss says handled the release of the Epstein files, was in charge of that in the first place. And
[15:48]the Oversight Committee will have questions for him. And moving forward, there's also a question of whether he actually will do it or not. The DOJ was pretty non-committal when we asked them about it, um, saying that, you know, Blanche answered questions already, his
[15:59]answers haven't changed since then, just because he's now the acting Attorney General. But it's also very much a live ball, because to get that job permanently, Yasmin, he needs to be confirmed by the Senate. You know, and so there is a there's a
[16:10]world in which he's facing pressure to talk to the House and this committee while he's also facing pressure to try to get confirmed from the Trump, you know, the Trump administration wants him to get confirmed in the Senate. So, it could be an interesting dynamic.
[16:21]>> Hally Jackson, thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, it is officially something that we've been waiting for. The day is here. The 2026 FIFA World Cup has officially kicked off today. Mexico is
[16:33]hosting the first two match-ups, one in Mexico City, one in Guadalajara, and we talked to our colleague Stephanie Gosk on the ground in Mexico City just before
[16:42]game one got started. Hi, Steph. >> Hi. This is so exciting. Right in front of Aztec Stadium. Perhaps the most famous soccer stadium in the whole world, Yas.
[16:54]>> What what is what is the vibe like? Take me there. >> First of all, this is a country that lives and breathes this sport. It is as much a part of their culture as their
[17:04]food, their music. And the fact that they are able to host this World Cup. Now, this is their third. It breaks a record at this stadium. They have an immense amount of pride that it is
[17:14]kicking off here. But they're also here to root for their team, and they are coming out in the tens of thousands. The stadium seats about 80,000 people or so, and it
[17:26]has been like one big, raucous party. There we've had musicians here. We have had a folk band playing. We have you know, people yelling and screaming, kids >> [laughter]
[17:37]>> as young as 2 years old, grandparents being wheeled in on wheelchairs, >> [laughter] >> mariachi bands. I mean, I'm telling you it has just been remarkable. The entire
[17:47]city has poured into this area. Even if they can't get in, they've come here to celebrate. >> You talk about how this is historic in nature because it is the third time they're hosting this World Cup, right?
[17:59]People feel the history that is happening. >> Oh, and some incredible moments. I mean, when people talk about the history of the World Cup, there are two particular moments that they always talk about, and
[18:10]it's Pelé in 1970 with this incredible header winning the World Cup for Brazil, huge moment. And then in 1986, you had Diego Maradona who had one of the most
[18:21]incredible goals. They called it the goal of the century in part because he touched it 11 times in 30 seconds or something crazy, and then scored, and Argentina won the World Cup there. But
[18:33]you know, talk to people here in Mexico, and they say, "That's great. We're glad Brazil had their moment. We're certainly glad Argentina had their moment, but this moment, we want this moment to be ours."
[18:43]>> This is going to pick up really quickly, Steph, because this is happening there in Mexico City, but literally games are being held in Mexico, US, Canada as well. Today is Mexico versus South
[18:54]Africa. Tomorrow Canada is going to take on Bosnia-Herzegovina in Toronto. Team USA goes up against Paraguay in Los Angeles. Then by Saturday though, you're
[19:03]looking at four games a day spread across the three countries. How are you keeping up? I mean, you just mentioned a lot of stats to me. Like, how are you going to keep track of all this?
[19:14]>> Yeah, well, I mean, um I've got some good feeds um that I that I keep an eye on. But, you're right. I mean, this is the biggest tournament ever. 38 countries. It eclipses tournaments in
[19:25]the past. 104 games. Um lot It means more of the world is involved as well. You know, someone asked me, you know, what what's what are the must-see games? And that's actually the really cool
[19:37]thing about this tournament. The must-see game is whenever your country plays. That's the must-see game. And so, you have this enthusiasm for every game that's being played. It is really
[19:47]remarkable and it's incredible. I've never been to one of these before and to come to this city and see them celebrate the start of it >> [music] >> has really been remarkable. >> Well, that's what I was going to say is
[19:58]it feels like every game um in the World Cup is going to be a must-see game. So, with that in mind, Steph, you have covered so many of these kind of sporting events, right? You said you've never been to the World Cup before, but you've covered the Olympics, so many
[20:08]other huge major sporting events. How does this compare, what you're seeing today, the lead-up to the first game? How does it compare to other things that you've covered? >> Well, it's the first time I've had to
[20:18]use a microphone because the mariachi band just started. >> [laughter] >> I don't believe that, I have to tell you. I don't believe that. >> That's actually No, no, that's actually a first.
[20:28]>> It's incredibly unique to this moment. >> And and you know, you saw Let's talk about the Knicks last night, right? Like, there are very few things in our lives
[20:38]that elicit the kind of passionate response that athletics do. And big events in particular. And for for a lot of people, watching this World Cup,
[20:49]actually getting the chance to attend it, this is going to be the singular moment of their lives. [music] And to be here and to report on it is really such a privilege, yes.
[20:59]>> It It's a moment for folks to really come together in a time in which things feel so divided. And you're right, um sporting events in general are just an incredible time in which people can
[21:11]celebrate as one. Steph Gosk, once again, the assignment of the century. Thank you, my friend. >> I'm so lucky. You're welcome. >> All right, that is going to do it for us
[21:22]at Here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Vossoughian. We'll be back tomorrow with whatever the day may bring. And if you like what you saw and you heard, press the subscribe button.
[21:33]We'll see you tomorrow. >> We thank you for watching and remember stay updated on breaking news and top stories on the NBC News app or watch
[21:44]live on our YouTube channel.