The U.S.-Iran Escalation Explained 06/23/25
36:07 Share

As America's leading business lender, Bank of America is on your corner and in your corner. With $215 billion in business loans and over 3,700 business specialists across the nation, we help businesses thrive so communities prosper. What would you like the power to do? Learn more at bankofamerica.com slash localbusiness. Bank of America, official bank of FIFA Club World Cup 2025. Copyright 2025 Bank of America Corporation. All rights reserved.

Trading at Schwab is now powered by Ameritrade. Unlocking the power of thinkorswim, the award-winning trading platforms loaded with features that let you dive deeper into the market. Visualize your trades in a new light on thinkorswim desktop with robust charting and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Learn more at Schwab.com/trading. Bring in show music, please. Today on SquawkPod. The U.S. is launching key strikes against Iran nuclear facilities. President Trump says it was decisive. Bullseye with three exclamation points. But where does the international community go from here?

I've got a mixture of hope and fear. Colonel Jack Jacobs, military analyst and Medal of Honor winner, joins us. We should be concerned about what Iran's going to do next, but we all should be concerned about what we're going to do in response. And reporter Emily Wilkins on the congressional response to the strikes, with the big, beautiful bill still in the balance. You do see a lot of lawmakers, and heck, there are even Democrats who were praising what was done with the particular strike.

Then, Gilead with a landmark FDA approval potentially marking an end to the AIDS epidemic. CEO Dan O'Day. It's a milestone moment in the history of HIV. This is a first of its kind medicine for preventing HIV.

And the rest of today's news that got us squawking. Like a disappointing showing for Elio at the box office. That's the worst ever opening for a Pixar film. Doesn't help that I'd never heard of it. Nope. I'm CNBC producer Zach Valisi. It's Monday, June 23rd. Squawk Pod begins right now. Stand back, goodbye in three, two, one. Cue, please.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to Squawk Box right here on CNBC. We're live from the Nasdaq market site in Times Square. I'm Becky Quick, along with Joe Kernan and Andrew Ross Sorkin. Let's bring you the latest developments right now following this weekend's U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. The full extent of the damage still unclear. It's also unclear if Iran has

had moved its enriched uranium before the attacks and there are some images and other things that reflect that but President Trump making the case on Truth Social that the mission was a success. Now last night in the post he said quote monumental damage was done to all nuclear sites in Iran as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term exclamation point. He said the white structure shown is deeply embedded into the rock with even its roof well below ground level and completely

completely shielded from flame. The biggest damage took place far below ground level. Bullseye with three exclamation points. Now, Iran and Israel continue to trade air and missile strikes in the wake of that U.S. attack. Meanwhile, Iran saying the U.S. mission expanded the range of targets for its armed forces, saying

It now reserves all options as it tries or thinks about how it's going to be responding. But President Trump said online following the U.S. strikes that any retaliation by Iran against the United States would be, quote, met with force far greater than what was displayed over the weekend. The State Department telling U.S. citizens worldwide to exercise increased caution.

And I'm still trying to figure out, obviously, I'm worried about our military on bases that are close by. But, you know, when you think about retaliation, what does that really mean? Are there cells inside the United States? Are there things that are going to take place in Europe and other places in the Middle East? Or is it the straight up moves? Do you end up closing that to try and inflict economic pain? Well, that would be the biggest business economic pain. But I was sort of referring to his to the State Department's comment that all U.S. citizens are supposed to be on high alert.

and what that really reflects i've got a mixture of of hope and fear i fear for our troops and um i don't know who came across the border i saw crazy numbers about how many people that they identified from iran that were trying to get across the border and that are here now there's there's no doubt um about that so we need obviously i think it says that all u.s citizens need to be wary wherever they are both here

Let's get to Jack Jacobs. Join us now for more on Israel, Iran and the United States. Retired Army Colonel Jack Jacobs, NBC and MSNBC military analyst. Colonel, I don't know what you know beyond what we're reading as well about the assessment of how much damage was done, how how long it sets back Iran on its nuclear ambitions.

They may have moved uranium, I guess. It's hard to move centrifuges. I don't I don't we won't know for a while exactly what. But you'd have to think that there was a large degree of degradation of that program. Yeah, a couple of ways to look at it. There certainly was a lot a lot of degradation to the facility itself. It's difficult to tell exactly how much damage was done. You've got to be on the ground and we're not going to do that anytime soon. But

it was clearly a lot of destruction. Whether or not they're able to ramp it up again, we won't know for a long time. And even they won't know, the Iranians won't know for a long time. But there was clearly a great deal of damage to the one particular site at Fordow. With respect to moving equipment, centrifuges,

and all the equipment to support them, difficult to move, and we would have picked that up, but there's little doubt that they've already moved and had previously moved some amount of the fissile material that was at Fordow to other locations below ground around the country. But the majority of it, as far as we know, was still at the Fordow site when it was struck. You raised a significant issue about

what happens next about retaliation. You know, Iran has been behind a significant number of cyber attacks. They're really good at it. We're good at offensive cyber, but we're terrible at defense. So that's one of the things that business and government needs to pay close attention to. We can expect perhaps that some cyber attacks will take place by either Iran or its agents.

With respect to physical attacks, you're quite right to be concerned about attacks on troops. We have more than 40,000 troops in the region in the Middle East. I think Iran is probably going to be less interested in doing physical. I mean, just because they're less interested in doing physical attacks on American troops doesn't mean they won't do it.

but they know that the retaliation from that will be devastating. And they're going to think twice about direct attacks by Iran on American troops. But they use proxies and have for a long, long time. And their concern right now, their focus right now is attacking Israel. Thinking about Israel, they've been defending with the Iron Dome and the Arrow system for a long time. The munitions for those are

I wouldn't say a running low, but they're not at the levels they were when the exchange of missiles began some time ago. And we have to pay close attention to rearming Israel, particularly with munitions for the Arrow system, if Israel is going to be properly defended against Iran. So you can expect Iran to continue to use proxies, need to be concerned about the Houthis

in the Gulf and in the Straits of Hormuz, and about agents and proxies around the world, but particularly with respect to American interests.

it's a chess match i mean how much oil does china get through the straits of hormones like 80 some crazy number uh and i don't i don't know what the chances of of that are the the oil markets are acting like the chances aren't great that that they would do that they've never done it before what do you think no they probably wouldn't do it before you're right about the about iran's supplying oil to china there's another

There's another aspect to this. I mean, Iran is very close to Russia, and Russia is not very close to China. And so the likelihood of anything happening in the Straits is very much lower than one would think. However, the Houthis, though they're an agent and have acted as agents for the Iranians for a long, long time,

sometimes act on their own and do what they want. Anytime you empower somebody not under your direct control, they're likely to do something that are inimical to your own interests. So it's difficult to contain or control the Houthis, and they're liable to do just about anything. But you're right. The likelihood of something in the straits is quite low. President Trump said that one and done, and that was going to be, you know, if...

if Iran were to come to the table now, there's room for negotiations. Would they ever do that? Would they ever just say, uncle, all right, you got us? I just can't see it. No, that's unlikely to do. We have to remember what takes place inside Iran. The theocracy with the mullahs at the top of the food chain, they control everything, almost everything, but not everything. They exist there at least partially, if not mostly,

because of the forbearance of the military, but particularly the Revolutionary Guards. To the extent that the Revolutionary Guards decide that the Bolas are not the right guys to run the country, then you will have some turnover at the top of the food chain. Not necessarily regime change, but you might wind up with the military establishment running the country. They're not more liberal, to be sure.

but they're going to be very much different in how they approach everything and particularly those relationships in the region. So look for changes perhaps in the country, but not the way we would expect. We should be concerned about what Iran's going to do next, but we all should be concerned about what we're going to do in response to that.

yeah colonel i i've got another question for you but that what do you mean different how different in terms of being more aggressive different in terms of being more tactical what what would that mean for the region you know we remember akhmedin a few a few years ago and we thought he was a he was the worst person in the world he was the liberal

I mean, he was a terrible person, but he was a liberal in the country. So while we might not be particularly happy with the mullahs at the top of the government, we might be less thrilled if there's a military takeover inside Iran. The people who take over might be even worse.

The idea of regime change was something that was severely knocked down by every member of the Trump administration on the airwaves yesterday, everyone from the Secretary of State Marco Rubio to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Vice President J.D. Vance, all of them saying this is not about regime change. And then last night on Truth Social, President Trump himself suggested that if they can't make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a regime change? And that kind of changed the equation a little bit. How did you read into that?

Well, we've had a very, well, it's probably bluster. I mean, there's not very much that we can do to affect what takes place inside Iran. You remember some years ago, there were these enormous demonstrations in Tehran, a million people in the square. I remember being on the air talking about it. The interest was there that they're all tweeting now, there's going to be regime change because the people are rising up. That was on, let's say, a Friday,

On Saturday, after a bunch of people were killed by the Revolutionary Guards, there were only 5,000 in the streets. The next day on Sunday, there was nothing. We have to remember how that place is run. Regime change can only take place from within. And our attacking a few nuclear sites is not going to make that happen. Yeah. When you're using live ammo, not rubber bullets to disperse protests, it has a tendency to thin out the...

protesters. Colonel, what's your sense of... That changes your mind about how things are going to be run, yeah. Yeah, exactly. There's two other players that have not been named thus far. Russia and Putin and what you think his role in all this will be. Obviously, it sounds like they want to try to de-escalate this via the UN. Same with China. But nonetheless, both of those countries have been supporting Iran in all sorts of ways, including by propping up their economy by buying oil. Now, clearly...

Iran is, you know, Iran matters more to China than or China matters more to Iran than Iran matters to China. But nonetheless, do you see them doing anything? Yes, but not in a military way. They're going to probably continue to do what they've been doing and and probably not do a great deal more. It's it's.

It is not in either Russia's or China's interest to get involved in what's taking place in the Middle East. They have not had a very good experience in the region. The Russians in particular got run out of there. No, they're going to stand by. They'll continue to support. But it's unlikely that they're going to get involved in anything. Don't forget that Russia's

almost decisively engaged in Ukraine and things there while are sort of going on Russia's side on the ground tactically, there's a long way to go before that thing is going to get that's going to be resolved. And most people do understand exactly how that's going to end some sort of negotiated settlement whereby the Ukrainians give up part of the Donbass.

Neither Russian or China is particularly interested in getting involved in the Middle East. There's two issues that are interesting here. One is that the U.S. is asking effectively China to help them with Iran as it relates to the Straits of Hormuz. Will they? And the other question is just what kind of message this sends to China's allies, to the extent that China has been trying to make friends all over the world economically and arguing, look, if we have an economic strategic alliance, clearly we will be allied in other ways, too.

It appears that there is no alliance beyond maybe economic for China in almost any realm. I think that's a good and focused perception. Most look, let's face it, most actors, whether they're individuals, economic entities or nation states, basically that their focus is is aggrandizement. They're only focused on themselves and relationships that exist, exist at least primarily economically.

if not wholly, for aggrandizement.

So Russia's and China's allies are not going to be particularly interested in anything beyond their own interests. I don't think that these U.S. strikes on Iran, the war between Israel and Iran, figures heavily in how either China or Russia views the world and what they're going to do in the mid to long term. All right, Colonel. No one knows. And near term is one thing. Long term?

I don't know. Is it a pipe dream to hope for spreading of the Abraham Accords and I don't know, the Arab Spring and whatever you want to refer, however you want to refer to it. But peace in the Middle East, is that is it closer or is it just never going to happen? I mean, maybe maybe I think it's different.

I've never been close. I mean, go back 3,000 years and we'll see it any farther away or closer than it is now. I think it's extremely difficult. Reliance on the United Nations, for example, makes absolutely no sense because nobody's going to, I mean, we've got a veto and we're not going to do anything that they say. No, I think peace in the Middle East is as far away as it's ever been. Well, hope springs eternal. Maybe it's no baby steps. Thanks, Colonel Jacobs.

We'll see. It's bad when we see you, but thanks for coming on. Appreciate it. Let's get some more reaction from Washington this morning. Emily Wilkins joins us for that. Emily.

Hey, Becky. Yeah, D.C. is waiting to see what Iran does next. But for now, Republicans on Capitol Hill are widely supporting Trump and the attack with top Republican leaders backing the strikes. But we're going to get a better sense this week of where lawmakers stand when senators are going to vote. They're going to be on the record on whether Trump needs to get approval from Congress if he wants to continue to use military force.

The measure from Senator Tim Kaine, it was actually introduced more than a week ago at this point, but it would require Trump to get congressional approval before military attacks on Iran. And senators, including Lindsey Graham, have backed up Trump. They said that Trump did have the power to authorize the attacks, but not all

Republicans aren't necessarily united on this. Senator Lisa Murkowski said on X that while she did back the limited strikes that we saw over the weekend, she said that if it is clear this is becoming a wider conflict, we must remember that Congress alone holds the constitutional power to authorize war.

Over in the House, you're seeing Congressman Thomas Massey say the strike was not constitutional. He's co-sponsoring a war power resolution in the House that's similar to Kaine's in the Senate. Other lawmakers also raised some concerns about the constitutionality, including Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a close ally of Trump's. She took to social media to break with the

president tweeting that every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war. And then she added later, this is not our fight.

Lawmakers returned to D.C. this evening. They are expected to get a briefing on the strikes tomorrow. But the main focus on Capitol Hill, it's really likely expected to remain on that Trump mega bill and the tax package. Senators could begin to vote on that bill this week. Remember, that package does include $150 billion for defense spending as of now. And we'll be watching closely to see if any changes are made as a result of the attacks. Becky.

Emily, just to the tax package, it sounds like they are still counting to see if they can get the votes through the Senate before they decide to start the vote this week. That's part of it, Becky. The other part is, remember, the process that they're using, it allows Republicans to get this done without any Democratic help. But it has a number of other rules they have to follow. Everything in this giant thousand page package has to have a budgetary impact.

And so what's happening right now is a process where the Senate parliamentarian goes through the items and says, OK, you can include this. You can't include this. That AI moratorium that we were talking about, she has approved that for the package because that is tied to broadcast spending. But a couple of other items, including SNAP funding, SNAP cost sharing with states, have not made the cut.

I don't know if I'd say some Republicans aren't on board. I'll trade you one Fetterman for one Murkowski any day. And then you throw in Thomas Massey. And even Murkowski didn't say she was against. I mean, you can't even get can't even get Murkowski to say she was against the initial strikes. Just we got from here on out. So I don't know. I don't know if I characterize it like that.

Yeah, Joe, I mean, I think in a certain degree you do see a lot of lawmakers and heck, there are even Democrats who were praising what was done with the particular strike. I think the question is what comes next. And I think that's one of the big things that I know in D.C. and probably across the country, everyone's waiting to see today. We mean it's well known how often, you know, President Obama, you know,

Dropped quite a few bombs. It's just rich. That's been pointed out. I'm not even going to go into it because we've seen historically a lot of... I think we've had 150 conflicts and maybe actually had a war resolution, what, eight times or something? Yeah.

It's rare to do it, but thank you. Yeah, you're right. It hasn't always been used for a number of wars. You can go back and kind of track that Congress has not always given approval. But, you know, it is coming up, and I think it's very interesting because obviously not every lawmaker posts their opinion on X, so we can only go with those who have made public statements. Well, you couldn't have done this. It will be very interesting this week when they get back. You couldn't have done it. You couldn't have done it.

You couldn't have done the strike if you got a resolution from Congress. It couldn't have been a surprise. It would have leaked if you tried to get all those people together to vote. But thank you, Emily.

Coming up next on SquawkPod, a landmark public health moment decades in the making. Gilead with federal approval for an HIV preventative injectable. The company's CEO, Dan O'Day, in an exclusive conversation on the news. It's a public health crisis in this country and around the world that has to go, we believe, really can bend the arc of the epidemic moving forward.

How will you shape the future of energy with confidence? What does it mean to deliver affordable and reliable energy for all?

From evolving supply and demand to pricing uncertainty, EY understands the disruptions energy companies face and how to drive the outcomes that matter. So whether it's in the plants, at the pipeline, or on the grid, EY's full spectrum of services help energy companies maximize operations to drive profitability and performance. EY. Shape the future with confidence.

Trading at Schwab is now powered by Ameritrade, unlocking the power of Thinkorswim, the award-winning trading platforms loaded with features that let you dive deeper into the market. Visualize your trades in a new light on Thinkorswim desktop with robust charting and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. Thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. With the price of just about everything going up, we thought we'd bring our prices down. So to help us, we brought in a reverse auctioneer, which is apparently a thing. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch.

This is Swapod. I'm Becky. Thank you.

And you're watching Squawk Box right here on CNBC. I'm Becky Quick along with Joe Kernan and Andrew Ross Sorkin. Well, the world has a new wonder drug for preventing HIV/AIDS. The FDA approving Gilead's injectable just a few days ago and joining us right now exclusively to talk about this is Gilead Sciences Chairman and CEO Daniel O'Day. Dan, welcome. Thank you very much for coming here. I know that this is something you've been working on for a very long time. I think we've been talking about it for over a year at this point.

But this is Gilead's focus to try and bring new drugs and hopefully eventually eradicate this disease. What is this latest injectable? Why is it better? It's a milestone moment, Becky, in the history of HIV. Yes2Go is potentially the best tool we've had yet and a number of great tools that could potentially end the epidemic. And the reason why is this is a first of its kind.

for preventing HIV that's given only twice a year. And in clinical trials, it provided almost 100% protection against HIV, which is really unheard of. So it's one of the most important scientific breakthroughs of our time that could help millions of people 20 years in the making

by Gilead scientists that have really made it their life's work to end HIV. - I mean, there are pills available for this at this point. Why does the injectable work better? I mean, I would almost prefer a pill. What's gone on with that?

Yeah, the issue is that it's difficult to take a pill, particularly when you don't have a disease. In fact, only about 50% of people that are taking pills today, and it's only about a third of the population that is defined by CDC, are compliant on their medicine. And particularly with a virus like this, if you're not compliant, you can have breakthrough cases of HIV. So we needed to create a medicine

that kind of met people where they were in terms of prevention and twice a year meets people where they are. - You go into the doctor's office every six months. - Correct. - To get the injection. I didn't realize we still have 30,000 new infections a year in the United States of HIV, 1.3 million worldwide, and that there are 400,000 Americans who are using some of these preventative options, right?

Yeah, it's really, I don't think it's spoken about that much. There's more than 2.7 hundred new cases in this country a week and about 100 people sadly die of HIV related illnesses.

And importantly, you know, although it's everywhere in the country, there are certain pockets in the country, particularly the south, the southern United States, states like Texas, Louisiana, Georgia, Florida, where the rates are rising disproportionately. Amongst women account for about 20% of new HIV cases in this country, about 50% globally.

um and black and latino men in the south are also more vulnerable so this is a this is a public health crisis in this country and around the world that yes to go we believe really can bend the arc of the epidemic movie you want to give it to everyone but it's expensive and you don't know about insurance it's what's twenty eight thousand dollars a year when would you is it got the 12-year protection how long when would it you know

when would it would it generically be available yeah it's kind of it's got you know basically the normal patent protection 12 to 15 years but let me say something about the price because i think that's important we price this roughly in line with other prep medicines branded prep medicines similar to the the medicine we were just speaking about and yet it provides significantly greater benefit for patients the other thing is that um

Because of the economic, beyond the human impact, the economic impact of preventing an HIV illness in this country, which can cost as much as $1.1 million lifetime costs, this is highly covered by, PrEP medicines that exist today are highly covered by insurance companies, more than 90%.

And Gilead also has programs for those that are uninsured or that need support for their co-pay. Equally important, Joe, is the fact that we've got programs to help people outside the United States. Because if you're

if you don't stop this virus everywhere, you don't stop it anywhere. And so we ventured into licensing agreements with six generic manufacturers immediately after this news last summer that will provide medicines to more than 120 low and middle income countries. And Gilead's also going to work with global aid organizations in the gap period of time, because it takes about two years for those generic companies to get up and running, at no profit to Gilead for about two million people. The most favored proposals from the Trump administration

Would that have any, so you would have generics being made in other countries then, but not here for 12 years. So once again, there'd be really cheap versions other places, but not here, which immediately raises the ire of all the politicians. Yeah, the most favored nations, first of all, I'd love to talk about that. It's really not geared towards the low and lower middle income under-resourced countries. It's really geared towards countries that are more economically similar to the United States.

I think that is why we're so focused on getting these generic medicines to countries around the world. - You mentioned that

you know most of these prep these preventative measures are covered by insurance but the supreme court is watching a case right now that could overturn those requirements what would happen if that's the case if the supreme court says that insurance companies no longer have to pay for some of these preparatory preventative measures yeah look we think that the you know prevention is the best way to help people in this country and economically so

Regardless of that court hearing, what we've seen in HIV in the past is that there's broad coverage for these medicines, particularly because of

of the human and economic impact for the country. So we believe that it's really important that PrEP services, which is preventing HIV services, are available to folks. And that's been the case both through private insurers and government insurers in the past. So we're fully dedicated and committed to making sure that these programs are available. And there are many safety net services for HIV in this country as well.

beyond perhaps particular insurers because of the nature of this disease. Following up just in terms of who's going to use it, I mean, we go back to the drugs that are, you know, like Zupbound and other drugs today. People say, okay, those are great drugs, but they're injectables. Why can't we have a pill version of it? Why does this work in the opposite direction?

Yeah, well, I think that what people want is to have something that helps prevent the disease and then they can forget about it. So I think there's a bit of a different motivation here. People don't want to take a daily medicine when they don't have a disease. I think that's different than some of the other medicines that you just articulated. What they want to do is go into a clinic.

get protected for six months, come back in six months time, get a test to make sure they don't have HIV. And again, with this medicine, it was nearly 100% protective against HIV. So what they want is to have an intervention and then forget about it for six months.

that's different than some of the dynamics associated with the other medicines, as you mentioned. - Dan, some activists say that a lot of the HIV prevention work done by the CDC has been largely dismantled by the Trump administration. Is that true?

Well, I think what's really important is federal funding here and state funding has been really important for HIV services in this country. And I spent a lot of time in DC, as I know a lot of folks that are involved in HIV have. And while there is clear disruption to some of the systems, obviously in HIV in this country and around the world, what I'm seeing is continued support for core services, core services related to diagnosing the disease, linking to care, surveillance of the disease. In fact,

The early draft of the president's 26 budget has support for those services and even calls out this kind of twice-year prevention as one of the most important things to invest in to end the epidemic. Because at the end of the day, if you really want to have this be economically more self-sustainable in the future,

what you need to do is eradicate the disease. And you only eradicate the disease by preventing the disease more effectively than it is today. There's only about a third of people that could benefit from prevention that are on prevention today. And then that you treat everybody that has the disease to a level where they can't transmit the disease. And we have medicines also, where as long as you treat the disease and you reduce the viral load to undetectable, you can't transmit the disease. So that's how you kind of dampen an epidemic in this country and around the world.

What do you see more broadly, just in terms of your negotiations in Washington, to try and make sure that drug companies can still charge what they need in order to do the innovation here? Well, I think what's really important here, what I agree with this administration on, is that we have an issue in this country about what people pay for their medicines out of pocket. It's higher than most other aspects of healthcare.

And so we have to address that and we're in dialogue with the administration and with Congress around this. But let's be clear, I mean, this is also the only country in the world where 50% of every dollar or 50 cents on every dollar goes to people that don't invent or discover the medicines.

So let's start by making sure that that system is addressed in the United States, that the discounts that we provide to insurers are passed along to patients. Are you talking about the pharmacy benefits managers? I'm talking about, yeah, middlemen and the system. So I think it's really important that we address that while also encouraging other countries, of course, to pay more for innovation. I think both those things can be true. But we have to make sure that we don't disrupt the system that created

something like Yes2Go, which is more than 20 years in the making. I mean, 4,000 molecules were screened to find this. It's true innovation made here in America that we have to make sure we continue to support. Dan, I want to thank you very much for coming in today. Daniel O'Day from Gilead. I remember that...

- The cocktail was three different ways of trying to prevent replication of HIV, right? - Yes. - Which one does this do? One specifically protease and everything? - This is a brand new mechanism. - Brand new. - Yeah, so it's-- - Totally prevents the viral replication. - Nearly 100% protective. - How? - Well, yeah, it's different than the way other medicines have worked in the past. So instead of stopping the replication, this actually attacks the,

encapsulated protein that encapsulates the genetic material that you have. So it stops HIV from ever infecting. Which is, by the way, you have to be HIV negative to be taking this drug. We should be clear on that as well. Correct. You have to be HIV negative. Once you have a virus, you can't take it. You have to get tested beforehand because you could build up a... That's correct. That's correct. It's a word I'm looking for. Resistance. Exactly. Dan, thank you.

There's still more to come on SquawkPod. Up next, the summer box office starts for Pixar with a stumble. They struck lightning in a bottle. I think there's no lightning left.

This episode is brought to you by Schwab Market Update, an original podcast from Charles Schwab. Join host Keith Lansford for this information-packed daily market preview delivered in 10 minutes or less, including projected stock updates, monetary policy decisions, and key results and statistics that may impact your trading. Download the latest episode and subscribe at schwab.com slash market update podcast or find Schwab Market Update wherever you get your podcasts.

I know every operating system like the back of my hand. I have 25 years of experience and have worked with several people from your company. I've been recognized for my passion. My team is everything. LinkedIn delivers candidates who rise above the rest. With an up-to-date view into shared connections, skills, and interests you won't find anywhere else. See why 86% of small businesses who post a job on LinkedIn get a qualified candidate within a day. Post a job for free at linkedin.com slash acquire.

LinkedIn, your next great hire is here. You're listening to Squawk Box. Here's Joe Kernan.

It's a tough weekend for Disney at the box office. Its new Pixar animated feature, Elio, took in just $21 million in North America. That's the worst ever opening for a Pixar film. Doesn't help that neither one of us, Becky, knew it. I'd never heard of it. Nope. Zoe Saldana plays Aunt Olga. I know who she is. Cost at least $250 million to produce Elio.

and market at the top of the box office was how to train your dragon from Universal Pictures, taking in $37 million. It has now grossed close to $360 million worldwide. Comcast owns Universal Pictures and NBC Universal. And of course, today is the parent of CNBC. Interesting piece, by the way, by Matt Bellany overnight about whether Pixar...

which has always done original films, meaning that all the IP that they use is their own IP. They never thus far have gone the Barbie route. Right. And whether... And apparently, in the last couple of years, they have not managed to score a sort of massive...

killer new film on an original basis. And the question is whether they should have a toy story. Right. And whether and whether they need to start using some of the IP in the library that Disney owns to try to take it to the next level. It was an interesting sort of idea. Is Lasseter's? But I think it's sort of a cultural Lasseter's still there. And they struck lightning in a bottle. I think there's no lightning left. That's like the 1890 when they wanted to close out the

Pat. There's nothing left. There was a long list. Ratatouille, there's nothing left. No, no, no, but they created it. That's what I mean. There's nothing left to create, Andrew. Things like that. It's done. Famous last words. That's what they always say. But I just, you know,

Toy Story, Bugs, let me just think. We had the talking rat. I just, it'd be hard. It's hard to strike lightning. It's easier to do a sequel. Well, then the question is, should they go do a Barbie? I mean, that's really the question. Much easier to do a sequel or someone else. Yeah, they had the animated technology, but they were so good at the creativity. They were. That could have been two guys that are gone, two people, and now they're gone.

But a lot of the argument is that if you look at some of the stuff that Universal's done, Super Mario and other things. Right, it's been very successful based on taking other IPs. Beloved IPs. Exactly. Not making it new.

That's the pod for today. I'm Zach Felici, and thanks for listening. Squawk Box is hosted by Joe Kernan, Becky Quick, and Andrew Ross Sorkin. Tune in weekday mornings on CNBC at 6 Eastern. Or get the best of our TV show right into your ears when you follow Squawk Pod wherever you get your podcasts. We'll meet you back here tomorrow. We are clear. Thanks, guys.

Trading at Schwab is now powered by Ameritrade. Unlocking the power of Thinkorswim, the award-winning trading platforms loaded with features that let you dive deeper into the market. Visualize your trades in a new light on Thinkorswim desktop with robust charting and analysis tools, all while you uncover new opportunities with up-to-the-minute market news and insights. Thinkorswim is available on desktop, web, and mobile to meet you where you are. It's built by the trading obsessed to help you trade brilliantly.

Learn more at Schwab.com slash trading.