tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN December 2, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm PST
thanks for joining us for the second hour of 360. a break in nearly 40 years of diplomatic practice. donald trump spoke on the phone with the president of taiwan. this happened without any contact with either the state department or white house according to administration official. trump tweeted twice about this tonight. first the president of taiwan called me today to wish me congratulations on winning the presidency, thank you. interesting how the u.s. sells taiwan billions of dollars in military equipment but i should not accept a congratulatory call. what more do we know about how this all came about? >> we understand that an adviser to president-elect trump's transition team, steven yates, a very pro-taiwan, former official with the reagan administration, with the bush administration, with vice president cheney, he was in taiwan and helped to facilitate the call. we understand that this wasn't
done, as you said, without any notification from the white house, or the state department. which is the key thing in with what president-elect trump has done. he hasn't contacted the state department or the white house for any of these calls. and that's one of the concerns here, is that usually these kind of briefings are, talk to the officials, talk to the president-elect, tell him about the sensitivities involved. clearly this is will cause a diplomatic uproar with china. we don't really know whether this was a message that he was sending to china, or just as he said in his tweets, taking a con dprat la tory phone call. that's what he said in the readout. a congratulatory phone call. they talked about strengthening that relationship. but it doesn't matter really what they talked about. the fact that they had this call really is the message here. >> choin a's contacting now the white house in reaction to this call. do we know much about that?
>> we don't know that much about that. you can imagine what they're saying. they're like, what is this about? does this mean that president-elect trump is going to up-end the one china policy? which this is 1979 for four decades. the fact is, they can't really say anything. the president obama's administration doesn't know about what president-elect trump is going to do. there's been a lot of uncertainty created. he's sent mixed messages, talked about being tough on china, making them a currency manipulator. but he has some very pro-china advisers who say this is one of the most important relationships. and they're even advocating a grand bargain with china. i don't think the administration's really going to have too many satisfying answers for the chinese. >> is the trump transition team making use of resources? >> president-elect trump made 50 phone calls with world leaders. these congratulatory phone calls. they're supposed to be very
perfunctory, getting to know you, looking forward to working with you. the state department stands at the ready for a briefing for these calls. his team has not reached out at all. i did hear tonight vice president-elect pence did reach out to the state department. they did provide him with some briefing papers. so it's kind of an interesting dichotomy why president-elect trump is kind of winging it, while vice president-elect pence is taking a more considered approach. >> appreciate the update. china quickly reacted to the call. let's get the latest from michelle kosinski. >> we know that almost immediately, as soon as the world got word of this very interesting phone call, chinese officials reached out to the white house. that says a lot. what isn't saying a lot right now is the white house itself. they don't want to comment on diplomatic conversations. about you let's just say that this was a discussion that happened, and china has questions. well, there's really not a lot
that the white house can convey at this point. they likely emphasized what the white house has said publicly about this. that the white house adheres to the one china policy. meaning they believe taiwan is a part of china, and they address diplomatic relations accordingly. but they can't lend china any real clarity on how relations and diplomacy will change. this is the same problem the president has had on his recent foreign trip. where world leaders want to know what's going to change and what's going to happen. the white house doesn't have the answers. >> michelle, thank you. joining me now is former ambassador christopher hill, served as assistant secretary of state for east asia affairs. what is your reaction to this? when you first heard about this phone call, the details about it, what did you make of it? >> well, my first reaction was this was kind of unintended. they had a phone call from the president of taiwan.
they thought as a courtesy they'd take the call. one worries, however, certainly, listening to some of the people in the trump transition side, that they feel this is the way to change a policy that's been around for 40 years. and ronald reagan adhered to this policy. george w. bush adhered to it. everyone adhered to it. it's a little odd to try to change a policy with a phone call without any consultations, congress, senate, and of course, the outgoing administration. so i guess what i'm concerned about is, i still think it's something that's kind of inadvertent. but i'm a little concerned that the president-elect would want to double down on it, and suggest this is good policy. by the way, this is a time, we have a lot of things going on with the chinese. we have south china sea. we have north korea. we have a huge trade problems. we have issues in the u.n., sanctions, et cetera. this is no time to introduce a new crisis point in the u.s.-china relationship. >> we just heard that a man
named steven yates, a trump transition adviser, formally advised cheney helped facilitate the call. the president-elect said the taiwanese leader called him. what do you make of the apparent involvement by mr. yates? >> it's hard to say. when he was working for vice president cheney, his sort of portfolio was taiwan. and he merrily went ahead on things with taiwan without too much regard for china. he was very much of an advocate for these arms sales to taiwan. but those arms sales are kind of laid out in the original taiwan relations act which is one of the twin, you know, founding documents of the u.s.-china relationship. we have one china policy, that is all official. contacts must be with mainland china. but we have something called the taiwan relations act that includes the idea that we help taiwan defend itself.
that's where these weapons sales come from. the chinese don't like them but they've accepted them over the decades. >> for people who think maybe this isn't a bad idea, putting china a little on edge about what the future holds, and maybe things will be different, and maybe they need to be different in their relations with the u.s. >> well, i think it's the thing if you want to make news, you ought to know you're going to make news. and it shouldn't be inadvertent. if you're going to change a policy of 40 years that's been subscribed to by democrats and republicans alike, you might want to give some thought to it. you might want to do some consultations with people. and you might want to decide whether this is maybe a time to change something. but as far as we know, there wasn't any discussion whatsoever before this phone call. so it does have kind of a look of winging it. and i think it's a little ominous if this is the kind of modus operandi we're going to see. these issues are complicated. it's been and for 40 years.
we're talking about this because it's a complicated issue. and i think people need to understand that, you know, there are people who spend their lifetimes studying this, understanding it, and i don't think we can completely disintermediate the experts from the state department and national security council staff. >> ambassador hill, thank you for your time. tom, you heard ambassador hill. how big of a deal do you think this is? >> we'll have to see, first of all, anderson, how the chinese react. and not just with the phone call, but whether they take substantive actions themselves. i do agree with what chris said, which is that, you know, this is a case for trump having his own china policy. maybe it will be tougher on trade, or tougher geopolitically in the south china sea. but that policy, anderson, should be achieved after he sits down with his secretary of commerce, to understand the
economic implications, with the secretary of state to understand the diplomatic implications, and secretary of defense to understand the security implications. because there are enormous tradeoffs on all those fronts. there's no sign that that was done at all. what this sounds like is a very aggressive member of his transition team, very pro-taiwanese. i love and admire the taiwanese. i always enjoyed going to taiwan, but they have their own agenda. they are not above currying influence with people in washington, d.c. we need to have our own agenda as well and not get sucked into that. we're talking about an island of 20 million people, and china 1.3 billion. there's a case for a different policy, but it should be done in a considered way. one issue chris raised. what if we discover north korea has developed an intercontinental ballistic missile that can reach the west coast of the united states. and we need china's cooperation
and help in trying to deter that. what if they say -- what if they don't take our phone call? there's enormous tradeoffs on multiple fronts. what you don't get the sense of when the president-elect says he called me, what, he just called the house, and he said, honey, the president of taiwan is on the phone? this was obviously set up. it had to be considered. it doesn't really feel like it was considered. because it does in effect challenge a very long policy that, you know what, has kept the south china sea, the u.s.-china-taiwan relationship not only relatively stable for four decades, but really prosperous and benefiting all three countries. >> it certainly puts renewed focus on whom the president-elect is going to choose to be his secretary of state. there's a lot of talk about the person will have a big portfolio representing the u.s. around the world. at the same time representing the policy of donald trump. >> but i think the secretary of
state, whoef it is, will be very important. what's most important are the impulses and instincts of the president-elect. and they are multiple we see here. because he is for getting rid of the transpacific partnership treaty, which, yes, was a free trade agreement, or trade promotion agreement. but it was also a de facto security agreement. it was by all our key nonchina trading partners. and that trade agreement, and the rules that it laid down both on trade and other issues, like human trafficking, the right to organize labor unions, it was a de facto security alliance. when you get rid of that, just throw that out the window, you leave all those countries, they're going to go closer to china, look for more protection with china and get more deeply integrated economically with china. the point is, what's worrying to me, and look, every president -- the president-elect, they're going to make some stumbles. i see this with every administration. i'm not going to jump down their throat from day one.
but at the same time, there's a certain cavalier attitude about big systems. nato, who needs it. eu, let it crack up. taiwan-u.s.-china relations, i can take a phone call. these are big systems that have been put in place over a long period of time. they are imperfect. a lot of them could use refreshing, a lot of them could use repair, even invigorating ideas. but these systems have kept the world peaceful and prosperous. our main western allies and relationships, for a lot of years now, you don't play around with big systems. >> tom friedman, thank you very much. appreciate it. coming up, incredibly heated debate between top clinton and trump p staff. van jones and jeffrey lord talk about how democrats and republicans move forward in the face of lingering vitriol.
♪ if you've got the time welcome to the high life. ♪ we've got the beer ♪ miller beer this is your daughter. and she just got this. ooh boy. but, you've got hum. so you can set this. and if she drives like this, you can tell her to drive more like this. because you'll get this. you can even set boundaries for so if she should be here, but instead goes here, here, or here. you'll know. so don't worry, mom. because you put this, in here. hum by verizon. the technology designed to make your car smarter, safer and more connected. put some smarts in your car. let's just get a sandwich or something. "or something"? you don't just graduate from medical school, "or something." and we don't just pull smoked chicken, bake fresh foccacia and hand-slice avocado. there's nothing "or something" about it.
after an election like no other, no surprise the conversation afterward is contentious, to say the least. top staff members from the trump and clinton campaigns faced off at a post-election event that showed the wounds of the election. randi kaye tonight reports. >> reporter: the two-hour panel discussion at harvard university was supposed to cement the 2016 campaign in history. instead, it added a new chapter. it got ugly fast, with hillary clinton's campaigns director of
communications jennifer palmeri accusing trump's team of elevating a belief of white supremacists. >> the platform that they gave to white supremacists, white nationalists, and i think as his presidency goes forward i'll be glad to have been part of the -- >> you think i ran a campaign where a white supremacist had a platform? >> kellyanne conway insisted that wasn't true. then turned up the heat. >> do you think you could have had a decent message for the white working class voters? you think this woman who has nothing in common with -- how about hillary clinton. she doesn't connect with people. how about they have nothing in common with her. >> listen to mandy grunwald weigh in. >> i don't think you give yourself enough credit for the negative cam rain you ran. >> reporter: she accused trump's aides of turning out fake news stories about clinton. >> there is a world that many
people were watching where hillary clinton was dying for months of parkinson's, just got days to live. she's going to jail. she's going to jail any minute now. >> reporter: conway shot back. >> you think that's why we won over 200 counties? that president obama won? that's how we -- >> take the compliment. i'm trying to -- >> i would if it were one. >> i give him credit. we gave you the material to work with. comey gave you the material to work with. >> reporter: comey, as in fbi director james comey. clinton advisers suggested his interference in the e-mail scandal in the final weeks of the campaign cost her the election. clinton's team was quick to point out she won the popular vote by a landslide. >> the fact of the matter is, that more americans voted for hillary clinton than donald trump. so let's put it in -- >> there was nothing that said the road to popular vote is anywhere. >> reporter: conway told clinton's aides their own message did them in.
>> it blew back on you. it's not an optimistic message. how did we have a female candidate whose closing ar dpumts were so negative. where is the uplifting visionary message of barack obama or bill clinton? i can tell you're angry, but wow. #he's your president. >> reporter: randi kaye, cnn, new york. >> jake tapper was at that event, also moderated a separate conversation through campaign managers robbie look and kellyanne conway which will air this weekend. first, here's part of that conversation. >> you've's referred to this as a post-factual election where facts don't matter. and you were taking issue with something that donald trump said. and there were other things the so-called fake news disinformation out there, stories, a crazy story toward the end of the campaign in which the nypd was about to throw hillary clinton and her whole gang in jail for stuff found on
a computer that linked everybody to child sex trafficking. general flynn retweeted at some point. how much of a problem was this post-factual election in your view? >> i think it was a huge problem. look, jake, i think there's a lot of things we need to examine coming out of this. you just named one of them. congress has got to investigate what happened with russia here. we cannot have foreign and foreign aggressors i would argue intervening in our elections. we know that the russians were promulgating fake news through facebook and other outlets. this is with all due respect to kellyanne and her colleagues, this isn't personal. steve bran non ran news that was notorious for peddling stories like this. i'm not attacking him personally. but they peddled a lot of stories on that website that are just false. they're just not true. and that reinforced sexist, racist, anti-semitic notions in
people. headlines that just make your -- that, you know, are shocking. and insulting. and shouldn't be part of our public discourse. >> the biggest piece of fake news in this election was that donald trump couldn't win. there's that. that was peddled probably for weeks and months before the campaign, definitely in the closing days. if you look at major newspapers, and major cable stations, in etworks, it's unmistakable. >> i didn't say he couldn't win. >> no, no, i'm saying, particularly print stories, we have colleagues whom we all respect, some of those in the room, that represent outlets, literally if you go back and pull the whole front page -- >> there's a lot of -- >> unbelievable. that's based on things that just aren't truth. they have no ground game. she has more money, more personnel, she can't possibly lose. of course, i'm not going to -- the persistent narrative that i
won't repeat here, but donald trump takes the wings off of butterflies. you know, america said, there's a difference between what may offend me and what absolutely affects me. i as a voter will vote to what affects me. >> jake tapper joins me now. you moderated a discussion yesterday. there was the heated discussion between the two groups of campaign aides yesterday evening. were you surprised by just the tension, the accusation? >> i was. because normally, this event at harvard, the institute of politics, is one where people look more clinically at what happened during the campaign. it's an attempt by the institute of politics, by the kennedy school to do a first draft of history and get people's thoughts and memories while they're still fresh. it's not a time to hash out emotional responses and anger. and so the bitterness that we saw by both clinton campaign
officials and trump campaign officials was not in keeping with this event that's been going on information years. >> did either side seem satisfied at the end? regrets, disputes, political campaigns, losing campaigns especially can last a lifetime. but michael dukakis still talks about re dprets. but did anything get settled? >> no. there were points of agreement. they all hated us. they all hated the media. and they all thought polling was garbage. public polling, not their private internal polling. but that said, the clinton people, their basic response and posture is, we won the popular vote by more than 2.5 million votes. it's a fluke donald trump won the electoral vote. how can you argue we did anything wrong. they're very focused on what the fbi director james comey did in the letter he wrote just ten days before the election. and also, on the fact that
according to u.s. intelligence, the russians were involved in trying to influence this election, both through disinformation and also through those hacks, and giving information allegedly to wikileaks. so that's their posture. the trump campaign posture is, we won. so whatever you think of us, we won. and we beat back everybody. the media was its own pro-hillary clinton super pac. so -- and there really was no acknowledgement of any mistakes on either side. even though plenty of us in the audience had long lists of things that all of them could have done differently. >> yet the clinton people think the media was too favorable toward donald trump and too critical of hillary clinton, too much focus on the e-mails. >> absolutely. that's one of their talking points is, they feel like in the last couple weeks of the election, last three weeks of the election, especially after the comey letter, that the media was just picking her apart, story after story. and in fact, they talked about how one of the things that they
were thinking about doing is calling for a fourth debate. because they felt like putting hillary clinton next to donald trump up on stage was when they could really do well. but when donald trump was able to go off and do his own thing, and the media was attacking her, not him, which is obviously not what the trump people thought, nor is it necessarily what happened, that that's when they didn't do as well. and an interesting moment, the clinton people said, i wish we had called for the fourth debate. the trump people said they would have gone along with it. the fourth debate that nef happened. >> jake, thanks. >> thanks, anderson. coming up, donald trump's team adding more stops in their thank you tour. where they're going and a conversation with van jones about what he has been hearing from trump supporters on the road over the last several days. will your business be ready when growth presents itself? american express open cards can help you take on a new job, or fill a big order
or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com. explore your treatment options with specialists who treat only cancer. every stage... every day.... at cancer treatment centers of america. learn more at cancercenter.com/experts ♪ i try to make the ♪worst seem better ♪ ♪ lord, show me the way ♪ to cut through all this worn out leather ♪
at times it got ugly. joining me is cnn political commentator, former obama official van jones talking to trump supporters. his reports will air next week. and jeffrey lord. you know, hearing the dispute between the trump campaign and clinton -- you hear from some democrats and it makes as if all trump supporters are members of the p at-right, which is obviously an unfair broad-brush characterization. >> you now have two political parties that have big problems. and they won't admit it. and they talk past each other. so it is true that there was a white nationalist part of the trump phenomenon. it is unfair, though, to the vast majority of trump voters to say they are all that. all of them are part of that. it's also, unfair to the rest of americans to say there was no white nationalist or neo-nazi involvement. >> the families you've been
speaking to, some reports that you're going to have on the program next week, it's not about any of that. it's about the real pain that's out there. >> yeah. i think where liberals are having a lot of heart break is that for liberals, and i count myself a strong progressive, either you're racist or anti-racist. if you vote for someone, said something racist, you're a racist yourself. that's just not true. for some people, those infamiliar tory comments were delightful. i would say those people are probably bigots. for a lot of people they were distasteful, but they weren't disqualifying. if you ask somebody who voted for trump, would you want your kids talking to people like trump did? no, but i voted for him anyway for other reasons. >> you make the distinction between constructsive, what was your term --
>> constructive disagreement versus destructive disagreement. i'm saying, why can't we get along. you can have disagreements but they should be more constructive. if you're all for markets and i'm all for government, we can disagree. if we talk about it constructively, we might come up with a public/private partnership that's better than my idea or your idea. we're not even trying to find common ground anymore. >> it doesn't seem like, you know, there's this debate going on among democrats, is it resistance some are calling it? or doing what they criticize the republicans for doing to president obama when he first came in office, of just obstruct, obstruct, obstruct? or do you try to reach across and find common ground? >> well, i think that there's a happy medium there. i think that either political
party's objective is to push their agenda forward and their principles forward. you don't have to be obstructing all the time. but you do, if you honestly feel that the president at the moment is taking the country in a wrong direction, there's nothing wrong with standing up and voting against him. it's the president's task to find areas of agreement to move the country in what he feels is the right direction. so i'm less critical of democrats for thinking that they can be, quote unquote, obstructists, because there is a political price to pay. if they do this in the right way, they'll be rewarded, or if they do it in the wrong way, they'll lose. >> right. if things get done, then it actually benefits the -- not only the country obviously, but politically the president in power and his power. >> right. >> that's right. >> so now you have democrats who say, listen, the same people who are telling us -- there's hypocrisy on both sides. the republicans are hypocritical, give him a chance.
the same republicans who didn't give obama a chance and said they wanted him to fail. and said he didn't have the right birth certificate and all that. they're being hypocritical not to understand why democrats might want to block. at the same time, the democrats who before were saying, can't we all get along, kumbayah, are now saying never, never, never, never. i think what has to happen is, where democrats feel strongly about, say, the muslim community being mistreated, or dreamers being drug out of colleges and deported, those kinds of issues that are going to have to be obstruction. but other issues, there may be common ground. my frustration is this. three times the democrats supported w. on his wars, on education, and on immigration. i can't tell you one time republicans supported president obama. >> jeff, can you? >> getting osama bin laden. i think there was a unanimous agreement he did a great thing there. i certainly thought so.
>> but that wasn't a legislative initiative. >> right. >> killing america's greatest enemy who was responsible for the slaughter of u.s. citizens and other citizens. >> this goes to the point i was trying to make earlier. if you believed as a lot of republicans believed that the president's self-professed agenda of transporting america in which was a socialist direction, then they're right to oppose that. they're right to stand up and say no. and they get blowback from internally. i think that's one of the reasons john boehner lost the speakership, et cetera. they get a lot of blowback for cooperating. >> van, jeff, thanks so much. >> thank you. >> thank you. more breaking news tonight. trump's phone call today with taiwan. it could hinder u.s.-china relations. and our correspondents talk about how the world is viewing donald trump. ♪ p is for permission to indulge. o is for out of this world.
i am a first responder tor and i'emergencies 24 hours a day, everyday of the year. my children and my family are on my mind when i'm working all the time. my neighbors are here, my friends and family live here, so it's important for me to respond as quickly as possible and get the power back on. it's an amazing feeling turning those lights back on. be informed about outages in your area. sign up for outage alerts at pge.com/outagealerts.
congratulations on winning the presidency. thank you. this is a break from u.s. policy, something that actually hasn't happened in nearly 40 years. china regards taiwan which broke away from the communist mainland as a outlaw province. to get insight on how the world sees president-elect trump, i recently spoke to our international correspondents. do you hear excitement in europe? >> you hear a lot of nervousness, but not for the same reasons people assume. it's not necessarily because of some of his more outlandish or controversial policy suggestions. it's because donald trump has essentially dispensed with the playbook. he is dispensing with diplomatic protocol. he is throwing away tradition. nobody knows what is coming in its place. he is a disrupter. everybody is sort of frantically
improvising to try to guess or anticipate what his next move will be. but he's not using protocol. he's not going through the existing chains of command. he's doing everything in his own unique way. and that is on the one hand i think to a lot of people kind of exciting and thrilling. >> right now hearing that, they're saying, good, great. >> but it's petrifying. >> i was going to say, there has been the transatlantic relationship with the nato and european countries, with ecan look across the atlantic at each other and see each other mirrored. i think there's a time in europe now, they're looking across the atlantic and they're not sure that they're seeing themselves mirrored back. maybe the uk and the britain independent party feels different. but that's a general feeling looking towards trump. and then, of course, that uncertainty. but that brings a little uncomfortableness on top of that
not knowing quite how he's going to behave and deal with nato, whether he's going to want to keep that alliance going. >> the rise in populism, not just in the united kingdom and the united states, but it's happening all around here. >> you get the frustration with the crash of 2008, feeling their politicians are tone deaf to the issue, the rise of global capitalism in a way, that it's not delivering for them. add on top of that, at a time when the economy -- people are feeling you're in a more precarious position. you add in the history of immigrants coming, the floods we're seeing coming in out of europe out of syria and afghanistan. that's resonated in britain for the brexit movement. i think that fueled their brand of populism. that's why britain voted to leave the european union. >> not just a fear of jobs from the my grants, fear of the
culture, them not assimilating. >> and the massive fear of the other. they are different. at least in europe. they view them as being different. i think that was one of the more striking things covering the refugee trail was how much fear there was amongst a certain segment of the population that is now getting a much louder and growing voice. fear because there might be a suicide bomber or isis sympathizer amongst these millions that people weren't able to get past the notion that one individual is not necessarily going to be reflective of everybody else. people are able to reach in and find compassion with what it was. they were so overcome with the fear they were going through. >> we talked about allowing a few thousand or 10,000 syrians, refugees into the united states. in germany, they've taken in 800,000 to 1 million. >> a place of change, too, in britain certainly. i've lived there for 50 years. i go back to london increasingly now. it feels like society has done a lot of demographic change.
my parents live in a very different britain now. i suppose maybe in our set of values here, in the liberal media, we need to ask ourselves that's how it should be. but for those outside of that, i think certain people look to this has gone very fast. we've had to endure an awful lot of things with etook for granted. >> i went back about six months ago and i was stunned to see the demographic changes you see on the streets. >> the political class didn't really -- hasn't sold it to the british people over a space of generations. this has built up over a period of time i think. >> i think as well as all of these components that you're talking about, there's a genuine sense of excitement that people feel, oh, my goodness, we do have the power, we can do it. it started with brexit. then people all over the world are watching what happened here in the united states, and they're saying, wow, disrupters have power. disrupters have a role. disrupters can affect change.
and there's a genuine excitement and enthusiasm that comes with that. >> they want to smash it up and see what's currently the change. it seems the urban elite have cheap labor. but when it comes down to actually having something they want to see in its place -- >> not just europe. we're seeing this in the philippines. look at their new leader, somebody called him the donald trump of the philippines. he's very different. he did hold off as mayor of the city. the new mayor in sao paulo is a millionaire, had a television background. a lot of people leading these movements are very wealthy and able to portray themselves and perhaps even be voices for the p populous. >> it's through frustration. through brexit and the elections here, you don't always have to say the truth. to get elected.
this is what's happening. >> they're charming often. they're charismatic. they have a sense of humor. they don't carry themselves with the same stiffness, with the rigorous enslavement of the idea of protocol and what is diplomatically feasible, and what you can say. they cut through the bull and they talk the language that people are desperate ri wanting to hear. >> certainly donald trump is the greatest example of that. >> the thing is, in this rise of nationalism you're seeing, you're seeing a rise in rejection of people that some individuals don't consider to be like them. britain today is very diverse. countries are very diverse. you can't say, nationalism is going to be on the rise. but i'm going to reject this entire segment of society, because their roots are different than what mine are. >> you obviously spent a lot of time in the middle east. you were just in iraq, incredible reporting from mosul in the heat of the battle. what's the reaction been to the people you talked to, to donald trump being elected?
>> there's a lot of surprise obviously, as there was throughout. i think there's a lot of concern amongst the syrian activists and rebel population, because they are worried about trump's potential relationship with putin and whether he will basically ally with putin, and completely give up on them. and that will lead eventually to their complete and total obliteration. >> tough talk, though, about destroying isis. bombing the hell out of them. >> in a city like mosul -- >> but does that play well in iraq? >> in the sense that, you know, they want a tough leader to a certain degree, they want -- they like the republicans because they saw bush as being a decisive individual, even though the invasion threw iraq into total and complete and utter shambl shambles. but they believe maybe a republican, even trump in his own entity, might be a harsher hand. but they're also very realistic
and concerned about the unpredictability of it all. because everyone knows that you can't bomb isis into defeat. you can't bomb an ideology. >> kind of the relationships he wants in the middle east, one of the first phone calls was to egyptian president assisi. not exactly one of the leaders of the free world, quite frankly. he's a strong man who will reach out to other strong men that will try to forge a path. >> thank you all. appreciate it. appreciate all your work. >> thank you. >> thank you. just ahead, the indiana manufacturing plant that did not get a job-saving deal. just down the street from carrier, the workers are wondering, what about us. all right, be cool. you got the amazing new iphone 7 on the house by switching to at&t... what??.... aand you got unlimited data because you have directv?? (laughs to self in disbelief) okay, just a few more steps... door! it's cool!
when you find something worth waiting for, we'll help you invest to protect it for the future. financial guidance while you're mastering life. from chase, so you can. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide.
today the indiana manufacturing company carrier confirmed it will still be sending 7 hub jobs to mexico. the cuts will fall on workers at a different factory than the one covered in the deal president-elect trump made with carrier. that deal will save 800 jobs, fewer than the 1,100 he initially said. he was including 300 jobs that weren't at risk getting shipped to mexico. still the deal is great news for the 800 workers whose jobs were saved. at another company in indianapolis it's a different story. martin savidge reports. >> reporter: as they celebrated saving hundreds of jobs inside the carrier plant, i sat at junior's kitchen table. he's a long-time worker at a company down the street, rexin
order. >> i'm psyched, happy for my community. >> reporter: he just wishes someone would save his job too. it was announced it was leaving, relocating to mexico, taking 300 well-paying jobs with it. at the union hall john felder remembers when the bad news broke. >> he says, we have a meeting at 2:30 on the back dock. they actually split the plant, half the plant went up to the front dock, the other half went to the back dock. they just come out and said, we're closing. >> reporter: rexnord has had a plant to the west side of indianapolis since the 1950s. john zering worked there for 43 years. >> it's not 300. it's at least three to four people per family, 12, 15, 1,800 people. >> reporter: ironically, at that moment mathis ended up at rexnord after his last factory closed. it's tough, it's rough. yeah, i was really hoping i
wouldn't have to go through it again. >> reporter: carrier had planned to phase its shutdown over three years. rexnord workers have six months. now they watch president-elect trump come to town and save carrier. and they're happy. >> we don't know the details yet. >> isn't there a part that says, what about me? >> sure, you bet there is. there's a part that says, what about me? >> reporter: he's married with six kids. they've already started cutting back. he thinks about all he missed working those 12-hour shifts to provide what he calls his nice middle-class home. >> it's not anything to brag about, but it's nice enough for us. >> reporter: he started a college fund for his daughters, put money into retirement, bought his wife their first new car. >> the first payment was due the friday they announced. >> he's glad about carrier, especially because he never thought it could happen. >> give you hope? >> no. it's a different situation.
>> how so? >> it's comparing apples to oranges. >> are rexnord wasn't a campaign issue. it's not a household name like carrier. and it doesn't have a parent company that does billions of dollars in defense contracts. >> we don't have a parent company that has 10% of their revenue in federal contracts. >> do you think that matters? >> oh, yeah, it matters. yeah. >> do you think it mattered in this case? >> oh, yeah, 100%. >> reporter: in his speech at carrier plant, donald trump said the days that companies could pick up and move to mexico, once he's president, are pretty much going to be over. there will be consequences. and for those many factory workers that are worried about their jobs, they've been delivered something they haven't had in a long time -- hope.
(vo) it's the holidays at verizon, and the best deals are on the best network. (both) yes! (vo) with no surprise overages, you can use your data worry free and even carry over the data you don't use. and right now get four lines and 20 gigs for only $40 per line. and, just for the holidays, get a samsung galaxy s7 edge for only $15 per month. no trade-in required. i love you in that, no, i love you in that. no, i love you in that! (vo) hurry, these offers end soon. get the best deals and the best network, only on verizon. our mission is to produce for african women as they try to build their businesses and careers. my name is yasmin belo-osagie and i'm a co-founder at she leads africa. i definitely could not do my job without technology. this windows 10 device, the touchscreen allows you to kind of pinpoint what you're talking about. which makes communication much easier and faster than the old mac that i used to use.
you can configure it in so many different ways, it just, i don't know, it feels really cool. i feel like i'm in the future. will your business be ready when growth presents itself? american express open cards can help you take on a new job, or fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com.
cnn follows the rise and fall of james arthur ray. you may remember him, a self-help guru who shot to popularity over a decade ago. thousands paid to go to ray's seminars and retreats which he packed with physical challenges to push participants past their comfort zones. that's what the selling point was. in 2009, three of ray's followers died in a sweat lodge in arizona. after two years in prison he's
trying to make a comeback. here's a preview of "enlighten us: the rise and fall of james arthur ray." >> it was so, so, so intense. you couldn't breathe. at the fourth round i said i had had enough and i crawled over and james was at the door. he's like, beverly, you can do this you can do this you're stronger than this, you can get through this. >> as a good mentor that they paid me to be i would say, come on, now, come on, you can do this. can't you? come on you can stick it out. i would encourage them. >> i was like, yeah, okay, okay. >> what am i doing here? why am i putting myself through this? what is the point of me sitting here with all these other people? and is it worth it? >> i had to leave. but then i was sitting there blaming myself. like, golly. is there something wrong with me that i wasn't able to stick it out? >> yes there were people that
were having a hard time. but every year there were people having a hard time. you know -- to me it was no different than running a marathon. >> "enlighten us: the rise and fall of james arthur ray" premieres on cnn tomorrow night at 8:00 eastern. thanks for watching. have a great weekend. "cnn tonight with don lemon" starts now. it has been more than 30 years since a president did what donald trump did today. this is "cnn tonight." i am don lemon. no american president or president-elect has spoken directly with the leader of taiwan since 1979. today president-elect trump did just that, a move likely to infuriate china and already has some u.s. lawmakers crying foul. what is behind it? trump meets with more cabinet hopefuls one day after picking general james mad dog mattis as his secretary of defense. i'll ask our team of generals what they think. if the economy is so good, why does it feel so bad?