tv CNN Newsroom Live CNN March 15, 2017 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
ways wins. especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business.
this is cnn break news. >> hello, welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. just 11:00 here on the west coast i'm john vause. >> i'm isha sesay. breaking news this hour, president trump's second try at a travel ban has been blocked by a federal judge just like the first one. a judge in hawaii made the decision hours before the ban was supposed to take effect. >> the execute executive order would have stopped travel from a majority of muslim countries. mr. trump told a crowd just a while ago he will fight this decision. >> a judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries. the order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order that was also bl
blocked by another judge and should have never been blocked to start with? >> we spoke last hour to hawaii's attorney general about the judge's decision. >> bottom line here, did judge watson, the judge in this case, did he essentially decide that the executive order, the travel ban, is a religious test? >> yes. i mean essentially with the rationale that judge watson applied to this case was a little different from what judge robart did in the washington case where he looked at it and analyzed the factors from the establish me establishment clause standpoint which is essentially the establishment clause just wants to make sure whenever there is an official action taken by the state it's not favoring or disfavoring one religion as was the case here. >> attorney general chin, how do you respond to president trump's reaction to this move. he said in public comments on
wednesday that this judgment displays unprecedented judicial overreach. what do you say to that? >> well, i don't think that judge watson was necessarily overreaching since there is precedent for the courts to be able to look at the context. context matters. in other words, that is something in a the u.s. government has been arguing, which is that the only right thing to do is to look at the four corners of the document to see whether or not there is neutral language. unfortunately for them, the supreme court has disagreed with that proposition and has told judges that the right thing to do is actually to look at what is going on behind the curtain. and that is our argument. and essentially, that's what what was happening. there have been so many statements, and even up until tonight, statements made by president trump, and even when he was a candidate, and now when
he's president that just indicate that he continues to display, unfortunately, a religious animus that is not constitutional. >> during arguments, the deputy of justice asked the judge if he was leaning towards an injunction, if he could tailor it specifically for hawaii. he rejected it and you know, applied it nationwide. they lost on that front as well. what are the implications there? >> right, well, i think certainly the most thing is that national security is protected. and what really the implication of this temporary restraining order is that the existing system, which is very secure, which is very strict, and is also constitutional, continues to remain in place. what the judge was enjoining was the application of an unconstitutional standard that was grouping people or just basically saying if you are from one of these six muslim-majority nations, you are presumptively a terrorist. it accident matter if you were a
baby, if you were a grandmother or the moirnl of our individual plaintiff in the case who wasn't able to get a visa and still hasn't, you were presumptively a terrorist and you would now have to go through some extra steps in order to prove to the government that you are not. >> that was just a short time ago. we have reporters in hawaii, and here in los angeles. >> and matthew lipman, and john phillips. >> stephanie, a big win for hawaii. but this injunction is only temporary. the legal fight is far from over? >> reporter: that is exactly the case. this is something to celebrate for now. it's a very nice win in hawaii, a big win for this attorney general. but they are poised to keep this fight going here because they know that there are parts of this that the trump administration will likely take
issue with and will probably have some sort of response to other than the comments that he made out speaking while he was traveling in the country yesterday. now, there are a couple of things though that are interesting. you heard the attorney general speak to that. and i was listening because i was in that federal court yesterday when this was happening. the judge was pressing the lawyer representing the united states about the fact of context, whether or not context should be a part of this. or do you take a look at a document and just look at the words there and not pay attention to what else has been happening out into world? and that was something that you heard him ask about several times, and clearly when you take a look at the ruling that he came out with, that is something that continued to be represented in his ruling. the other issue here is just why hawaii wanted to stay alone here in this. they are saying some of the issues are specific to hawaii more so than other states and that is the reason why they chose to take the road alone on this one.
>> stephanie thank you. >> brian to you now, we heard president trump react to this decision. one of the things he said in those public comments in tennessee was that the judge here displayed unprecedented judicial overreach. is he right in saying that? is it unprecedented? >> isha, i agree with president trump on this one. as a trial lawyer for 20-plus years i will he tell you that the one place i thought we could be immune from a political agenda is the courtroom. i believe this ruling by judge watson, evidences what i call courtroom chaos because itbased more on political motivation and emotion than it is logic. to give you an example, his comments in this executive order, they read more like a movie script, like a mystery novell than they did an actual court order. he is citing for example, rudy giuliani, the former mayor of new york city having conversations with donald trump about a muslim hahn skban how to enforce this. he is citing comments made on
anderson cooper's show to support his ruling on this executive order. and i will tell you, rest assured that when this ruling by judge watson makes its way up to the u.s. supreme court, the supreme court justices are not going to be considering extraneous comments made during an election. nor will they consider comments made on tv shows in ruling on this case. >> okay. let's play one of the comments that the judge was actually considering when he delivered this opinion. as brian said, there are a number of them. up with of them was steve miller, a sister aide to donald trump. this is what he said. >> well, one of the big differences that you are going to see in the executive order is that it's going to be responsive to the judicial ruling which didn't exist previously. so those are mostly minor technical differences, fundamentally you are still going to have the same basic policy outcome for the country. but you are going to be responsive to a lot of very
technical issues that were brought up by the court and those will be addressed. but in terms of protecting the country, those basic policies are still going to be in effect. >> john, i guess we'll find out the legalities of all of this as it works its way through the court system. for now, that tough talk coming from the white house, has it backfired. >> i think they should rename the 9th sishlgt court of appeals the academy of motion pictures arts and sciences because it is an idea where all good ideas go to die. the president said he will take it to supreme court. this is why the fight over the vacancy on the supreme court is critical. this could be a 5-4 decision. and you have liberal scholars including alan dershwitz saying he thinks president trump could win think in supreme court. >> trump said he is we are going to be sick of all the winning.
50 days or so into his administration they are focused on the muslim ban instead of a lot of the issues the people elected him to work on, for example, jobs, infrastructure, tax cuts, those things. we are focused on the muslim ban. he keeps losing on the same thing. it's obvious they are trying to ban muslims. rudy giuliani was on tv saying they asked him how to ban muslims. then they tried to ban muslims. we don't have a religious test in this country. that's part of the united states and what we are founded upon. he is trying to block muslims. stop, concentrate on what the people elected you on. >> the president brought up national security as one of the reasons why the ban was so important. this is what donald trump had to say. >> hundreds of refugees are under federal investigation for terrorism and related reasons. we have entire regions of the world destabilized by terrorism and isis. for this reason, i issued an
executive order to temporarily suspend immigration from places where it cannot safely occur. >> brian, the problem for president trump is that the evidence that the judge saw in hawaii just didn't back up those statements. >> that's what judge watson says. but what about the fact that 91% of muslims worldwide are not included in this alleged muslim ban? judge watson had the audacity, john, in his ruling, to mock that fact. in other words, he said oh, just because there is 91% of muslims not in this travel ban, that doesn't make a difference. because if you just exclude one muslim from coming into this country then that's unconstitutional. that's not how the law works judge watson. i will tell you that what's different here, john, is that there is now empirical evidence. remember in that first executive order -- we talked about this -- there was no evidence put forth by the government of any public
safety threat. it was just rhetoric. now we have donald trump actually saying that we have over 300 individuals, refugees in our country being investigated for domestic terrorism. now that he cites that, people mock him on that. it's -- it's -- it's never ending. >> matt, to bring you in, you are shaking your head. >> not. >> not only has it been reject booed i the judge in honolulu, but there is also the question whether the president is overreaching his own powers when it comes to the issue of national security. >> the problem with what brian is saying is trump's department of homeland security has said this muslim ban will not make the united states any safer. his press secretary has said there are no imminent threats. i don't think the idea is there are terrorist threats. we have had a lot of shootings. when this person went into newtown and shot a bunch of first graders he wasn't a muslim. but donald trump is trying to take advantage of the fact that
people are scared of terrorism. terrorism is a big problem and he wants to ban muslims. his administration has said we will start out with these first few countries and then expand it. >> can we please at least consider the comments that isis has put out and tweeted out where they say that they plan on infiltrating the ranks of refugees and sneaking them into western countries so they can commit acts of terror? can we at least consider that, too. >> but the united states has a totally different policy than countries in europe. in europe you get on a bode boat from one country to another. it's impossible to vet those people. in the united states we have a two year vetting process. >> but isis has said they are going to sneak them in. >> they can say what they want. it's not specific evidence that this is a specific threat to the united states. >> it's not just the united
states. it's the west. but we did fine iraqi refugees in bowling groan kentucky who were conspiring to commit acts of terror. >> in iraq, conspiring to support acts in iraq. >> nonetheless, we are supporting people who are aspiring terrorists. we have seen acts in europe where people are coming in with papers of being refugees. this is a real problem. >> of all the shooting in the last 15 years, have any of the people come from these countries. >> that's not the point. >> it is a big point. >> the number should be zero. >> it is zero. all those domestic attacks have been people who live in the united states and have been here for a long time. they are not people coming from these countries. >> a study found in a domestic attacks in this country were carried out by second generation radicalized in their 15th year after they had arrived. banning them from -- >> that's a problem, and people
who are clearly radicals who want to come here like the san bernardino terrorist she was radicalized before she moved here and the evidence i have seen said she radicalized the husband even more. >> brian, isn't it there are notions in this country that people in this country are against safety? everyone is for safety. the question is the way the administration is going about achieving that. >> great point. that goes to the issue i made earlier, which is president trump has earmarked six countries, the same six countries that president obama had also identified as hot beds for domestic terrorism. so donald trump is not simply putting his hand over his eyes and just picking you know 20 countries to pick on. he has data that is supported by our previous president, obama. he has now centered that information on countries that have predominant terrorist cells. and what he's trying to do,
isha, is simply put a delay on the process of vetting. he's not saying this is a permanent ban on muslims from these six countries coming into the country. he's saying we need to stop, take a deep breath, take 120 days, and let's do a better job of vetting folks coming from those countries into the united states to insure public safety. plain and simple. >> regardless of getting into the weeds of this decision, if you look at this from 2,000 feet what you see is that this administration has tried twice and failed to implement an executive order. the first time they botched the rollout. it was chaos and confusing and a disaster. they have tried again and it's rejected again. the perception is that this administration can't get their act together. >> politically speaking it would be better for him to wait until after a terrorist attack to do something like this.
but this is why we elected an outsider. >> we don't want a president who keeps fighting and losing. you have got to fulfill the agenda that people elected you for, jobs, infrastructure. he is spending his first two months on this muslim bachbl i think it is a mistake. >> hold that thought. >> and the conversation continues. >> thanks to brian we appreciate your contribution and insights. >> thanks john, thanks isha. >> you are welcome. time for a quick break. lawmakers are getting frustrated. coming up, what they want from the fbi and what they will do if they don't get it. also, the u.s. government named suspects accused of hacking hundreds of millions of yahoo e-mail accounts. we will tell you why the company is calling it a state sponsored attack. announcer: get on your feet for the nastiest bull in the state of texas. ♪
and he recommended eliquis. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots and reduces the risk of them happening again. yes, eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. eliquis also had significantly less major bleeding than the standard treatment. both made me turn around my thinking. don't stop eliquis unless your doctor tells you to. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. if you had a spinal injection while on eliquis call your doctor right away if you have tingling, numbness, or muscle weakness. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily ...and it may take longer than usual for bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines. tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures. eliquis treats dvt and pe blood clots. plus had less major bleeding. both made eliquis the right treatment for me. ask your doctor if switching to eliquis is right for you.
22 minutes past 11:00 here in los angeles. there is growing frustration in congress with the fbi silent on allegations of russian meddling in the presidential election and also on president trump's claim of wiretapping. >> they are threatening to issue subpoenas for information and openly doubting the president's claim. >> i don't believe just in the last week of time the people we
have talked to, i don't think there was an actual tap of trump tower. >> i've seep no evidence that supports the claim that president trump made that his predecessor had wiretapped and he his associates at trump tower. >> mr. trump though is defending his accusation. >> in an interview with fox news he listed a couple of sources for his claim and he said he had more proof he wasn't revealing just yet. >> i read in i think it was january 20th, a "new york times" article where they were talking about wire.at thatting. there was an article. i think they used that exact term. i read other things. i watched your friend bret bare the day previous where he was talking about certain very complex sets of things happening and wiretapping. i said wait a minute there is a lot of wiretapping being talked about. i have been seeing a lot of things. >> back now with matt lipman and
john phillips. john, read a lot of things, heard a lot of things. someone told me that a friend heard something. zero hour fast approaching. if he has any evidence would now be a good time to bring it up and bring it forward. >> we do know his conversation with the president of mexico was listened in by someone. >> we don't know that. >> absolutely. >> we know it was leaked. >> yes, which had to be illegal. >> could have been a transcript. doesn't mean it was bugged. >> which is illegal. >> doesn't mean he was bugged. >> same thing with the president of australia. same thing with michael flynn. >> the russian ambassador was being monitored because he is being monitored. >> fur listening to call you are listening to at least two parties. conversations that michael flynn was on and donald trump were on were listened to by third parties and the contents of those conversations would illegally leaked. >> but the conversations between the president of mexico and the prime minister of australia, that could have been a
transcript which was leaked. doesn't necessarily mean that the conversation was listened to. >> nonl it's illegal to take the contents of those private conversations and put it in the public domain. i think it's obvious it's allies of president obama or political enemies. >> is it. >> absolutely. of president trump trying to do damage to him. these are illegal acts. these people should be in prison. >> deep state. >> i'm talking about people who are breaking the law. they should go to jail for doing what they are doing because they are putting america's national security at risk. >> when he is watching tv shows, does he know he is the president? he can call people and get information. not from saved by the bell or whatever he is watching. take the job of being the president seriously. he is spending all this time on the internet. he said barack obama is a sick guy who is wiretapping him at trump tower. that's a very specific claim. the members of congress who are in charge of finding this stuff
out all say there is no truth to this claim. the big thing for president trump is some of the members of congress start to not take him seriously. he has an agenda, how can they push it forward. >> there are others who say they have been wiretapped to, like your friend dennis kucinich. >> not my friend, number two, he is out of office for how long? >> it didn't sound like he was, i don't know, amend -- >> wiggle. >> wiggle. let's listen to this. >> the wiretap covers a lot of different things. i think you are going to independent finds some interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. >> very interesting things coming to the forefront. >> and wiretapping. >> really? >> maybe more conversations that he is having are going to be leaked to the press. >> matt, the to up for the president is wiretapping doesn't mean a lot of different things. it is a narrowly defined term.
>> he said obama is a sick guy who is wiretapping his wiretapping his phone at the trump tower. it didn't mean obama himself is putting the bug into the phone. the fbi is doing it or whoever. but tapping his phone at trump tower. it didn't happen, now he looks foolish. want to talk about news that emerged from the department of justice involving russia. two russian. s are among four people charged in a massive hack at yahoo. the breach occurred in 2014 and affected half a million people. the stolen data included e-mail address asks pass words but not financial information. let's go to claire sebastian. basic question, are we getting a response, a reaction from moscow to this? >> reporter: yeah, isha, we are getting some reaction from moscow. the kremlin spokesman saying he has no information on this. this is a question for the police. but task news agency did earlier
on wednesday quote an anonymous high-ranking source in moscow who said washington never appealed to the russian federation in connection of the russian allegations of russian hacking of the yahoo site. according to the seniors the case also suggests another attempt to use the topic of russian hackers in the political struggle in the u.s. we do know of department of justice officials telling cnn they had plans to reach out to russia after the announce men of this indictment on wednesday. we don't know more on that as yet. this is an extraordinary development. the first time really that the u.s. has managed to explicitly link the russian kind of cyber criminal underworld with the intelligence apparatus in this country. something that has long been suspected but never explicitly set out on this scale. as you said, the indictment includes two fsb officers, sushchin and dokuchaev.
dokuchaev was among four people named in december and arrested -- accused of treason on behalf of the u.s. a very rare occurrence in the post soviet era in russia now there is many unanswered questions related to that particular case. we still don't know if there is going to be a trial or when or anything approximate that. all very murky. as for this yahoo case we do know one man was arrested in canada. as for the rest it's very unlikely they will face justice in the u.s. when cyber criminals have faced justice in the u.s. it's usually because they have been apprehended in third country outside. there is no formal extradition treaty. >> claire kbasian with the view from russia there. we appreciate it. >> quickly, i know this is not related to the hack of the democratic national committee. >> this is the new game that cartels and organized crime
does. this is the new game they are involved in. going act to the sony hacking when amy pascal and all the executives in that corporation had their e-mails hacked i thought it was a mistake for us to have fun with the contents of those e-mails. that's a serious crime, and should be dealt with severely. >> during the campaign, donald trump asked the russians to hack into the dnc and hillary's e-mails. when you ask that, they are also going to hack into other places we don't like and invade the privacy of americans. they are not our allies and we don't like that. after our break tough words on china on how to deal with the threat from north korea. a message to geert wilders. the latest election results are next.
did you know slow internet can actually hold your business back? say goodbye to slow downloads, slow backups, slow everything. comcast business offers blazing fast and reliable internet that's over 6 times faster than slow internet from the phone company. say hello to internet speeds up to 250 mbps. and add phone and tv for only $34.90 more a month. call today. comcast business. built for business.
welcome back, everybody, you are watching "cnn newsroom" live from los angeles where it is coming up on 11:33. i'm john vause. >> i'm isha sesay. u.s. president donald trump is lashing out after a judge blocked a new travel ban. >> the ban would have blocked people from six majority muslim nations from entering the u.s. for 90 days. >> mr. trump says he questions the judge's motivations for blocking his executive order. >> you don't think this was done by a judge for a political reason, do you? no. this ruling makes us look weak, which by the way, we no longer are, believe me.
>> and the president says he will appeal all the way to the supreme court if necessary. voters in the netherlands are not buying into far right leader geert weiler's national message the way he wanted. preliminary elections show the ruling party headed for victory. >> the people's party is projected to win 33 out of the 150 seats in parliament. the freedom party is a distant 20 seats, more than double what they held before the election. but mr. richter is claiming a big win. >> translator: i have had lots of european leaders on the phone already. this night is a night for the
netherlands. after brexit, after the american elections, where we said stop it. stop it, to the wrong top of populism. >> translator: if they need me or if they need the pbb for talks, then i am happy to take part. if not, then they haven't gotten rid of me yet. with more people, with 19 to 20 people in parliament, we will have a strong opposition against the cabinet and we will make their lives difficult every day. >> let's go live to the haig now with cnn correspondent atika shubert and the chairman at ucla dominic thomas. good to have you with us. dominic, wirute seemed to track farther to the right. now will he track away from the far right more to the center?
>> yes, rutte, and in fact everyone else running in this election have said specifically they would not work with wilders. as we move forward into the process of coalition formation it is very likely that rutte's party lost votes but nevertheless came out with a fair lead in this election and will move towards forming a center or center right coalition most likely with the christian democrats with whom he has been in the coalition previously a few years ago. probably also with the christian union and with the democrats 66 they may need some support from a smaller party. but that looks like the way that this is going to go. >> atika, to you, what about the issues that geert wilders brought to the forefront of this race, the issues of immigration and islam? he raised issues that resonated with a lot of people. they are not just going to disappear now that the vote's
done. >> reporter: basically, when i spoke to wilders last weekend, he said, you know, even if i end up losing seats, i still win because everybody is talking about the issues that i have been bringing up for years, immigration, what he describes as islamization. and you know, this issue of what is dutch identity. you know, it's interesting. i actually spent a day with a group of fishermen who all voted for wilders. and they said, you know, it's not just the issue of immigration. although it does factor into why they support him. but also the fact that he is anti-eu. for them it's really about shaking up the establishment. and all politics is local. they live in small area where there is not a lot of foreigners. but they are concerned when they deliver into the cities they see these big muslim communities that they feel are benefiting unfairly while they are working hard and really not getting ahead. they are not seeing their
salaries move up much. it's those kind of local concerns that wilders gives a voice to. but he hasn't offered any solution now it is a up to rutte to say we have heard you here are some solutions. >> dominic, let me ask you this, does this result mean that populism has peaked? has it killed the momentum for the race in france and germany? >> no, absolute will he not, especially when it comes to the french case. what we see here, the interesting story here is the tremendous international attention on the question of populism and the far right. the message to make the netherlands great again has fallen flat. people came out and voted at over 806% yesterday. which has gone against the trend of declining voting numbers in
recent years. people came out to vote saying yes maybe we don't have consensus on all of these issues but overrule we are not the divided society that is the america of today or france or brexit of the united kingdom. we have come together. we are used to working in coalition. we will affirm this coalition and we will find solutions to these particular problems. whether or not this message carries over to the french conteg, which is the next election coming up is a different matter. the french political landscape is extraordinarily divided. i don't think this is going to change the nature of the debate there. in the netherlands it has, and it is a very good day four the european union as well. >> this was a vote against extremists. it is a good day, but that's not to say there aren't still choppy warts ahead. the fact of the matter is europe is changing. >> europe is changes. but i think what the netherlands
has proved is that with this vote we can say yes we can listen, give a voice to some of these concerns like immigration but that doesn't mean it has to dominate the issues. wilders was able to provide some sort of a voice, but he was so extreme in what he was saying that all the other parties have said, you know, no, we are not going to work with that. and that's sort of a lesson i think that's being learned throughout europe. already, within minutes the results coming out we saw the candidates in germany for example, martin schultz saying, you know, this shows us the path forward. there is still a fight ahead and of course we have the french and german elections. yes, it sort of opens the way new for an alternative for voters who see that you don't have to reject the establishment only by voting for the far right. there are other alternatives. >> great insight and analysis. my thanks to you both. france and germany have elections later this year. and nationalists like marie la
penn in france are hoping to capitalize on anti-immigrant sentiment in europe. melissa, the outcome of this election in holland, it was seen as a bell weather for those elections later this year in france and germany. what will this mean for the leader of the far right national front, marie la penn. >> that's a big question here in france. already the mainstream candidates and france's president have been congratulating the dutch prime minister on his victory, celebrating the fact that apparently the excream -- all celebrating the defeat of extremism. i'll tell you what the french president said. the president of the republic congratulated rutte.
the only true response to the nationalist impulses and isolationism that are shaking the world. yet, while there is a celebratory attitude from france's candidates and politicians i would caution there is a difference between a wilders and le pen. if there is a great deal of similarity between the pro european main treatment progressivists, there is a difference between the various pop you lists standing in the election that you mentioned. marie le pen is much less openly anti-muslim than geert wilders. he was extreme and strong on that question of being anti-muslim. marie le pen has developed a more nuanced view. we have been spending time with her voters saying if she was racist or anti-muslim or anti-semitic we would not be campaigning for her. she is anti-european but she has shedd the rhetoric that hampered
her father when he was in charge of the national front john. >> melissa thank you so much. at least in france and jearlny they are breathing a seif relief right now. but it may be short lived. melissa belle live in paris. thank you. >> quick break. the united states top enjoy is meeting with japanese leaders in tokyo. what rex tillerson hopes to accomplish on north korea. that's up next. o the open road. healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. the east and the west are mine. the north and the south are mine. all seems beautiful to me. to take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer.
the u.s. secretary of state rex tillerson he is in tokyo. he is holding a news conference right now with japan's foreign minister. >> after that, he will meet with prime minister shinzo abe. north korea is high on the agenda for tillerson's first official trip to asia. that will likely continue as he visits south korea and china. >> ivan watson is standing by in tokyo. this should be a easy trip in tokyo. the challenge comes when he
arrives in beijing. he will have to deal with the question of north korea. >> reporter: that's right. we heard some rather provocative proposals coming from senior u.s. officials suggesting that one of the messages that rex tillerson will bring to beijing is that the u.s. would be willing to penalize japanese companies -- rather, chinese companies that do business with north korea in an effort to try to put more pressure on china to end its trade ties with north korea to help enforce sanctions and try to convince north korea to give up its nuclear program, it is ballistic missiles program. that is probably not going to be a proposal that goes over very well with the chinese. so there is still this sticking point here where north korea threatens u.s. allies. south korea and japan. and the u.s. is determined to try to put a stop to some of these threats and provocatiopro.
while china calls for a ratch ratcheting down of tensions on all sides and has actually warned this looks like two traipse, the u.s. and north korea, heading towards each other at full speed towards a collision, there still seems to be disagreement on how to deal with this in the end, john. >> as you mentioned, the chinese are not likely to be happy with that threat of financial penalties of chinese companies doing business with the north koreans. they are also already unhappy because the u.s. has deployed the anti-missile system in south korea. >> reporter: that's right. this has been a big bone of contention. that's called thaad. it is the u.s. missile defense system that has been rushed into place into south korea. and that beijing has come out very strongly against saying it just doesn't like this at all. and it has start punishing, basically, south korea economically for accepting this missile defense system.
the missile defense system, the u.s. says s purely a defensive measure. it needs to protect the american ally, south korea, from the provocations of north korea. china certainly doesn't see it that way. but there's another issue -- another question in the air right now. and that is that the president of south korea has recently been removed from office. she was a conservative who was working quite closely with washington. there is a power vacuum in south korea right now. and it is a left-leaning politician who is leading in the polls right now who has spoken against that missile defense system. so that puts some questions up in the air about the future of u.s./south korean cooperation on that front. and that's something else that rex tillerson may not actually be able to deal with since that future south korean government has yet to even be elected. >> ivan watson live in tokyo. while you were
>> i guess we'll see if rex tillerson takes questions from reporters. thanks, ivan. still to come, what trump says, what he means, sometimes the same. >> sometimes they're not. >> we take the tweet so seriously, and not figuratively. >> when you are literally the president of the united states, we're going to take you seriously, and we're going to take you literally.
♪ oh! the things you say ♪ ♪ oh! ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ you're unbelievab♪e ♪ you're unbelievab♪e e*trade's powerful trading tools, give you access to in-depth analysis, and a team of experienced traders ready to help if you need it. it's like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. it's your trade. e*trade
finally this hour, president trump, he's a man of many words, the best words. also a man of many tweets. >> so how do we know when to take him seriously and not literally? jeanne moos takes a light-hearted approach to find out. >> reporter: -- take him -- >> just literally. >> literally around -- >> don't take donald trump literally about anything. >> reporter: for instance, when president trump tweeted, just found out that obama had my wires tapped in trump tower, no one thought president obama himself literally tapped those wires. but even the republican chairman of the house intelligence committee now says --
>> are you going to take the tweets literally, and if you are, then clearly the president was wrong. >> reporter: wrong, or worse. lied, say trump critics online. if tweets are not to be taken literally, then stop tweeting. this whole literal thing first surfaced last year in "the atlantic" when celine azito observed, the press takes him literally, but not seriously. his supporters take him seriously, but not literally. to which then candidate trump responded, now, that's interesting. and confusing. >> reporter: they take him literally and not seriously. >> no, don't take him literally, take him symbolically. >> we take the tweet literally -- >> when you are literally the president of the united states, we're going to take you seriously, and we're going to take you literally. >> reporter: trump supporters are always berating the press. >> you should take him seriously because he's a man of his word. >> reporter: make that words,
plural. >> i know words, i have the best words. but there's no better word than stupid, right? >> reporter: literally. >> right? >> reporter: jeanne moos, cnn, new york. >> you're watching cnn newsroom. >> i'm literally and seriously john vause. and max foster will literally and seriously pick up our coverage right after this. thank you! imagine if the things you bought every day earned you miles to get to the places you really want to go. with the united mileageplus explorer card, you'll get a free checked bag, 2 united club passes... priority boarding... and 50,000 bonus miles. everything you need for an unforgettable vacation. the united mileageplus explorer card. imagine where it will take you.
we need to be ready for my name's scott strenfel and r i'm a meteorologist at pg&e. we make sure that our crews as well as our customers are prepared to how weather may impact their energy. so every single day we're monitoring the weather, and when storm events arise our forecast get crews out ahead of the storm to minimize any outages. during storm season we want our customers to be ready and stay safe. learn how you can be prepared at pge.com/beprepared.
together, we're building a better california. blocked again. president donald trump is complaining about judicial overreach after his second attempt at a travel ban hits a legal roadblock. and he's speaking out about the source of his wiretap allegations. and dutch voters decide to stick with the status quo, rejecting a far right fire brand and his party. hello and welcome to our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm max foster, and this is cnn newsroom. ♪ ♪ u.s. president donald trump is lashing out after his second travel ban was struck down by a