tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN July 6, 2017 9:00pm-10:00pm PDT
he understands the fragility of institutions like the european union and nato, ideas like integration and diversity. in other words, vladimir putin understands us very well. the question is, do we, does donald trump, really understand him? good evening, john burman here in for anderson. breaking news tonight on perhaps the only growth industry in the united states, the president will not be touting any time soon, russian spying. here at home, on the rise. a new twist as president trump gets ready to meet his russian counterpart who happens to be russia's former top spy and someone who may have ordered intelligence operations aimed at getting him elected. today, president trump issued his strongest statement yet about russian mischief around the world but abundantly unwilling to decisively include russian meddling in the u.s. election as part of it. that's the reality tonight in hamburg, germany, on the eve of
president trump's first formal meeting with vladimir putin at the g-20 summit. it takes place with protesters marching, allies seeking reassurance, north korea testing missiles, china looking to fill the vacuum and so much more including now the breaking news. cnn has learned that even with all the attention, the reporting, the hearings, the fbi probe, intelligence officials are concerned that russian has accelerated its spying given the intelligence community which the president slighted today even more to do. more on putin, the summit, the president's resistance, all of it tonight. first, though, cnn justice correspondent pamela brown on the stepped up spying. pamela, what have you learned? >> we learned, john, russian spies are ramping up their intelligence-gathering efforts in the united states, this is according to current and former u.s. intelligence officials who say they noticed this increase since the election. so it appears, john, the russians have not been slowed by retaliatory efforts after it meddled in the u.s. election according to the u.s.
intelligence community. and since the election, john, u.s. authorities have detected an uptick in suspected russian intelligence officers entering the united states under the guise of other business. officials say they believe russia is trying to replenish their ranks since the u.s. expelled 35 russian diplomats suspected of spying last december, and in some cases, russian spies have tried to gain employment at places with sensitive information as part of their intelligence-gathering efforts. the fbi, which is responsible for counterintelligence efforts in the u.s. would not comment for this story, and the russian embassy in washington didn't respond for comment either. >> so if this is known to u.s. intelligence, pamela, and they're seeing it, why aren't they stopping it? >> so, that is the big question. first of all, you know, even after the meddling in the u.s. elections in 2016, both the obama and trump administrations have been slow to take measures to respond to the intelligence threat. according to current and former u.s. officials, partisan political disagreements over the russian activity and president donald trump's reluctance to
accept intelligence conclusions about russia's meddling in the election has slowed efforts to counter this threat. also, we're told from -- by russian experts that russia wants to ramp up spying when it has someone new in office, an adversary government, someone who they view as unpredictable, they want to have as much intelligence as they can. we're told counterintelligence is seeking to keep an eye on the activity as much as it can. in some cases the fbi uses surveillance to track the suspected russian intelligence officers as part of a counterintelligences effort and that's how the u.s. was able to identify and expel the 35 russian diplomats accused of spying last december in response to russian election meddling. we're told some of the russian diplomats have violated protocol, john, by leaving the washington, d.c., area, without notifying the state department. that's been a big concern for those in the intelligence community. russia, by the way, has similar rules in place for u.s. diplomats in russia. and another issue is an ongoing frustration with the state department over granting of visas to people the u.s.
intelligence community suspects are intelligence officers. state department official would not comment specifically on the visas. john? >> all right. pamela brown. fascinating reporting and a lot of it. thank you so much. so, if the russians taking advantage of american inaction, which might in turn be affected by the continued refusal of the president to say he is certain the russians meddled in the election. today at a news conference in warsaw, the president once again hedged on the hacking. cnn's jim acosta has that on the president's latest remarks, some of which may be more comforting to western allies. jim joins us now. jim, what exactly did the president have to say about russian interference in 2016? >> reporter: well, as you said, john, the president once again declined to back up the u.s. intelligence community's assessment that russia was behind the meddling in last year's election. at the same time he blamed barack obama for failing to do enough to stop the russians. and at the same time he said you can't trust what the u.s. intelligence community is
saying because they got the weapons of mass destruction wrong in iraq. here's more of what he had to say at a news conference earlier today. >> i think it was russia, and i think it could have been other people, in other countries. could have been a lot of people interfered. i said it very simply, i think it could very well have been russia, but i think it well could have been other countries. i won't be specific, but i think a lot of people interfere. i think it's been happening for a long time. it's been happening for many, many years. now, the thing i have to mention is mat barack obama, when he was president, found out about this in terms of if it were russia, found out about it in august. now, the election was in november. that's a lot of time. he did nothing about it. why did he do nothing about it? i think it was russia, but i think it was probably other people and/or countries. i see nothing wrong with that statement. nobody really knows. nobody really knows for sure. i remember when i was sitting
back listening about iraq. weapons of mass destruction. how everybody was 100% sure that iraq had weapons of mass destruction. guess what, that led to one big mess. they were wrong. and it led to a mess. >> reporter: now, a couple of points on this, john, one thing we should point out, the president appears to be the only person in the united states government in any kind of intelligence-receiving capacity who is saying that russia did not act alone in the meddling in last year's election. he's the only one saying other countries may be involved. as a matter of fact, at a senate intelligence committee hearing back in may, six heads of different intelligence agencies all testified that they believe russia was behind the meddling if last year's election. now to the point about former president obama, we should point out, john, yes, there are some democrats who say the obama administration did not go far enough. and there are even some obama administration veterans who say
that, themselves, but point of fact, president obama did confront vladimir putin at a g-20 summit in september of last year after he received this information about the possible hacking of last year's election. so when the president says that barack obama did nothing, that is factually not accurate. meanwhile, the president has not even said, himself, whether he will bring up this issue when he meets with vladimir putin tomorrow here in hamburg. so at this point the president is doing, or at least promising he's going to do even less than what he's accusing barack obama of doing about russia meddling in last year's election. >> interesting way to put it there, jim. the speech the president gave today in warsaw after the press conference, it actually did include some language that was tough on russia, in some cases tougher than he has been. what did he say? >> reporter: that's right. he was tougher on russia when it comes to ukraine. he said he wanted russia to stop its activities in ukraine, referring to the military intervention there. he also said that it's time for the russians to stop supporting what he called a hostile regime in syria, and in iran.
so that is going to certainly ease a lot of tensions among some of the western european allies who are concerned about president trump and what he said during his last foreign trip. remember, john, he went to nato in brussels and did not really offer up a stout defensive of article 5 of nato, of nato's charter that says an attack on one member country is an attack on all. the president made sure to say that today. that certainly is going to really soothe some of those ruffled feathers from earlier this year when he was on that last foreign trip. the question is whether or not he brings all of this up with vladimir putin. they don't have a long time in their meeting. less than an hour scheduled for the meeting between the president and vladimir putin tomorrow. >> high stakes but not a lot of time. jim acosta in hamburg for us. thank you so much. drilling down now more on the hacking question, and whether as jim just mentioned even an open question at all for u.s. intelligence.
jim sciutto sat down with former top intelligence officials who watched the election tampering unfold. jim sciutto joins us now. so, jim, keeping them honest. the hacking question, is it an open question with the u.s. intelligence community at all? >> in a word, no. it's difficult to imagine a more definitive dismissal of the president's comments today than what we heard from the former director of national intelligence james clapper. the senior-most american spy with more than 40 years' experience, serving presidents of both parties i might add. he said, one, zero question or doubt within the intelligence community that it was russia behind the hacks. two, no evidence whatsoever that he has seen, and of course he sees all the intelligence on this, that there were any others involved in this. and finally, you heard clapper debunking this sort of 17 intelligence agencies thing that's gotten out there. he made the point that these assessments were the assessments of the u.s. intelligence community as a whole. and while not all 17 intelligence agencies signed on
to it, they wouldn't, because he said they consulted the agencies that had relevant intelligence to add. the nsa, the cia, the fbi, not, for instance, the coast guard's intelligence branch which is one of the 17 agencies, or dea's intelligence branch, because that's not what they do. definitive knockdown from director clapper. >> jim, the president did cite something that you know sticks. the intelligence community, the weapons of mass destruction in iraq. you brought that up with clapper in your interview today. what did he say? >> that's right. this is a frequent point that donald trump has returned to many times as he has undermined the credibility of the intelligence community, saying they got wmd wrong. i asked director clapper this. he takes it personally because he was involved. have a listen. >> the intelligence community has done a lot of things to make sure that never happens again. and so, yes, it's true that was a big mistake. but we have learned from it.
and inserted -- the intelligence community has, i should say, injected a lot of safeguards to prevent that from ever happening again. because of that experience, and my having lived through it, that's why my confidence level is so high and the veracity and fidelity of the information of the intelligence community assessment. >> you know, john, one of the changes that's been put in place by the intelligence community since the failure of the iraq wmd assessment is including at times in classified intelligence reports dissenting views, in other words, saying you have a certain group of analysts who believe "x" but there's this dissenting view for a reason and i've spoken to u.s. intelligence officials repeatedly on russian hacking, including former director clapper, and they say there were no dissenting views in the analysis that russia was behind this hack. >> interesting. all right, jim. stick around. stay with us. i want to talk to you more after the break, to you and our other intelligence professionals about how tomorrow's meeting with vladimir putin could play out and how the u.s./russia
relationship may unfold given some of the realities we've been discussing. later, another reality, north korea's nuclear weapons and missiles, president trump's warning to kim jong yun today about the, quote, pretty severe response he's considering. we'll talk about the message he sent and how it might be received ahead on 360. it senses your every move and automatically adjusts on both sides. right now save on sleep number 360™ smart beds. plus, it's the lowest prices of the season with savings of $500 on our most popular p5 bed. ends sunday. that's why new downy protect and refresh conditions fibers to... how your clothes smell can say a lot abut you. ...lock out odors. new downy protect and refresh.
papa, hola! ♪i've hungered for your touch no, no no, no no no! ♪i'll be coming home, wait for me♪ tais really quite simple.est it comes in the mail, you pull out the tube and you spit in it, which is something southern girls are taught you're not supposed to do. you seal it and send it back and then you wait for your results. it's that simple. wheyou wantve somto protect it.e, at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. legal help is here.
russia ramping up their spying emboldened what they perceive as lack of action from both presidents trump and obama. that is the backing news tonight. the ongoing news, the current president's reluctant to issue a full-throated unequivocal endorsement of his own intelligence community's assessment on election hacking, lest it somehow tarnish his victory which is not in question. jim sciutto is back, along with phil mudd and steve hall. steve, i want to start with you here. this cnn reporting, russia sending in more spies, feeling emboldened about the size and scope of spying it can do. does that surprise you? >> no, it doesn't really surprise me. i mean, this is a time of significant tension and uncertainty on both sides. russia and the united states. and it's not at all uncommon for intelligence services to try to ramp up so they can get more information on the plans and intentions of the senior-most policymakers in washington. in that sense, it's not a surprise. it's also not a surprise given
the fact that 35 russian diplomats, one can safely assume, many of them intelligence officers, were expelled from the united states late last year. so, that's another thing that the russians have to do some catching up on. no, it's pretty much expected. >> phil mudd, this happens on the same day that president trump said that nobody knows for sure whether the russians meddled in the u.s. election, despite the fact that u.s. intelligence officials say they do know for sure. and the president also brought up the failed intelligence about weapons of mass destruction. what impact does that have on the intelligence community? >> now, really, john, let's discuss this for a moment. the president of the united states when he gets great intelligence on, that leads to the laptop ban. intelligence from the partner of the u.s. intelligence services that he's so proud of that he brags to the russians in an inappropriate leak of that information. he talks about it. doesn't talk about the iraq problem then. when he gets great intelligence warning him that the syrians might use chemical weapons again, what does he do? he publicly uses that intelligence to warn the syrians. when he gets great intelligence
on issues like the iran nuclear program, on issues like north korea partnering its ballistic missiles with nuclear weapons potentially, he brags about that information. when he gets information that's inconvenient personally because it looks like it might tarnish his election victory, what does he do? overseas in the spotlight of european security services and every cia officer around the world, because it personally embarrasses him, he suggests that he doesn't like that intelligence because it's an inconvenient truth. i think we know what's going on here, john, when the intelligence supports him, he's going to use it publicly including leaking it to the russians. when it doesn't, he's going to denigrate publicly in an overseas environment an overseas the u.s. intelligence community. i think i know what's going on here. read it as simply as i can. he doesn't like stuff that embarrasses him personally. that's what this is. >> let me ask you this, phil. the thing we've heard already in
the few hours this has been reported, the possibility that this information, the intelligence community saying more spies are coming in, upset about what you're talking about, the president's criticizing them openly overseas. is that possible? >> i think that's possible. but i think this story could potentially be overplayed. let me pick up on something that steve hall said. look, president obama, despite what president trump has said, expelled a lot of russian intelligence officers. any intelligence service on the planet is going to say over the course of the next months or years, i'm going to replace those intelligence officers, i'm going to send more people in. let me give you one other truth about this country, john, and that is, if you send more russians into this country, there is plenty of information available on cnn, in "the new york times," in the "washington post," and on the cocktail circuit in washington, d.c., about what is happening in the white house. you can vacuum up information in this environment without spies that will help the kremlin understand what's going on in the white house, and that's what i think the russians are doing. it's entirely predictable. >> jim sciutto, there seems to
be a flat-out conflicting message from the president of the united states. on the one hand, he delivered a speech in warsaw where he called on russia to stop what he called their destabilizing activities in the ukraine and elsewhere. that's the strongest statement in some ways on that subject to date. quite deliberately seemed not to include election meddling as a destabilizing activity. that's a mixed message to say the least. >> no question one was a scripted speech, the speech itself, and the other, when he's in the press conferences he's speaking off the cuff. i think that might be part of the explanation there. but there is clearly something about election meddling. remember, the president, it took him some time to call out russia for activity in the ukraine and elsewhere. he's gotten to that point. i'm sure his advisers have been briefing him on that, pubbi ing him in that direction. on the meddling, we know he's been briefed on that as well. he's seen the same intelligence that director clapper and others have seen, but on that issue he has something stopping him from going public and definitive with that.
and perhaps that means that it is unlikely that he brings it up face to face with putin tomorrow. that's something that you're hearing from both democrats and republicans, that that would be a mistake. particularly in light of the fact that russia continues to lay the groundwork, as director clapper said in our interview today, that russia is, quote /unquote prepping the battlefield for attacks on the elections in 2018 and 2020. an alarming warning to hear from the former director of national intelligence. >> you know, steve hall, what is the effect inside the intelligence trenches, as it were, of statements like the president made today, that nobody knows for sure when in fact intelligence leaders are saying they do. what impact does that have for the people on the ground? >> so, it was interesting to hear jim clapper's comments on that and he went on to say something very important which was essentially, look, that the intelligence community, it doesn't help when they hear those things. but they're a resilient bunch. i would agree with that.
i tell you who it does help, though. it really helps vladimir putin and those in the kremlin who are prepping for the meeting tomorrow. for a president who says i really don't like to transmit my plans to our adversaries, i'm not going to talk a whole lot about what happens in north korea or another war zone, he certainly has transmitted a lot of information about himself before he goes to meet putin. it will be extremely difficult for him to walk into that room tomorrow and be what i think he needs to be, which is tough with putin when he's already equivocated on whether or not the russians were the only ones involved in the election meddling. it shows his own personal insecurities with regard to his presidency. that's something that's not going to go unnoticed by putin. lastly, this divisiveness that exists between the intelligence community, at least perceived to exist, certainly the russians will perceive it as such, between the intel community and presidency, that's something they'll take advantage of. putin will say, it must be tough for you, mr. president, when you can't trust your own intel guys. when they make those kinds of
mistakes and the deep state element to this, those are things putin will try to manipulate. the president has essentially given him that for free. >> we'll see how it plays tomorrow at hamburg when the two sit down face to face for the first formal meeting as president. jim sciutto, steve hall, phil mudd, thank withdrew very much. next, weighs in on the russian relationship where he thinks the president gets it right and where he fell short. ♪ ♪ award winning interface. award winning design. award winning engine. the volvo xc90. the most awarded luxury suv of the century. visit your volvo dealer today and get up to $4,500 in allowances.
maybe it's time for otezla (apremilast). otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable after just 4 months,... with reduced redness,... thickness, and scaliness of plaques. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you're allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts... or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight... and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea,... nausea, upper respiratory tract infection... and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.
with the intelligence assessment that the president still can't fully endorse or accept in poland today he undercut the intelligence agency that made it, and the consensus they reached. keeping them honest, here's what top officials of some of the relevant agencies said when asked by the senate intelligence committee. >> assembled leadership of the intelligence community, do you believe the january 2017 intelligence community assessment accurately characterized the extent of russian activities in the 2016 election, and its conclusion that russian intelligence agencies were responsible for the hacking and leaking of information and using
misinformation in order to influence our elections? simple yes or no would suffice. >> i do, yes, sir. >> yes, senator. >> yes, i do. >> yes, i do. >> yes. >> yes. >> you also heard former dni clapper endorse that view a bit earlier on the program. more on the subject now from republican member of the house foreign affairs committee, congressman adam kinsinger of illinois. we spoke a short time ago about that and tonight's breaking news. congressman kinsinger, the breaking news tonight is russian spies are ramping up their efforts to gather intelligence in the u.s., they feel emboldened to do so because of the lack of retaliation of the 2016 election interference, lack of retaliation from both the trump and obama administrations. what's your reaction to this news? >> presuming this is true and presuming the reason for why is true, first off i'm not surprised that they're ramping up their intelligence-gathering information. the russians feel as if the cold war is back on. they're trying to re-establish the soviet empire through soft
power, through election hackings and hard power like in ukraine and syria. and i do think that the reaction needs to be strong. i think it's time for the house of representatives to get past this russian sanctions bill. that the senate sent us. there may be some tweaks, that's fine, whatever. we need to send that strong message and it needs to be powerful and effective. i think if we react to that, that's absolutely essential. i think this sends one big point, the russians only react when they meet brick walls. when they don't meet brick walls, when they think they can advance and up their spying game without repercussion, they'll do it. that's how they think. >> they only react to brick walls. today the president of the united states was in warsaw, the border with russia. and said, nobody knows for sure whether the russians hacked into the 2016 election. is that the kind of brick wall you're talking about? >> no, that's not. that's not. he did say, yes, it was the russians, but it was the follow-up statement, i don't understand, it could have been other countries, it could have been other people. unless he knows something that i haven't been briefed on. it's a good start, at least he's saying that.
the reality is, this isn't about delegitimizing president trump. he won because he won a majority of the electorates. he spoke to the part of people who were in anguish in a lot of areas. this is about protecting democracy and the institution, not for 2018, not for 2020, but for frankly 2100. >> just to be clear, any doubt in your mind that russia hacked into the 2016 election? >> no doubt. i trust our intelligence agencies about this stuff. they seem pretty convinced. >> again, given that you think there needs to be a brick wall message from the united states, congress and the administration, was the statement nobody knows for sure appropriate for the president to make, especially in central europe? >> i don't think so. i think the president has an opportunity to make some really good strides in this. i think he's doing good in some areas, but that comment, that or talking about the intelligence agencies in iraq is something "a," you don't do, secondly, you
don't do it overseas in front of our allies. keep in mind, our allies, feeding us intelligence information when it comes to isis, al qaeda, russia, et cetera. we're doing the same. there's a good exchange of information. if they believe, and i kont believe this is necessarily true, but if they believe the president of the united states does not trust his own intelligence agencies, that could lead to real serious problems in the future. >> big meeting. big meeting tomorrow between president trump and vladimir putin. what message do you think the president should deliver? >> i think he needs to deliver that brick wall. i think he needs to talk about the assad regime and begin to talk about, let's force a solution here that ends the violence, that ends isis. he needs to talk about ukraine. i think he needs to bring up election hacking, election meddling. not just here, but what's going on right now in europe and what's going to happen in the future elections. i don't think that needs to be the centerpiece, but i think it needs to be mentioned. he needs to make it clear to president putin that we're serious about this. keep in mind, if you have a
meeting, i don't know how long it's going to last, maybe an hour or something, you have translators, that gives you 30 minutes of actual talking time because of the translators. we need to hit syria, ukraine, let's see if there are areas of common ground in north korea. but i do think election hacking needs at least mentioned if not necessarily discussed the whole time. >> from what you've seen, does president trump understand vladimir putin? >> i don't know. i don't have any indication yet. i think a lot of presidents in the past did not understand vladimir putin. i think this is a man that reacts to power. he reacts to strength. concessions will not help him concede to us. so giving back the properties we seize will not create goodwill that he's going to get out of syria or ukraine. i think meeting that with strength, shootshoot-down, bombf the airfield in syria are good messages. now president trump needs to back that up with very strong statements and points to him. >> congressman adam kinzinger of illinois, thanks for being with us. >> you bet, any time. up next, how white house staffers are preparing the president to handle vladimir putin tomorrow. stay with us. americans - 83% try to eat healthy.
yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's complete with key nutrients we may need. plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with treatments that don't give you clearer skin. be the you who controls your psoriasis with stelara® just 4 doses a year after 2 starter doses. stelara® may lower your ability to fight infections and may increase your risk of infections and cancer. some serious infections require hospitalization. before treatment, get tested for tuberculosis. before starting stelara® tell your doctor if you think you have an infection or have symptoms such as: fever, sweats, chills, muscle aches or cough. always tell your doctor if you have any signs of infection, have had cancer, if you develop any new skin growths or if anyone in your house needs or has recently received a vaccine. alert your doctor of new or worsening problems, including headaches, seizures, confusion and vision problems these may be signs of a rare, potentially fatal brain condition. some serious allergic reactions can occur.
do not take stelara® if you are allergic to stelara® or any of its ingredients. most people using stelara® saw 75% clearer skin and the majority were rated as cleared or minimal at 12 weeks. be the you who talks to your dermatologist about stelara®. if you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis or crohn's, and your symptoms have left you with the same view, it may be time for a different perspective. if other treatments haven't worked well enough, ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works by focusing right in the gi-tract to help control damaging inflammation and is clinically proven to begin helping many patients achieve both symptom relief as well as remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. while not reported with entyvio, pml, a rare, serious brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections,
meetings of his presidency to date. lots of issues could be up for discussion. from escalating tensions in north korea, to the fight against isis in iraq and syria. as of earlier this week, there was really no set agenda for the meeting. now white house staffers are trying to prepare the president the best they can. cnn's elise labott has more. >> reporter: even as donald trump publicly meets with world leaders in germany, behind the scenes his top aides, secretary of state rex tillerson, defense secretary james mattis, and feona hill, now on the national security council, are all prepping him for tomorrow's sit-down with russian president vladimir putin. tillerson has a long history of dealing with the russian president and mattis has taken a harder line on putin than the president has publicly. over the last several days advisers gave the president a large binder of material for his nine meetings on the sidelines of the g-20 summit but aides say the section on putin and raush
s russia is only a few pages written in one sentence talking points to keep the president focused. senior administration officials say the president has been receptive to their advice. >> we're at the very beginning, and i would say at this point it's difficult to say exactly what russia's intentions are in this relationship. i think that's the most important part of this meeting is to have a good exchange between president trump and president putin over what they both see as the nature of this relationship. between our two countries. >> reporter: in a statement, secretary tillerson offering the only clues so far as to what the leaders will discuss on syria, writing, quote, the united states and russia certainly have unresolved differences on a number of issues. but we have the potential to appropriately coordinate in syria in order to produce stability and serve our mutual security interests." besides the two leaders and their translators, only tillerson, foreign minister sergey lavrov will be in the room for tomorrow's meeting. on the eve of the sit-down,
putin is showing he isn't planning to make things easy for trump. praising the success of the g-20 in a german newspaper but slamming u.s. trade policies as, "protectionism" and u.s. sanctions as "doomed to fail." he also voiced support for the paris climate accord which trump pulled out of, calling it, quote a reliable international legal framework." meanwhile, president trump publicly called out russia in his harshest terms to date. >> we urge russia to cease its destabilizing activities in ukraine, and elsewhere, and its support for hostile regimes, including syria, and iran. >> reporter: but he also cast doubt on u.s. intelligence assessments putin was behind the meddling in the 2016 election, an issue trump is not expected to raise with putin. though his advisers acknowledge
they have no over what trump will bring up with president putin, and are concerned over the president's unpredictability when it comes to tomorrow's meeting. john? >> elise at the state department, thank you so much. a lot to discuss with our panel now. former chief of staff, secretary of state john kerry. jill dougherty. and steve hall. john, i'll start with you because you've been in the room with vladimir putin several times when he met with then-secretary of state john kerry. give us an idea of what that's like, the vibe he gives off. >> thanks, john. the trick with these meetings is to maximize the amount of time you're spending on the agenda that you have and minimize the amount of time you have to listen to what is inevitably a fairly lengthy russian diatribe against alleged american transgressions in foreign policy. they usually start the meeting with. they'll go back in history to the cold war, to the arab spring, to the iraq invasion, to try to put the person across the table on the offensive. i think the key is being able to
absorb that, rebut it when absolutely necessary and shift to your own agenda which is the most important reason why you're there. >> jill dougherty, so much is being made of the optics of this, who will smile, who will frown, who will shake hands first. you know, don't forget the u.s. policy here and what is the u.s. policy toward russia. >> well, i don't think actually there is a policy right now. that's one of the problems. there are disparate issues but it's no overarching policy so that kind of makes it difficult really to pin down what's going to happen. i mean, i think on the optics, you know, you have two men who were pretty macho in different -- kind of different ways. and i think it would be very interesting to see that kind of power dynamic. you know, who initiates the conversation, and as it was just said, who can kind of make their points without being rammed by the other guy.
and eating up time that you don't want to deal with. you know, interestingly, i was just looking at some russian media and how they're hamming this. because they each -- each man is playing to his own domestic audience as well. i think that's really important. mr. trump has to be strong to his people. maybe we'll see that kind of serious frown that he has. president putin also has to look strong to his own people. some of the media are actually kind of mocking -- this is sputnik, the russian media outlet, they're mocking president trump. interestingly, for a handshake faux pas in poland. and so it's interesting, they're kind of nibbling around the edges, setting it up. and anything that makes trump look a little weak makes putin look stronger. >> steve hall, to you, again, vladimir putin not your average world leader. someone who led up russian intelligence. do you think he approaches this
type of meeting differently then with that intelligence experience? and how then should the u.s. be prepared for that? >> there's no doubt that putin's experiences as a kgb officer, and then, of course, his responsibilities in the fsb, his move-up through the ranks certainly influenced him. he's also an experienced world leader who's met with a bunch of other world leaders. so he kind of knows how this whole thing goes. it's really important that trump be very, very firm with putin right off the bat. people have made an argument, oh, we're not sure how much time there's going to be. it doesn't take much time to say something like the following -- mr. putin, you all have to earn the right to deal with the rest of the civilized world, with the west and with the united states. let's just review, even if you set aside, you know, shenanigans with regard to election hacking and meddling, you know, you've annexed a country. you've set another country very close to civil war in ukraine. you've shot down civilian airliners.
that's all before we even get to the part about the election meddling. so before we talk about any of that, mr. putin, you know, we have to resolve those issues and then we'll talk about the things you want to talk about, lifting of sanctions and so forth. i have a national security team who can work through that stuff with you, but right upfront, we've got to call you on these basically inappropriate and bad behavior that you've done in the international realm before we can go any further. >> of course, courtney, john, you have to do that while also waiting for vladimir putin to finish his diatribe on soviet and russian history. john finer, to you, do you ever emerge with these meetings with vladimir putin with the russians saying one thing happened, it went a certain way, and u.s. officials feeling something different happened? >> that absolutely does happen. what you often see is reflections in the russian state-run media that bear almost no resemblance to what actually went on behind closed doors. but, again, that's to be expected and that's not a problem.
another thing to emphasize, these meetings particularly for the u.s. side are big opportunities. in our system, there are lots of people who are empowered at different levels of the governments to make different decisions, at least about matters of policy that don't rise to the level of war and peace. in the russian system, putin is really is the only decisionmaker. the opportunity to make the case about steps we need him to take, and to put down firm markers as was just said, is unusual and important to take advantage of. >> jill, is there a way to intimidate vladimir putin? >> i don't think so. i really don't. putin's very good at thrusting back, you know, paring and thrusting. he often -- he usually knows something that he will use, or exploit in a conversation about the other person. and maybe establish a little camaraderie by quoting what the other person thinks. he's very skillful in almost a lawyerly fashion in saying, you've made that point, but you have these faults, too.
especially america has these faults. >> it will be fascinating to see. again, that happens about 12 hours from now. thank you, all, so much. up next, tensions escalating after this week's successful launch of a north korean icbm. president trump says he has not ruled out military options but some experts say that could spell disaster. 24hr protection from frequent heartburn. all day, and all night. now packed into a pill so small, we call it mini. new clearminis from nexium 24hr. see heartburn differently. but with my back pain i couldn't sleep or get up in time. then i found aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. and now. i'm back! aleve pm for a better am. [ rock music playing ] have fun with your replaced windows. run away! [ grunts ] leave him! leave him!
[ music continues ] brick and mortar, what?! [ music continues ] [ tires screech ] [ laughs ] [ doorbell rings ] when you bundle home and auto insurance with progressive, you get more than a big discount. that's what you get for bundling home and auto! jamie! you get sneaky-good coverage. thanks. we're gonna live forever!
problem is, you'reith neterrible with names. there's pam, donny, comet and blitzen. wait, pretty sure those last two were reindeer. nice to see you, phabitha? is that even a real name? okay, this is the boss. you got this. anna!...yes! thank goodness for name tags. new clients? we've been there. and with breakfast on the run, we'll be there for you. book direct for a guaranteed discount. hampton by hilton. ♪ ♪
desensitizes aggravated nerves with the max strength lidocaine available. new icyhot lidocaine patch. in the latest escalation of tensions between the u.s. and north korea, president trump addressed potential military options at a news conference with the polish president today. >> as far as north korea's concerned, i don't know, we'll see what happens. i don't like to talk about what i have planned. but i have some pretty severe things that we're thinking about. that doesn't mean we're going to do them. i don't draw red lines. >> military experts say that any attack could spark an all-out war on the korean peninsula. i want to bring in david gergen who worked with four u.s. presidents, cnn retired major general james "spider" marks. and former director for obama, laura rosenberger. you heard the president say pretty severe things, those were his words. how do you interpret that?
>> well, i interpret that as he wants to put a warning out there but he's not quite sure what to do yet. basically, the united states for some years has faced the same three options, and none of them appealing. as put so well, their options are buy them out, squeeze them out or burn them out. and we tried buying them out with the clinton administration. we got an agreement. i was involved with that. and it worked for a number of years but eventually fell apart. we've tried sanctions, squeezing them. since then, that hasn't worked very well. the president, inevitably, is also thinking about severe military reprisals and that's a very scary proposition and i thought secretary mattis of the defense department was reassuring today, saying this recent test by the north koreans does not bring us any closer to war. >> it was fascinating, general marks, what david gergen is
saying there because james mattis went to the briefing room to talk to reporters. they weren't expecting him. he went there to say that the new capability by north korea doesn't change the calculus for the united states in the region and seemed to be saying this doesn't make war more likely. and specifically said diplomacy is still the first option here. do you think the reason he did that is that as a general, he knows that the military options here are just not good? >> well, the military options clearly are not good. the third option that david described which is burn them out clearly is not an acceptable option either. what needs to be clear -- and i think secretary tillerson has made this clear. regime change in the north is not an objective of the united states or the coalition in the south. clearly there are pockets that would want to see that. intellectually and emotionally you can sit back and say, well, of course, kim jong-un and the kim regime is a pathetic -- he's a charleton leader.
and this regime needs to go away. no, no, we don't. the real recipient of that discussion is in beijing. beijing does not want to have a reunified peninsula. we don't care about the kim regime. what we care about is kim's ability to marry up a nuke with a missile and have that missile reach the united states or launch a missile over south korea and have an electromath magnetic pulse that darkens that part of the world for quite some time. those are unacceptable outcomes and the window is very, very narrow. jim mattis, secretary mattis is correct. this is simply a step in the path that we have predicted and seen all along. it doesn't, in the near term, make it any more likely that there will be hostilities on the peninsula. >> so laura rosenberg, this is part of the world you watch for a very long time with intense interest. how do you think president trump's words will be received? pretty severe options he's looking at right now, on twitter talking about kim jong-un. how is that received? >> you know, i think it's a little bit careless and
potentially reckless to put out strong terms like that when it's, as david said, not entirely clear that the president even really knows what in fact he means by that. pyongyang surely reads a lot into the president's words and will be trying to figure out what in fact are his intentions. my greatest fear is miscalculation, whether it's miscalculation in pyongyang thinking that trump said something that it wasn't meant to signal or whether that's miscalculation in solar tokyo thinking that they may not be able to have the same kind of confidence in our assurances that they have come to believe that are there under our defense agreements. >> laura, what about the idea that for generations people have said sometimes uncertainty and mystery can help in foreign policy. does it give the president more options? is it okay to have the north koreans guessing here? and also, people will take issue with your notion the president
doesn't have a strategy here. look, he tried to woo the chinese. he thought it was worth a try. it didn't work. now he's going in a different direction. >> i think there are absolutely elements of the administration that have a strategy that they are trying to pursue. i think diplomacy or messaging on this issue is a highly complex process. i think it requires a lot of careful coordination. i think that that's very hard to convey and sentiments that are a bit off the cuff. i think there are two really important concepts in dealing with the north korean threat. one is deterrence and one is reassurance. deturns of our adversaries, reassurance of our allies. both of those depend very, very centrally on clarity of intentions and a very crisp understanding of the credibility of what we are saying we may do. what is concerning to me about some of trump's statements is i don't believe that he is actually conveying the kind of clarity that is necessary for deterrence and reassurance to actually have the kind of effect we need them to. >> david gergen, your response to that?
>> well, i do think, john, to go back to your original point, there are times when ambiguity is a wise course. that's the way we have approached what we would do about taiwan if they got into a fight with mainland china. we've had intentional ambiguity. but on a question of north korea, i think it's really important that the administration have come to a firm consensus view within the administration about what they would like to see happen, what their plans are in order to get allies to join with them. ultimately, we may have to face down china and russia on this question and we need to have japan and the south korean government, we need europe to be standing firmly with us. that means you can't be too ambition. you have to have some clear path of what you're really trying to accomplish. >> and spider, one of the most important allies here might be south korea. they are the ones most immediately involved with this situation. we have a new south korean
leader who may be more amenable to the idea of negotiation. what should the united states be doing there? >> we've been there before. the former leader kim -- the leader of south korea, my apologies, back in 2000, won the nobel peace prize, kdj. he was able to talk to the north and spent millions of dollars to try to achieve some type of result. even though president moon may move in a situation not dissimilar from that, the foundation of our relationship with the south is absolutely solid. there is no break in that type of view or an approach towards what's right for seoul and what's right for the united states and the regional partners. >> it will be fascinating to see the meetings over the coming days and what comes out of it and the language that's used. thanks so much, everyone. up next, more on our breaking news. word of ramped up russian spying just hours before the president's first formal face-to-face meeting with