tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN August 11, 2017 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
makes the company worth $2.9 billion? this. the netscape navigator, software which makes it easy for people to connect the global computer network called the internet. >> the internet. make sure you tune in for a new episode of the cnn original series "the nineties" right here on cnn. thank you for watching cnn here on this friday afternoon. here on this friday afternoon. i'm brooke baldwin. -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com >> military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded should north korea act unwisely. he writes, hopefully kim jong un will find another path. north korea now accusing the president of pushing the world to the brink of nuclear war, a top north korean general saying if -- if the u.s. tries anything with pyongyang, it will, quote,
turn the u.s. mainland into the stage of a nuclear war by immediately attacking it with various strategic nuclear weapons. so, there's that. then this stunning reversal of rhetoric, the north called america the heinous nuclear war fanatic. jim sciutto, i'm beginning with you, our chief national correspondent, and to use the president's words, locked and loaded, isn't the u.s. always locked and loaded. >> reporter: yes, and certainly in a threat zone like north korea. you have pacific command out there essentially built around -- i mean, in addition to china, neutralizing or reducing the north korean threat. that's under water. that's on the surface. that's in the air. and that's from space. satellites trained down on north korea to keep track of exactly what it's doing. i mean, i suppose you could say the president doubled down on his fire and fury comments yesterday, he's tripling down this morning and even injecting some hollywood language in
there, locked and loaded. and look, presidential tweets are in effect presidential statements. the question is, was this okay? was this discussed, for instance, with his new chief of staff. remember, you and i have talked about this, brooke, the idea that john kelly was going to institute some messaging discipline out of the white house. but this has been a consistent message from the president this week, and that is very forward leaning and putting military options front and center. >> jim, i'm going to fold you into this conversation. let me bring in anthony, senior fellow at the foundation for the defense of democracy. so, anthony, the chinese-controlled state newspaper, the global times, published an article that said if north korea launches missiles at the u.s., then china will remain neutral, but if the roles are reversed, if it's the u.s. and south korea who take that first hit on north korea, that china will not sit still, will take action. what's your -- first of all, do you believe them, and secondly,
you know, what's at stake for china here? >> well, it's a state newspaper that leadership could use to put out a message, both to washington and pyongyang, trying to, i think, tamp down the situation. i think the north koreans probably are expecting that the chinese would have their back in a military situation, but the chinese are drawing a clear line. if the north koreans initiate a military strike -- i think that was the purpose of the president's tweet as well, to deter north korea from attacking. >> you know that the u.s., though, has been negotiating for more than 25 years and still dealing with very similar threats, but this is what democratic senator chris van hollen from maryland told me here just a couple days ago. >> you can pass sanctions at the united nations. you can pass sanctions at the united states. that's just words on a piece of paper unless they're actually enforced, which is why senator toomey and i have introduced bipartisan legislation modeled
after the iran sanctions so that we really put teeth in these sanctions. right now, a chinese banks, chinese firms and others are saying that they're complying with the sanctions, but they're not. they're violating the sanctions right and left, which continues to provide aid and comfort for the north korean regime. >> so anthony, my question is, is there a lot more, you know, wiggle room here on the sanctions to really crack down on north korea or not? and what needs to happen to make sure the chinese banks comply? >> there's absolutely a lot more room. we are nowhere near where we were on iran. in 2010 on iran, we passed a u.n. resolution and congress passed new sanctions law, and then we had a ramp-up, a u.s.-led sanctions campaign. we don't have that right now. that's what this new resolution is this where we move to a sanctions campaign. it's china, it's chinese banks and companies, and individuals that are facilitating north korea sanctions of asian
companies in singapore that are allowing north korea to buy luxury goods. yesterday we learned that kuwait said they're not going to reduce the number of overseas laborers in europe. i mean, i can go on and on. unfortunately, the number of countries that are working with north korea and violating sanctions. >> yeah. okay. >> brooke, he makes a great point. the real teeth of the iran sanctions were not just sanctioning iran itself but sanctioning trading partners who were dealing with iran, pressuring, for instance, china in that case to not buy iranian oil. those are the things that really squeezed the iranian economy in the end. and that's the one on this. really, the only target the is china because china's the one that really does business there and a lot of it's illicit, and if you don't address that trade, then north korea still gets the money it needs for its leaders and weapons program, which is really all it cares about. >> thank you both so much. we're going have a whole other conversation about the possible military options from the u.s. standpoint here in just a
moment. but first, one week now into his official working vacation, president trump indulged in some rare q&a. we haven't seen him in open to the media, really, since mid-february. he sat there and answered more than 30 questions in two separate sessions with reporters, off mike, no podium, and talked a lot. let's see what he does with guam. he does something in guam, it will be an event the likes of which nobody's seen before. well, i'll tell you what. if he doesn't get repeal and replace done, and if he doesn't get taxes done, then you can ask me that question. i want to thank him, because we're trying to cut down on payroll. i thought it was a very, very strong signal or whatever to
wake him up, perhaps his family was there. i haven't given it any thought. i mean, i've been reading about it from you people. you say, oh, i'm going to dismiss him. no, i'm not dismissing anybody. he's our friend. he's my friend, and he's a very talented man. i like him, and i respect him. it's fine. it is what it is. it's fine. the opioid crisis is an emergency, and i'm saying officially, right now, it is an emergency. you know, when i was growing up, they had the lsd and they had certain generations of drugs. there's never been anything like what's happened to this country over the last four or five years. it's been a very confusing issue for the military. i think i'm doing the military a great favor. it's a very big decision for me. i took over a mess. and we're going to make it a lot less messy. you have the leaks where people want to love me.
and they're all fighting for love. but actually, i'm somewhat honored by them. look, i won because i suppose i was a much better candidate than her. i won because i went to wisconsin. i went to michigan. i won pennsylvania. i fought a smart battle. that's why i win. i didn't win because of russia. look, i have -- nobody has greater respect for intelligence than donald trump. but you have to have the right leaders. i think we have great leaders right now. nuclear, to me, number one, i would like to denuke the world. let me bring in cnn political commentator michael smirconish. michael smirconish, we got this urgent in, one of those comments, the white house is already playing clean-up. when the president was saying now that -- the white house is saying that the president was being sarcastic in his response to putin, the whole thanking
putin, right, for the expulsion of the 755 u.s. diplomats. but here's my question to you. like, there are these explosive comments, and there are these defenders saying it's a joke or he was being sarcastic. but to me, in this case, it's kind of b.s. >> well, i never took him literally. i don't think that anybody believed he was truly expressing gratitude for russia in their behavior in that instance. what i found more interesting is that while sarah huckabee sanders is saying he was being sarcastic, you've got the nsc spokesperson saying, he was being sarcastic and let's not forget that the downward spiral of our relationship with russia began with their meddling in the election. i'm paraphrasing that which was just said, and when i saw those two statements, the similarity is that they both say he was being sarcastic, but you don't hear the white house saying, and remember, this was all because of the russian meddling in the election. >> right. right. but all right, so let's take the white house at their word, that
he was being sarcastic. why is the president being sarcastic when he's talking about something that he hadn't even touched? he hadn't even responded to, you know, the news from putin from a couple weeks ago on the 755 u.s. diplomats and the one and only time we have it, it's sarcasm? >> brooke, his inconsistency is his great consistency. i know that sounds a bit ridiculous, but the unpredictable nature of what he might say -- >> make that a bumper sticker, michael. >> i think it might be too long. but as i was watching your highlight reel, i was reflecting on the many conversations that you and i had in the lead-up to the 2016 election where we wondered aloud, and i was often mistaken in thinking that there would be some pivot. >> memories. >> this is vintage donald trump. what you see is what you get. he's the same person who was elected. it's the way he's comported himself, and frankly, it's what makes, you know, some of these press availabilities rare as they have become so interesting to watch and see him as he just sort of spitballs on all these
different issues. >> no, i loved it. at one point, apparently sarah huckabee sanders came out with a big piece of paper saying, one more question and he's like, forget about that, and he kept talking for 20 minutes. we appreciate that, mr. president. let me ask you on north korea. what are you hearing from your listeners, what they think is the best option moving forward. >> mark bowden wrote a very lengthy piece for the atlantic. >> i just printed all 27 pages. >> and you know mark bowden of black hawk down fame. he interviewed all sorts of military leaders, and essentially says, look, when all is said and done, there are four options, three of them are military, ranging from an all-out assault on north korea to decapitating or assassinating kim jong un. he goes through the pluses and minuses of each of the four, but it's option number four that people are going to find hard to stomach but that is acceptance
of a nuclear north korea and amazingly, when we polled our audience on this, and thousands of people have voted, they say, yeah, that's probably where it ends up. now, that sounds like capitulation, but it's the least bad of four bad options. >> the least bad of four bad options. okay. >> yep. >> okay. i'll report back after i've read this thing. michael smerconish, always a pleasure. see you on tv tomorrow morning. 14 minutes. that is how long the u.s. says a north korean missile will take to reach guam. we'll talk about what the president would do if the north fired one. also, after weeks of silence, the president finally responds to vladimir putin's retaliation by, as we were just discussing, thanking him for kicking out diplomats. again, the white house saying he was totally being sarcastic. but let's talk with a former state department official who trump fired. and after we learn of an fbi raid targeting president trump's former campaign chairman, paul manafort, he's now hiring a new legal team.
whyou're not thinking clearly, so they called the fire department for us. i could hear crackling in the walls. my mind went totally blank. all i remember saying was, "my boyfriend's beating me" and she took it from there. and all of this occurred in four minutes or less. i am grateful we all made it out safely. people you don't know care about you. it's kind of one of those things where you can't even thank somebody. to protect what you love, call 1-800-adt-cares
you myour joints...thing for your heart... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you... your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is now the number one selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.
14 minutes. that is the ominous headline of guam's pacific "daily news." see for yourself there. and the stunningly short amount of time it would take a north korean missile to reach the u.s. territory. 14 minutes. it is also a razor thin window for the u.s. military to intercept it or for citizens to race and take shelter. here is how some of the people living in guam feel about this current threat. >> i mean, obviously, for me, because i'm a father, so it's really concerning, you know? i wish, you know, that it didn't have to come to that.
i wish that the super powers of the world would be able to come up with a different way. >> if they threaten us, bring it. the u.s. is strong. i'm pretty sure we got them. >> we have lived under the shadow of this north korean threat for a long time. on the eve of world war ii, the united states used a lot of the same rhetoric. they said, you're totally safe, the japanese will never attack you, you will be totally defended by us, and what we learned and what my grandparents, for example, learned was that was not true at all. >> joining me now, retired navy commander, the commanding officer of the "uss cole." always a pleasure to have you on and thank you for your service to this great country. >> thank you, brooke. glad to be on. >> here's the what if. what happens if north korea launches a missile that comes really close to guam but doesn't actually hit it? what would conversations look like between the commander in chief and top military brass? >> i think the first thing you have to look at is even before that missile were to launch,
we're going to try and get what's called intelligence and warning, i and w to determine are they getting the missiles ready, are they fuelling them up, where do we think they're going to be shooting them, where do we think the target is going to be. from that, we make an assessment. at this point in time, i think the response should be, if they're going to aim and argument guam and they have as much as said so, that we need to prepare to shoot that missile down, regardless of where it goes. any missile leaving the north korean peninsula at this point has to be considered a threat to the u.s. or our allies, and we should respond accordingly and shoot them down. >> on the shooting the missile down, i've read a lot about, you know, the thaad systems or i've read just people debating about the readiness of that. where does that stand right now? >> well, right now, we have only one of four batteries in south korea that are there. japan obviously has batteries. the issue that you're hearing a lot in some corners of the pentagon, unfortunately, is we
don't want to shoot it because we have nothing to gain. if we shoot it and it fails, north korea is going to gain a huge propaganda advantage by demonstrating the u.s. has systems that don't work. i don't want to see the senior leadership of the pentagon put in a position where they appear to be risk-averse at the expense of safeguarding u.s. national security interests. if we take a shot and miss, then guess what? we learn where the system's shortfalls might be and we fix them. to do it only in test environment is not good for our national security. >> what about just even, commander, the possibility of, you know, an invisible weapon like the preemptively neutralizing north korea's ability of attacking anyone. i was reading back on the u.s.-stalled iran's nuclear technology with a computer virus. is that a possibility here? >> it is a possibility. i don't want to delve too much into that, brooke, because of the obviously highly sensitive nature and classification of that material, but the bottom line remains that while that capability may exist, that is one capability that we do want to harbor until it comes a point where we are actually feeling
that they are threatening us, that they are targeting the island, targeting japan, and then we would be able to use that to disrupt it, only to use it for follow-on action that would come where we would actually destroy those facilities and missile-launching capability. >> okay, commander kirk lippold, thank you so much. we'll speak again. thank you. kochlicoming up next, trumps vladimir putin for kicking hundreds of u.s. din helplomats of russia. the white house now saying he was being sarcastic. we'll talk to former state department official who the president actually fired. what does he think about this sarcasm? next. (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything so we know how to cover almost anything. even a swing set standoff.
pepsoriasis does that. it was tough getting out there on stage. i wanted to be clear. i wanted it to last. so i kept on fighting. i found something that worked. and keeps on working. now? they see me. see me. see if cosentyx could make a difference for you- cosentyx is proven to help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis... ...find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting cosentyx, you should be checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability
to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms. or if you have received a vaccine or plan to. if you have inflammatory bowel disease, tell your doctor if symptoms develop or worsen. serious allergic reactions may occur. never give up. see me. see me. clear skin can last. don't hold back... ...ask your dermatologist if cosentyx can help you find clear skin that lasts. will people know it means they'll get the lowest price guaranteed on our rooms by booking direct on choicehotels.com? hey! badda book. badda boom! mr. badda book. badda boom! book now at choicehotels.com
anyone who calls it a hobby doesn't understand. we know that a person's passion is what drives them. [ clapping ] and that's why every memorial we create is a true reflection of the individual. only a dignity memorial professional can celebrate a life like no other. find out how at sanfranciscodignity.com. so it only made sense to create a network that keeps up. introducing xfinity mobile. it combines america's largest, most reliable 4g lte with the most wifi hotspots nationwide. saving you money wherever you check your phone. yeah, even there. see how much you can save when you choose by the gig or unlimited. call, or go to xfinitymobile.com. xfinity mobile. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money.
well, it took a couple weeks, but president trump responded to vladimir putin's news of expelling more than 700 u.s. diplomatic staff out of russia, and the president trump, in his q&a session with members of the media yesterday, thanked him, and here's another layer to this. moments ago, the white house said the president was being sarcastic. here's the clip. >> no, i want to thank him, because we're trying to cut down on payroll, and as far as i'm concerned, i'm very thankful that he let go of a large number of people, because now we have a smaller payroll. there's no real reason for them to go back. so, i greatly appreciate the fact that they've been able to cut our payroll for the united states. we'll save a lot of money. >> tom countryman joins me live from washington. he is a former state department official who was fired by president trump. tom, welcome back.
>> thank you. it's always an honor. >> so, white house says this was sarcasm. you heard it for yourself. do you take the white house at his word? >> i take the white house spokesperson at their word. when i first heard the president's thank you message to president putin yesterday, i thought this is not the most outrageous thing this president has said, but it is one of the most shameful things any american president has said. >> tell me why. >> to stand with someone taking hostile action against your government employees, the people that you should be relying on to serve your agenda, is simply backwards. it reflects this white house's tendency to demean the service, not just of the state department, but of a dozen other federal agencies that work in embassy moscow and that will be forced to cut back. >> tom, have you had conversations with -- i mean, without divulging specifics, have you had conversations with
current staffers at state and how is this thanking putin, sarcasm or not, sitting with them? >> well, i haven't had any conversations with people currently employed at state in the last 24 hours. i think the important point is that whether a president speaks with anger, as in the case of north korea, or speaks with sarcasm, as in this case, those tones of voice have real world consequences, and in this case, the real world consequence is to send a message not just to moscow but to the rest of the world that he does not trust either the state department or all the other agencies where patriotic public servants are doing their best to serve the united states. and i think as a consequence, to use a famous phrase from donald trump, they're laughing at us many moscow and in other capitals around the world. and they're laughing specifically at this president.
>> why do you think, then, that president trump will never, ever criticize vladimir putin? >> i think it's apparent that he believes rosie o'donnell to be a bigger threat to the security of the united states than vladimir putin, just based on the amount of time that he devotes to criticism. it's a very difficult question to answer. i want to see a better relationship with the russian federation, and i believe we can work on that. but you can't work on it if you are determined to turn a blind eye to every outrageous action undertaken by the kremlin. and that's what our president is doing. >> i have a feeling rosie o'donnell would like it the other way around. tom, stand by. i want to bring in lisa with some new reporting on north korea. >> elise, what are you learning? >> reporter: brooke, i think even though there's all this
fiery rhetoric between the u.s. and north korea, i think it's important for our viewers to know that there are talks going on between washington and pyongyang, and there have been for some time. now, we're talking about discussions between the u.s. envoy to north korea. his name is joseph yun, and several of his counterparts, both the north korean ambassador to the united nations, and also some top officials in the north korean foreign ministry. now, originally, these talks started in may. they were really about the release of u.s. hostages in north korea, and you remember otto warmbier, the young man who was ultimately released by north korea and died back here in the united states, it was about trying to release them, but the hope was that these talks, these talks about releasing americans in north korea would also lead to some kind of fuller dialogue. they did address the issue of poor relations between the u.s.
and south korea. so, ambassador yun has met with his counterparts. he met with them in may, in oslo and in june in new york, and he's been, you know, they called this, and you might have heard this kind of diplomatic term before, the new york channel. it's been a long-established channel between the state department and the north korean -- the mission at the united nations, and this is usually to pass messages, but since president trump came in, secretary tillerson, ambassador yun have been really, at the instruction of president trump, trying to double down on getting these americans out. so, those are the discussions going on. they do kind of tiptoe around the issue of relations. the question is, in the midst of all this fiery rhetoric, can that channel be used for some more diplomacy. >> all right. let's listen to the president. >> secretary devos for joining us today. and thank you all, because we are -- we have been working very
hard on being sure that americans have the training they need for the jobs in the future. i also want to thank ivanka, my daughter, for her leadership on workforce training and her efforts. she's been working very, very hard to create new economic opportunities for women across america and actually for women across the world. she's been working with the chancellor of germany on helping women all over the world. in the past seven months, we've made enormous gains in getting americans back to work. the symptom marktock market is highs, unemployment is at a 16-year low, and manufacturers have never expressed more optimism about the future. the optimism has been truly incredible. recently, foxconn announced it is going to invest $10 billion to build a new factory in wisconsin. we want to make sure that every job that comes back to our shores is filled with american workers. we have a lot of companies moving back to our country.
your probably seeing that. two major automobile companies just announced they're moving back to the united states. and they're going to build major plants. they're looking for the site. they're putting it out to seven or eight different states, and they're going to be very happy building in the united states. it's going to work out very well for them. that's why in june, we began a historic initiative to expand apprenticeship and workforce training programs in all industries. we're expanding pathways to success. so important. and apprenticeships are one of the many avenues that lead to the great jobs completely debt-free, and who knows more about the word apprentice than donald trump. in fact, under "the apprentice"ship, you earn while you learn. so important. and so great. and you love getting up in the mark a morning and going to work and a lot of great things involved here. we're always here today to discuss additional steps we will be taking to expand apprenticeship programs, especially for women and
minorities in s.t.e.m. fields where women have been truly underrepresented, really, i guess you could say, underrepresented for many, many decades. technology has become a part of nearly every industry, from manufacturing to retail. and we want all of our citizens, every single citizen, including women and minorities, to have access to high-paying tech jobs and other s.t.e.m.-related jobs. american workers are the best there is anywhere in the world, and we're finding work for them. they built the skyscrapers of our cities, the roads and bridges across our land, and will be building plenty of new roads and bridges, by the way. the technology that has revolutionized the globe and so much more, as you're well aware. their skills, talent, and grit have always put america on top, and we're going remain on top, but at a much higher level than we are right now. and speaking of now, it is our
job to make sure that they have the training, immediately, to lead us into the future. we have great, great hope. we have a great, great future in this country. there's never been more optimism, and again, unemployment at a 16-year low. so, we're honored to have all of you. mr. secretary, thank you very much. we appreciate it. and ivanka, congratulations on working so hard. >> thank you. >> we really do appreciate it. thank you. any questions? >> mr. president, what did you mean by military solutions are locked and loaded as it relates to north korea? >> i think it's pretty obvious. we are looking at that very carefully. and i hope that they are going to fully understand the gravity of what i said, and what i said is what i mean. so, hopefully they'll understand, peter, exactly what i said and the meaning of those words. those words are very, very easy to understand. >> any progress on the diplomatic back channel? >> well, we don't want to talk about progress. we don't want to talk about back
channels. we want to talk about a country that has misbehaved for many, many years, decades, actually, through numerous administrations and they didn't want to take on the issue, and i have no choice but to take it on, and i'm taking it on, and we'll either be very, very successful, quickly, or we're going to be very, very successful in a different way quickly. >> angela merkel says she sees no military solution to fight with north korea. why is she wrong? >> well, i think maybe she's speaking for germany. let her speak for germany. she's a friend of mine. she's a very good person, very good woman. she's a friend of ivanka. perhaps she's referring to germany. she's certainly not referring to united states. that i can tell you. >> mr. president, you've said you want to send a strong message to north korea. what dubsz to to you say to you that say the rhetoric is raising the tension. >> my critics are only saying that because it's me. if somebody else uttered the exact words, they'd say, what a great statement, what a
wonderful statement. they're only doing it. but i will tell you, we have tens of millions of people in this country that are so happy with what i'm saying, because they're saying, finally, we have a president that's stick uing u for our nation and frankly sticking up for our friends and allies. and this man will not get away with what he's doing, believe me. and if he utters one threat in the form of an overt threat, which, by the way, he has been uttering for years, and his family has been uttering for years, or if he does anything with respect to guam or any place else that's an american territory or an american ally, he will truly regret it, and he will regret it fast. thank you all very much. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. >> gloria borger, tom countryman, elise labott, he will regret it.
he will regret it fast. gloria, what does that mean? >> look, this is a president who is tripling down. yesterday, he was doubling down. i think today you could easily say he is tripling down, and what's not clear to me is he said, if he utters one form of an overt threat, and then within the went on and said, and threatens guam, et cetera, well, he already has been threatening. kim has been uttering overt threats. >> the specifics of the guam attack, they're out there. >> right. they're already out there, so i'm not quite sure. i was trying to parse those words. i'm not quite sure what he means by that. but he reiterated a lot of what he said yesterday, brooke, which is that tens of millions of people are applauding him, that there's finally somebody to stand up for america, and he also said, if somebody else had uttered the words that i said, they would have been applauded. but because, you know, the inference is but because it came
from donald trump, he's being criticized. >> listen, i know that the white house, elise, is saying that there are no mixed messages, we're all on the same page, tillerson, mattis, trump, but again, you have this, you know, gloria's right, this tripling down, and yet you have what you are hearing, what you were just reporting, that the back channels and the -- let's bring them to the table and try diplomacy. how do you square those? >> reporter: okay, i think, you know, as gloria said, we need to really parse out what the president said and he kind of stopped himself. he said if he even threatens -- and then he kind of said, overt threats. now, if you saw kind of over the last two days, secretary tillerson, especially defense secretary mattis, have been kind of clarifying what that means. and that means, if you threaten with actual force, if you take action. north korea's been threatening the u.s. and its allies for years. i mean, if we listen to every, you know, threat by north korea, i mean, we wouldn't be able to go on with our lives.
they are masters at brinksmanship, at rhetoric and sometimes you just need to kind of put that aside, and when we say, listen to the president, look at what the president does, don't listen to his tweets, i think you need to do that with north korea. but so he's saying, if you take action, and that message is to north korea and it's also to china. that if you -- to china and russia, you need to get this under control. you need to put your pressure on north korea. and to north korea, the message is, if you're thinking about it, don't do it. because we will annihilate you. we have the defenses. we have the capability. you will not survive an attack on the u.s. or its allies, but i have to say, it's working, brooke, because you know, if you look at north korea, if you parse out north korea's statements a couple days ago, he was very specific. the north korean news agency was very specific about four missiles directed at guam. today, you're hearing the kind
of typical bombast that you hear from north korea, that the u.s. will go up in a sea of fire, it's kind of the things that we hear all the time. so, i'm not trying to make light of the fact that it's a very serious situation. there is a chance for miscalculation here, but i do think that this kind of serious threat of force, kim jong un is cowering a bit, and you know, look, the masters of the brinksmanship, kim jong un, may have met their match in donald trump and he seems to be cowering a bit. >> the u.s.'s good friend in germany, and the chancellor saying that there is no military solution. tom, going to you and your years there in foggy bottom, like, you know, the president was essentially saying, we'll let merkel speak for germany, certainly she's not speaking for the u.s. what did you make of that? >> i think that chancellor merkel's statement was pretty clear that there is not a military solution that the
united states could impose upon north korea that would reliably destroy the nuclear arsenal of north korea. and that's not just speaking for germany. i am sure that she intended for our approximapresident to liste statement as well. i understand the impulse to reply to a thug like kim jong un with the same kind of intemperate language that he uses, but the fact is, no american president has ever done that before. i think that the president may succeed, i hope, as elise says, in getting north korea to back off some of its rhetoric, but the fact is, north korea does not intend to initiate an all-out conflict with the united states. the president will take credit, have no doubt, if they never make a military move, but it is
not credible to believe that the president's words are going to convince north korea to halt its nuclear program. >> okay. gloria, the president, though, in terms of tom's talking about the rhetoric, the president defended his rhetoric, and, you know, said if any other president did the same thing, they would be praised. is he right? >> no. i don't think he is. that i think the kind of bellicose, apocalyptic language coming from a president is a little jarring, and he may be right that there are an awful lot of people applauding it, but on the other hand, i think what you want to hear from a president in this particular case with north korea is you want to isolate north korea and say the entire civilized world voted against you at the united nations, and we led that fight, and you know, trump has reason to crow about that, and he should, and not make it a fight
about, our fire and fury against your fire and fury but rather a fight between the civilized world and kim jong un. and instead, what you hear is this kind of mano a mano, we have more armaments than you have, and you know, by the way, i think the language that you hear from general mattis, for example, is so strikingly different, and this is the man who's in charge of all the armaments, right? and the secretary of defense, last night, was so sober and somber about all of this, and talked about a diplomatic solution, and very different from the president. so, while you don't want the president to not, you know, stand up for america, criticize north korea, et cetera, et cetera, ratcheted up an already-tense situation is kind
of questionable. and you know, maybe the ends will justify the means, you know, we'll have to see. >> sure. everyone stand by. we have a correspondent in guam. we've been talking about guam and the specific attacks from pyongyang to this american territory, just about 2,100 miles off the peninsula. martin savage is there live, just about 2:00 in the morning your time. you know, the president mentioned guam, martin. nice to see you. talk to me about, we've seen the headline from the paper there today where it says "14 minutes." that's the time it will take for a missile to go from north korea to where you are. how are people in guam feeling? >> reporter: you know, there's kind of two levels of preparation that i think people are going through here, brooke. one is the physical, which is of course getting ready with emergency supplies as best you can. and then the other is the mental preparedness and that's probably the most difficult. let me show you the newest paper. this is the saturday morning version. and the banner headline there, of course, says "missile watch." but the one that really catches
your eye. officials, quote, do not look at the flash, which is a clear reference that if there's some sort of nuclear fireball, don't be looking at it because you could go blind. if it's on the front page of the paper, you can see how it ratchets up the level of people's concern. the governor on the island is doing his best to tell people that the threat level has not been raised in any way, that the island is safe and sound and they should go about their lives as they always would. it's the old, keep calm and carry on. but at the same time, the bureau of homeland security issued a new guideline sheet in which they talked about what to do in the event of a nuclear explosion. and they talk about, yeah, don't look at the fireball. immediately get low on the ground behind any kind of substantial block there may be, cover your head. it's the old duck and cover from the cold war days. then on top of that, it goes on to say that, stay indoors after the initial blast for at least 24 hours to reduce exposure to fallout and then wash yourself
in a shower, scrubbing with copious amounts of water and soap. you get this kind of listing coming from your official government, and you could see why people here are beginning to really get worried, and even though this island has been threatened in the past, there's something this time around, folks say, that makes it more real. and of course, very much concerning. >> that's what i wanted to ask about. i was talking to a congresswoman from guam this week. she had talked about how she reached out to secretaries of defense past, asked about the readiness of any defense missile system, but sort of intuiting that this felt different. what is it about this time, just quickly, that feels so different for people there in guam? >> reporter: well, couple of things. of course, north korea's been much more active in its testing and its use of its rockets and missiles. and then on top of that, the other difference is who's in charge in the white house in the
united states. it's donald trump. you have two men who don't like to back down. kim jong un being the other here. and there is a fear that they could talk themselves into a very dangerous situation. that's one of the biggest differences, say, from several years ago when the same threats appeared. >> okay. martin savage in guam for us, thank you so much. again, now seeing the new headlines there in the newspaper, "14 minutes" they're saying that's how long it would take for the missile to reach the island nation off the korean peninsula. everyone stand by. we have more on our breaking news about these back channel efforts that elise labott was just reporting on between the u.s. and north korea. i'm brooke baldwin. this is cnn special live coverage.
when you have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, the unpredictability of a flare may weigh on your mind. thinking about what to avoid, where to go, and how to work around your uc. that's how i thought it had to be. but then i talked to my doctor about humira, and learned humira can help get and keep uc under control... when certain medications haven't worked well enough. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions,
and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. raise your expectations and ask your gastroenterologist if humira may be right for you. with humira, control is possible. ♪ the sun'll come out for people with heart failure,
tomorrow is not a given. but entresto is a medicine that helps make more tomorrows possible. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ i love ya, tomorrow in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto helped more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure... ...kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow i love ya, tomorrow ♪ ask your heart doctor about entresto. and help make tomorrow possible. ♪ you're only a day away. alzheimer's disease the fi is out there.survive and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen
by funding scientific breakthroughs, advancing public policy, and providing local support to those living with the disease and their caregivers. but we won't get there without you. visit alz.org to join the fight. in this tripling down on north korea and the leader of the rogue nation coming from the president of the united states moments ago here. let's go to will ripley, our correspondent overseas there in
beijing who has been to pyongyang many times for us at cnn, so listening to president trump, tripling down. kept saying, he, you know, referencing kim jong-un felt a little bit different this time in his messaging. how do you think kim jong-un reacts to president trump this time? >> this is the thing, brooke. all of these responses, these fired responses we've seen from north korea so far haven't been direct quotes from kim jong-un. they're his generals or lower level government officials. he's putting out statements through officials in his government and then the president of the united states is directly responding, mentioning him by name. either north korea is being elevated up to the level of the united states or the united states is being dragged down to the level of north korea, but either way, all of the sunday, we have two leaders vastly different with military capability, wealth, political influence, respect, and yet, basically at the same level in
this tit for tat and the north korean propaganda i've seen today and we could see another wave of north korean releases soon, but the rhetoric was relatively tame by north korea standards. back to their normal threatening to turn the mainland united states into a stage for nuclear war. we've heard that before, saying president trump and the united states is pushing towards the brink of a nuclear war and heard north korea say that many times before. they didn't personally insult the president and didn't talk about this plan to launch four intermediate range missiles and put them down within 20 miles of guam or elaborate further on that. although they're putting together a plan for kim jong-un's signature and almost as if he's baiting kim jong-un to sign the orders on the plan and have north korea give it a go and do what would be their most provocative missile test
ever because he continues to fan the flames even when it didn't seem to match the president's. more intense than what we heard today from north korea. >> here's hoping it doesn't ratchet up and see if kim jong-un the man responds this time. will ripley, thank you so much in beijing and move now to developments in the russia investigation. after news broke that the fbi raided the home of the former trump campaign paul manafort, manafort is dropping his old legal team and hiring new lawyers with particular expertise in tax investigations that the special counsel probe could be focused more on possible tax kriecrimes and leag before this pre-dawn raid, met with manafort's son-in-law who handed over documents. meanwhile, president trump is weighing in on this that he was, quote, very, very surprised when he heard about the raid.
here he is. >> i thought it was a very, very strong signal or whatever. i know mr. manafort, i haven't spoken to him in a long time but he was with the campaign for a very short period of time, relatively short period of time. i've found him to be a decent man and makes consultant fees all over the place. who knows? i don't know. i thought that was pretty tough stuff, to wake him up, perhaps his family was there. i think that's pretty tough stuff. >> jeff kramer with me and directly with the research group. firing legal team and bringing on attorneys. forgive me, sir. jeff, thank you so much for being with me. the fact that manafort has fired the old team, brought on these new guys with specifically tactical expertise.
we knew that bob mueller was following the money trail but what does that signify to you? >> putting new attorneys in that area as well as warrants itself, i think it's significant but not really surprising. i think it's significant in the sense we've got some idea of the direction based upon the lawyers he might be hiring and also, a warrant itself where a judge determined that there was probable cause that a crime occurred and there might be evidence in the house. that's significant but not really surprising. executing a search warrant of a subject of an investigation is part and parcel of what goes on during the course of any investigation like this. >> jeff, we know they took a bunch of documents from manafort's home and here's the if. if investigators actually uncovered any documents related to current members of the administration, do you know, is there any required disclosure to the white house? or can bob mueller keep it to
himself? >> it could be attorney/client privilege but certain instances where director mueller, special council, will have to disclose something but can keep everything close to the vest. mr. manafort has disclosed some documents and an investigation has obviously been going on for months and months. not sure what might have been found at that house. but after months and months, may not be a smoking gun but there could be some information there leading to either tax or might be information regarding moneys overseas that need to be disclosed by u.s. citizens. >> okay. we played the president's comments on this ongoing investigations and we know the president's own attorney talked about the raid. john dowd e-mailed "the wall street journal" and a piece of this quote. he said the raid was extraordinary invasion of privacy and a gross use of judicial process and these methods are normally found employed in russia and not
america. here's my question to you, jeff. if this investigation does not involve the president personally, which his attorneys maintain, why are the lawyers and the president himself commenting on this? >> well, it's not surprising that the president's lawyers would come to lay the groundwork for an argument down the road, perhaps but your point is well taken. if this investigation doesn't touch the white house, why is the president commenting at all? but i think what we have here is a search warrant, again, his normal course in what investigators do. not a russian tactic. it's under the fourth amendment where a judge, a judicial representative, has already said there was enough evidence in the search warrant obviously sealed at this point. >> okay. jeffrey kramer, thank you so much. happy friday. happy weekend. thanks for being with me here. again, we're going to stay on. i'm sure jake will stay on what's happening, the latest reporting on the back channel
conversations. back with regard to the u.s. and north korea with the latest tripling down from the president of the united states there in bed minister during the working vacations, so stay tuned. i'm brook baldwin. thank you so much. the lead with jake tapper starts right now. good afternoon. welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. a brand new warning. >> anything in respect to guam or anyplace else with territory to america, he will regret it and regret it fast. >> might be more accustomed to hear in a hollywood flick. military solutions are now fully in place.