Return to Transcripts main page


Donald Trump Speaks at Rally; Earnings Slump Leads to Negative Markets; Cheap Energy Best Way to Boost Growth?; Growht in Eurozone outpaced U.S.; South African Court Recommend Zuma Face Charges; Brexit, Brussels Terrorism Hurting Demand; Leicester On Verge of Incredible Title Win; Leicester Face Weekend of Destiny in Title Bid; Windsors versus Obamas in Social Media Melee

Aired April 29, 2016 - 16:00   ET



DONALD TRUMP, U.S. REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We have had so many incredible endorsements and now they're coming. And I'll tell you over the

last two weeks and it took place really even before that but people see what's happening. Because we have far more votes than anybody else. Far

more delegates than anybody else. And we're going to hit that number I think quite easily. Because I watch the very dishonest media and they say,

oh, Cruz is getting there. He's not getting delegates. They say he's getting delegates. He is setting second, third, fourth, fifth round. He's

not going to be here because we're going to win in the first round, we don't even compete for them.

I mean we're so far -- as of today, we have 1,001. We just broke the 1,000 mark. OK? [ applause ] and we did fight hard actually in Pennsylvania

because in Pennsylvania I won in a landslide. We got I guess over 60% of the vote. And that's pretty hard with three people running. You know when

you get 60% with 2 people you win in a landslide, right that's called a landslide. When you have three people and you get practically 60% and then

in the other states, you know we had 5 and we did unbelievable numbers. Up to 66%. And it's been amazing.

We had Rhode Island. We had Delaware and Connecticut and Maryland, Pennsylvania. And we did great. But Pennsylvania had a little thing that if

you win you get 17. So I got 17, and the rest you have to fight for. I said what kind of a deal is this? In other words you have to take them out to

dinner. And this is a wonderful hotel, I'm sure your lunch is good but they don't take them here, they take them to very fancy restaurants, they bring

them to hotels. Perhaps they put them on yachts and take them for a cruise. They basically have to bribe the delegates and it is not the right system.

You know we have a system where it's like democracy, where it's supposed to be voting. And it's terrible. And fortunately we have a great Republican

leader in Pennsylvania. He's a really fair guy and a really something. And there's also a moral clause that you know of and I've heard this for a

couple of years with the delegates in Pennsylvania, if you win, there's a moral obligation that you're supposed to vote for the one who wins, which

sort of makes sense, right?

And you know I refused to say in this room because I say it outside and I get standing ovations, but this is a room, I won't do, but it's a rigged

system. It's a rigged system. Okay? It's a horrible, horrible, disgusting system. [ applause ] And you know, I see this Bernie Sanders. I'm not a fan

of Bernie Sanders, by the way. But I see that he wins a lot, wins a lot and he never has a chance of winning. He had a streak where he won about 10 in

a row and every time you watch the pundits they say, oh, he can't win. It is done. You know he's way behind because they have a thing called super


Well ours is more sophisticated because you don't know how badly rigged it is. Ok? With the super delegate it is obvious. You know they hand her all

these super delegates. And by the way, do I look forward to beating her. Do we look forward to winning. [ applause ] Do we look forward to winning.

I mean, if she is -- you know, if she's allowed to run. There is an a big question. Will she be -- I personally think she's protected by the

Democrats and she'll be allowed to run but we'll see what happens.

So what we have done is we have really -- I mean, we won New York with 60%, almost 62% of the vote which is unprecedented and got almost 100% of the

delegates, 95 delegates, we got them almost all. And then next week we had the 5 and won them all in landslides. And actually, lying Ted - you know do

we - and I think we have a couple of fans but lying Ted did not do too well in New York, folks. You know he's hovering around the 10% mark. You've got

to do better than that if you're going to collect all these delegates on the second ballot.

How would you like to be in a position where you're in -- we're in Cleveland and we're having the whole deal and it is going fine and for some

reason and don't worry about it, we've got it, I think we have it easily but for some it goes to a second ballot and somebody on the second ballot

because they wine and dined delegates who has 5 million less votes, because by the time we finish and we're scheduled to do very well in California, I

guess you have seen that. But really well. [ applause ] yes, really well.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN HOST: Donald Trump is speaking to supporters at a rally and there are protesters outside the rally in California. Nothing new from

Mr. Trump that we have been able to hear or ascertain so far. But we're going to keep listening and watching to see what he's saying because

obviously as he now goes over 1,000 delegates on the delegate count for the Republican nomination, so it gets ever closer and more interesting.


QUEST: Whilst we listen and monitor what Mr. Trump says and we'll bring it to you, let us return to our business agenda. The market has just closed in

New York. The Dow Jones closed -- I'll show you exactly where the market closed.


QUEST: Just a short time ago. The market was off 57 points, just a third of a percentage point down at 17,773. Nervousness is back on Wall Street.


QUEST: The earnings slump has led all three major markets in the U.S. to negative in April. And the Dow has just printed its worst week since

February. And you can see the sort of sessions that we have had all week. They are down. They stayed down. Often hitting lows earlier in the day.

We had a minor recovery towards the late afternoon. The market turbulence comes as Wall Street is celebrating a milestone because since the great

financial crisis or the great recession, the bull market is now the second longest in American history at some 2,600 days long. The longest, of

course, was 1987 to 2000. We're now in this bull market run, the second longest, and at the same time, corporate America is wrapping up a rough

earnings season.

First of all, look at the sectors. If we break this down, in the oil fields, profits in the oil sector, Exxon Mobil down, Chevron down, Phillips

down. It's estimated $67 billion worth of losses across the whole oil sector and the oil industry in the united states due to the crash in crude


Exxon had the worst quarter since 1999 with profits down 63%. Chevron lost three quarters of a billion and Phillips, profits down some 66%. Now,

continuing with that theme, the banks, Morgan, Citi, Goldman, Wall Street, the market weighed in, as well. JP Morgan's, Citi and Goldman all saw their

profits decline both across the range.

Goldman is the worst performer on the Dow Jones so far this year. If you want to factor in just how widespread this miserableness of the earnings

season is, look at the tech sector. Apple, Alphabet, Google, Twitter, Microsoft. All lower. Apple the first decline in sales since 2003. They

have all had miserable times except Facebook and amazon. They are the only two bright spots of the major names that we can say. Amazon has its fourth

consecutive profitable quarter. We need to put all of this into somehow good to see Paul La Monica.

PAUL LA MONICA, CNN MONEY CORRESPONDENT: Thank you very much, it's nice to be back.

QUEST: Good to see you sir, in fit and fetal. What happened in this earnings season?

MONICA: It has not been a particularly good one which is really discouraging because most people were not expecting results to be that good

to begin with. And they really disappointed. You know, Facebook and Amazon are the only two bright spots.

QUEST: But what's driving the lower earnings?

MONICA: Some of it is the volatility that we have had in the both currency markets, stronger dollar in the beginning of the first quarter, really

hurting. Also, you have oil prices, obviously, when we look at Exxon, Chevron and Phillips, oil's had a nice rebound since February but the

beginning of the year they were extremely low.

QUEST: I don't buy it because that lower oil price hurts the oil sector, but it puts more money into consumers so we should be seeing a concurrent

rise on the other side of the equation.

MONICA: We've been waiting for that for a long time. It seems like consumers are dare I say it acting fiscally responsible and maybe doing

things like paying down debt instead of splurging on more purchases with those lower prices. Even the airlines are still struggling many of them

despite the boom they get from these lower oil prices.

QUEST: Right. Because we're seeing something that (inaudible) -- revenue per available seat mile that is down. Passenger revenue is down even though

they're filling the planes. This is worrying because we are in a situation of still low interest rates, weak earnings, fragile growth and uncertain


MONICA: Without question. And then we're going into an election cycle, of course. We just saw Donald Trump speak. I think the big worry is central

banks can't do anything more than they have and look at the few days ago. And just look at what happened at the Bank of Japan decided to not do

anything, sit tight and hold off on more stimulus and the market freaked out about that.

QUEST: And Mervyn King talked about that on this program. Early Twitter investor, Chris Sacca has been speaking to CNN and giving an opinion on

exactly to Laurie Siegel at a tech conference in New Orleans. We know about Twitter, we know about the issues. But this early investor had a very sharp



CHRIS SACCA, EARLY TWITTER INVESTOR: Twitter is just a series of missed opportunities. That's just my kid who I keep walking into the room and

finding like the big pile of drugs under the mattress and be like, come on. You could have been somebody. You know?

LAURIE SEGALL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What's the biggest opportunity when you're screaming at your kid with the drugs on the floor?


SACCA: I mean -- Twitter has all of the world's best information. No matter who you are in this room, it has cool [ bleep ] that you want to know about

it. That you want to know about. And it has it faster than anybody else on the planet and they do the worst job of getting you that. It's so much work

as a user to see stuff.

SEGALL: What do you think ultimately happens? Do you want to lay down?

SACCA: Malaise. I know seriously. I feel like I need to pay you for this session now.

SEGALL: We're getting into that part, Chris.

SACCA: Yes, it's years. I mean when I posted 8,500 words on what Twitter should be, I wanted to make clear this wasn't like a vision statement for

the future. What's so frustrating about it is that's what it should have been already. These are ideas we have been talking about for years. It's

weird that Twitter makes it so hard to follow the basketball game when everybody's there talking about the basketball game. It's so hard to follow

the debate. It's so hard to find the best [ bleep ] that just happened in the hour that you were here ostensibly paying attention. And so that just

frustrates the hell out of me.


QUEST: Is he right that Twitter is so hard to do everything?

MONICA: I think Twitter is still a platform that is mystifying to many people. Twitter is trying hard to do many things at once. It's going more

into live video, obviously, with the periscope app. But many people are just confused about what Twitter is. I have often referred to it as kind of

like an old news wire service on steroids and obviously a lot of journalists are addicted to Twitter but my wife is not. My mother-in-law is


QUEST: Except on that news service, if I want to know what's authoritative, I can go to the web to or whatever and see what the news wire is

saying. With Twitter, I can do a search for something but I'm not sure I'm getting to a source.

MONICA: Yes. To be charitable, there's a lot of noise.

QUEST: Oh, charitable!

MONICA: It needs to be filtered out on Twitter. And I think that Facebook, for example, it often gets compared to Twitter. Facebook because of it's a

lot more curated I think than Twitter, that is the reason why people kind of trust that more as a source than twitter.

QUEST: Back to earnings. I just need to know, these earnings, the first quarter's gone. We look to the second quarter. GDP growth in Q1 in the U.S.

was weak. It tends to rebound. Is there a feeling that second quarter will be better on earnings?

MONICA: I think so. I do believe that the rebound we have seen in oil prices going to help the broader market because there's still relatively

low. Oil prices fell so sharply that it is encouraging that we're finally seeing a bit of a rebound. I think part of it is the worst case fears of

China having a hard landing are starting to fade a little bit, as well and that's good for the global economy, obviously.

QUEST: It is good to see you, sir.

MONICA: Thank you.

QUEST: Thank you very much, indeed. Now on the question of what's happening, if you want a daily digest of the day's top business stories and

particularly subscribe to the "Quest Means Business" newsletter.


QUEST: The profitable moment, well, today, my profitable moment is on the bull market and why even though it's the second longest bull market in

history, I don't feel this bull is running very well.


QUEST: It's a sickly bull that you always get the feeling it is about to go keel over and drop over and die. Just go to and please do


The oil tycoon T Boone Pickens believes cheap energy is the best way to boost growth and pay down debt in the United States.

The chief of BP Capital Management says it's crucial that the next President embrace that very fact. Mr. Pickens says he's as staunch a

Republican as ever regardless of who wins the nomination, he's never voted for a Democrat in the presidential election in his life.


T. BOONE PICKENS, CHAIRMAN, B.P CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: I'll be 88 next month and I've never voted for a Democrat for President in the United States.


QUEST: You have got Cruz, Kasich or Trump. Who are you supporting or are you still debating?

PICKENS: Oh, I've said I'll support the nominee. I don't care. Any three of them I'll support. I'll give the same amount of money to any one of the

three. They're fine with me. All of them are. All 17 were.

QUEST: All 17 are better than --


QUEST: The alternative.

PICKENS: Yes, all of them are fine with me. You can't have Hillary.

QUEST: Why not?

PICKENS: Well, she is already shown you how dishonest she is. That's enough for me.

QUEST: As you look at this election and you see the dirt being thrown and the accusations and the lying Teds and the Bernie Sanders and Hillary

Clinton accusations, what do you make of it? You have seen a few elections. What do you make of it?

PICKENS: Oh, all that stuff, I don't pay a lot of attention to what Trump says about Cruz or Cruz says about Trump or -- it's borders on being a

little bit juvenile. Let's get down to what we're going to do for America. Is what I want to know. What are you going to do? How are you going to do



PICKENS: And I'm concerned about the debt in America. And you've got -- the only way you can pay the debt off is grow the economy. And the economy's

barely growing at 2%. I mean, it's not going to pay any debt off at all. You got to grow it at 5%, 6%.

QUEST: That's not going to happen.

PICKENS: You know how it can happen? We have cheapest energy the world in America. Cheapest energy. Cheap energy trumps cheap labor. You can do it

with cheap energy.

QUEST: Exxon lost its AAA bond rating.

PICKENS: Oh gosh. I'm sick. I'm sick.

QUEST: Is that all I need to know about your view on that? I mean, the oil companies have lost 67 billion.

PICKENS: I understand that. I was in there for a small sliver.

QUEST: So you lost.

PICKENS: You damn right I did. Yes.

QUEST: Is everybody losing?

PICKENS: If you're in the oil business, you are, because price of oil went from $100 a barrel to $26.

QUEST: Is there any lasting damage being done to this cyclical --

PICKENS: Lasting for those that went bankrupt.

QUEST: Well, yes, that is true. But I think you know, in terms -- is there structural damage being done to America's oil business do you think or is

this just wait until the price comes back and it goes back up again?

PICKENS: That's exactly what will happen.


QUEST: There are entrepreneurs, , there are tycoons and there's T. Boon Pickens, one of the greatest of them all in the oil industry. We were glad

and privileged to have him in the C-Suite on "Quest Means Business."

Now here's a funny thing on the way to the studio. Eurozone growth was faster than the United States and it's not the first quarter where it's

happened. Who is faltering and who is picking up speed? Was it just a mystery aberration? We'll talk about it after the break. It's "Quest Means

Business" at the end of the week. We're delighted that you're here.


QUEST: Growth in the Eurozone outpaced both the United States and the U.K. in the first quarter of the year.


QUEST: These are the numbers for -- working your way up. This is last year and then working your way up and get to this year and see Eurozone grew

0.6% quarter on quarter non-annualized. Better than expected. It's the fastest growth in a year. You can see the previous three quarters behind

it. Economists say the pace is unlikely to be sustained. But what we do need to consider, of course, is why should Eurozone Q1 growth be so robust

when U.S. Q1 growth was so weak? And is traditionally weak and as you can see here it's not particularly traditionally strong elsewhere.


QUEST: On the unemployment front, across the Eurozone, unemployment fell to 10.2% lowest since March 2011 which is an amazing achievement. I want to

show you, though, where there are some still very strong hot spots of unemployment.

If you look higher than 10%, you've got France, you've got Spain, you've got Portugal, obviously you've got Italy, you've got down to Greece, and

you've got countries over into Slovakia, over into the Central Europe, as well. Take out 10% and you look up at 6% and you've got the northern

countries. You've got obviously the Baltics. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia and then Benelux countries heading up towards Denmark and the Netherlands.

And Ireland that's up more than 6%.

But for gains and benefits within the Eurozone, green and you see those that are less than 6% and remember U.S. unemployment now is, what? 5 and

change. U.K. unemployment is the same, 5 and change. There's only Austria and Germany within the 19 members of the Eurozone that are under 6%. The

U.K. not a Eurozone member but it comes in at roughly the same amount. Put that on overall and you see the whole Eurozone picture.


QUEST: Richard Clarida is with us on a Friday.

RICHARD CLARIDA, STRATEGIC ADVISOR, PIMCO: I love your map. Very impressive. I love the map. Very impressive.

QUEST: I managed to remember all the countries in the right order, I was going to call you over there to help.

CLARIDA: Good to see you.

QUEST: Good to see you. Why did the Eurozone outpace the U.S.?

CLARIDA: You know, they're benefiting from lower oil prices. They have the weaker currency last couple of years. ECB policy is getting traction. You

look to the U.S. the low oil prices have been hurting us far because of the oil patch. We have a strong dollar and of course the Fed's no longer

easing, they're starting to hike. So they're going in opposite directions and you see stronger growth in the Eurozone. Yes.

QUEST: This question of the currency effect.


QUEST: I mean, traditional economics has always taught us, you know, weak increases growth and therefore you're seeing -- do you believe that the

stronger dollar versus the weaker euro has a -- because it's a long-term effect that it takes before you see it on the GDP number.

CLARIDA: But, Richard, we are seeing it. We're seeing it. U.S. Exports are declining year over year it takes a while but the Fed's own models estimate

a big move in the dollar, it shaves about half a percent from growth. You know 10 years ago we were growing at 4%, we didn't notice it, now at 2% you

do notice it. Yes.

QUEST: And the Eurozone, this the ECB, basically, they're buying any old garbage that they can find.

CLARIDA: Well, they're buying a lot of bonds.

QUEST: They're buying a lot of bonds and if you've got a bond in your back pocket they'll probably buy it off you.

Do you think this GDP number basically tells them they're on the right track, even though there's still not a whiff of inflation, in fact there's

deflation still?

CLARIDA: I think they will obviously be encouraged. Obviously the German data coming out in a couple of weeks, they'll be looking at that closely. I

think they're heartened by the decline in unemployment but they're not kidding themselves. They have a long way to go. Pedal to the metal in terms

of ECB policy. They're not going to let up.

QUEST: The Q1 number, is it an aberration? Or, will we see it being repeated?

CLARIDA: In the Eurozone?

QUEST: In the Eurozone.

CLARIDA: Our best guess is European growth this year will be about 1.5%, maybe a little bit north of that. We would be surprised if we see 2.2%

every quarter but there's a good number. Let's cheer when we get some good news out of Europe, yes.

QUEST: And the fact that you do have monetary divergence, I mean the Fed's clearly not going to raise rates. How did you read the Fed statement this

week? I read it as being we're still very worried.

CLARIDA: I put out that the Fed leaves the door slightly ajar to a rate hike in June but it clearly is going to depend on the data, they're not

going to hike four times. They may hike once or twice but the Fed is going to try to minimize that divergence relative to what they indicated last


QUEST: And although the Fed got protest political blindness, they're going to avoid wanting to try and raise in the week or month before the

presidential election. They have done it before, but they're going to want to avoid it aren't they if they can?

CLARIDA: Richard, I don't think that will be a factor. I think they're on schedule to hike once or twice. September could occur, December, i don't

think they have a meeting right before the election. So I don't think that will be a factor let me put it that way.

QUEST: True diplomat, sir.

CLARIDA: Of course.

QUEST: Have a great weekend.

Today's growth numbers mean the Eurozone is now outgrowing the United Kingdom and of course we're heading towards June the 23rd which is the

"brexit" referendum.

British growth has slipped to four tenths of a percentage point on a quarter by quarter percentage. Britain at quarter of a percent, the

Eurozone at six tenths of a percent.


QUEST: The IMF, the OECD, the Bank of England all warning about economic fallout from the vote. John Codwell is the billionaire founder of Phones4u

and says Britain should hurry up and get out of Europe. He joins me now from London. John, good to see you, sir.


QUEST: We could be in a situation where the Eurozone looks better long term economically than the United Kingdom.

CODWELL: No. I don't believe that at all and especially if we get out of Europe. You know Europe at the moment is pushing huge chunks of legislation

into Britain which Britain has no choice but to employ. Lots of legislation that we don't need and in addition to ramping all that legislation in to

us, we have to pay 8.5 billion net contributions into the European Union.

QUEST: Now, John, I do not for one moment - I am not naive enough for a second to believe that you are suddenly going to turn around and say on

this program you have changed your mind. That's not going to happen. But I do --

CODWELL: I might do.

QUEST: Well, please. You'd give yourself more of a shock than you would me.

CODWELL: I would.

QUEST: But tell me. What's -- what trading system do you prefer? I've got the document from the (Hatton) Foundation which I'm sure you're familiar

with, Britain's decision. What trading system do you want Britain to adopt if it leaves the E.U.? Norway's system? The Swiss EEA system or a complete

system based on the WTO?

CODWELL: Well, the first thing is that who needs to be part of Europe? Is it Britain that needs to be part of Europe or is it Germany that needs

Britain to be part of the Europe? Britain is probably this year going to be heading towards 100 billion of trade deficit with Europe. Germany, on the

other hand, is probably heading towards 100 billion trade positive in Europe. What is the need for Britain to be in Europe? Why do we need to be

part of that?

QUEST: Because, services --

CODWELL: And if we're not part of it people --

QUEST: Services as you know --

CODWELL: People -- people --

QUEST: -- Are not part of the trade agreement.

CODWELL: People say that if we are excluded from Europe, if we're not in Europe, we won't be part of the decision making process. Well, we don't

really need to be part of the European decision making process. Europe needs us far more than we need Europe. And whatever happens in exiting

Europe, there will be a trade deal done that suits Britain totally perfectly because there's 100 billion worth of deficit that Europe has to

gain from us so why would it be a difficulty striking a trade deal with somebody who's going to gain enormously out of that deal?

QUEST: John, Mervyn King on this program yesterday said that leaving the E.U. would not be an existential threat for anybody else except possibly

the U.K.

CODWELL: Yes, you know there's all these pundits that say these things but what is the fundamental basis of truth in this? You know you've got all the

people that are supporting the European situation, spreading propaganda like that. Unprovable. Completely unsustainable. You've got people on the

"brexit" side that will make statements that are unsustainable. What is sustainable is that we have a 100 billion deficit probably this year.

QUEST: Right.

CODWELL: Heading towards that with Europe. That Germany has 100 billion positive. And it's costing us 8.5 billion for the privilege. 8.5 billion

might be a small amount of money in the total GDP of the U.K. but 8.5 billion would help, help potentially to research and find cures for 15

million people in the U.K. that suffer chronic illnesses. Illnesses like Lyme disease, all the co-infections, ME, Fibromyalgia, all of the diseases.

It could be used for those specific causes to help fund a health service that is at the moment completely unable to help people properly with those

chronic illnesses.

QUEST: John, I shall be driving around Britain in a 1975 Bedford van, a camper van. I hope you are going to have a cup of tea in the van on the

primer stove.

CODWELL: Just give me a call.

QUEST: I will. Good to see you, sir.

CODWELL: And you.

QUEST: I'll tell you more about those plans as we get nearer towards "brexit" and our camper van, Freddy Brexit.

The rule of law still stands and no one is above it.


[16:30:00] QUEST: That's the message from the President Zuma's main political opposition in South Africa as the court says he should face

hundreds of corruption charges. We'll be in South Africa talking about that after the break.


[16:42:32] RICHARD QUEST, CNN ANCHOR: Hello. I'm Richard Quest. More QUEST MEANS BUSINESS in just a moment. We're going to be live in

Johannesburg. The South African High Court says president Zuma should face hundreds of charges of corruption. And the football fairytale that has the

world rooting for the underdog. It's Leicester's day of destiny. Before that, this is CNN. And on this network, the news always comes first.

Scores of protesters have descended on California at the Republican convention in protest of Donald Trump. Demonstrations blocked off the

entrance ahead of Mr. Trump's speech forcing the Republican party front- runner to enter the venue through a rear door. There's a heavy police presence. Law enforcement is eager to avoid a repeat of Thursday night's

when violence broke out at a Trump rally.

As the nominations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump seem nearly all but inevitable, attacks between the two are ramping up. In her first interview

since a series of commanding wins on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton sat down with CNN's Jake Tapper to speak about her election strategy, and what she refers

to as Donald Trump's temper tantrums.


JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: He has lately taken to calling you, I believe, corrupt Hillary and he's had some rather personal and pointed tweets. Have

you learned anything from watching the way that Republican's dealt with him in the primaries that will inform how you will deal with such an

unconventional candidate?

HILLARY CLINTON, U.S. DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, you know, remember. I had a lot of experience dealing with men who sometimes get off

the reservation and the way they behave and how they speak. I'm not going to deal with their temper tantrums or they're bullying or their efforts to

try to provoke me. He can say whatever he wants to about me. I can really care less. I'll going to stand up for what I think the American people

need and want in the next president. That's why I've laid out very specific plans. There's nothing secret about what I want to do with the

economy, with education, with health care, with foreign policy. I've laid it all out there. And he can't or he won't. I can't tell which. So we're

going to talk about what we want to do for the country. And he can continue on his insult-fest but that's the choice he's making.


QUEST: Thirteen people are dead after a helicopter crash off the western coast of Norway. All the passengers were Norwegian and employed by the oil

and gas company Statoil. The crash happened just ten minutes before the helicopter was due to land in the city of Bergen.

Kenya is preparing to burn the tusks from some 8,000 elephants that were illegally taken in the wild. The burn is meant to highlight record levels

of poaching and the ivory trade that derives from it. One Kenyan wildlife official said Saturday's burn to send a message that the only value of

ivory is in the tusks on live elephants.

Tonight, a South African court is breathing new life into corruption charges evaded by President Zuma. It says prosecuted acted irrationally

when dropping more than 700 charges against him in 2009. President Zuma denies any wrongdoing. Of course it's another blow for his ANC party

already reeling from accusations that they have unconstitutionally, over changes to his house. President Zuma is no stranger to controversy. In

2005, his financial advisor, Shamir Shaikh, was found guilty of corrupting payments to the president. Zuma's 700 charges are linked to Shaikh, who

was also convicted of bribing a French arms company.

In December 2015 President Zuma appointed three finance ministers in a week. Wiping billions of dollars off the country stock market. Last month

the constitutional court ruled he had unlawfully used $15 million in state funds to upgrade his private home. Earlier this month the president son

resigned from Oakbay Resources after he was accused of wielding undue influence in politics. Eleni Giokos of CNN Money's correspondent is

joining us now from Johannesburg. So the court has said that consideration needs to be given to reinstating the charges. But it's up to the

prosecutor to decide whether they are going to do so. Will they?

[16:45:00] ELENI GIOKOS, CNN MONEY, AFRICA CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is the interesting thing, Richard, because at the end of the day it was

nothing more than a recommendation. And basically giving National Prosecuting Authority, the decision-making power as to whether they're

going to be embarking on this going forward. And Richard, and this actually brings up the big question as to whether the National Prosecuting

Authority is independent. Remember, in 2009 they dropped those charges. The court saying that it was an irrational decision and basically

implicating the National Prosecuting Authority saying that they weren't that independent back then. We know that the court system, the judicial

system, Richard, and over the past few months have proven that they are independent and of course this giving a lot of uncertainty to the investor

community out there, of course the rand also strengthening quite a bit in today's session.

QUEST: There's only one thing, it seems to outsiders, those of us outside South Africa looking in, that it doesn't matter how much probe in or

insults or how much accusations and scandal is leveled at this president. He continues and he continues to enjoy the support of his party. Is that

an accurate view?

GIOKOS: Absolutely an accurate view. I mean, at the end of the day he survived an impeachment in parliament, Richard, after the Constitutional

Court, as you say, the highest court in the land said he acted unconstitutionally and then basically following that up with a press

conference showing that they're backing the president.

Now, remember that Jacob Zuma right now doesn't have charges against him. It is up to the National Prosecuting Authority and it's also now in the

hands of the electorate. Remember we are going towards a local government elections in august. Yes, the ruling ANC have shown they're backing Zuma,

no matter what. Is the electorate going to do so? Are the South African voters going to show they're finally upset and unhappy with scandal after

scandal that's marred his presidency?

QUEST: What's the thinking tonight in South Africa? Does the prosecutor bring charges?

GIOKOS: Well, I mean, at the end of the day these are charges we have known about for 15 years. We know that his financial adviser has been

convicted of corruption and even spent time in jail. So this is nothing new in South Africa. Again, this is going to come into question whether

the MPA has the power to show its independence, whether they're going to consider it. From what we've been hearing the MPA says that they are going

to consider the judgments and take it forward from there. But the thinking right now is that it's going to take a very long time and even if they do

reinstate these charges, this is going to carry on, Richard, as we have seen in the South African judiciary system. That it's going to carry on

for quite some time.

QUEST: Eleni Giokos, who is in South Africa, in Johannesburg for us tonight, thank you.

Shares in the airline group IAG are down nearly 5 percent. The chief executive Willie Walsh is pointing the finger at a possible Brexit in the

deadly terror attacks in Brussels.


[16:50:00] QUEST: The parent company of British airways is trimming growth expectations and says Brexit uncertainty is hurting bookings. IAG is also

pointing to the Brussel's terror attacks has taken a toll on the business. IAG still reported operating profits of $177 million in this last quarter

compared to $28 million in the year before. Those figures exclude Aer Lingus, which reports last August.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the OECD, has issued a stark warning to the UK's pro-Brexit camp. It now says if Britain

leaves, economic uncertainty will increase and Britons will face a Brexit tax. The OECD says declines in GDP would across the equivalent of $3200

for each British household by the end of the decade. And that will rise to 4 1/2 thousand by 2030. The Vote Leave campaign has slammed the OECD

saying there's no reason to what they called the doom laden projections and predictions. One man claims to have released a pamphlet offering impartial

advice. It's more than a pamphlet, it's a book. It's called, "Britain's Decision: Faxon Impartial Analysis for the EU Referendum on June 23."

It's 126 pages, it's my weekend reading, which I will be going through to see what it says. This has been written by the Scottish billionaire and

published by Tom Hunter. I asked him how both sides crunching the numbers to their advantage.


TOM HUNTER, AUTHOR, "BRITAIN'S DECISION: FACTS AND IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS": Well, Richard, you know what they say about economists, they've predicted

nine out of the last three rescissions. So what we're trying to do with our book is we think this is far too important of a session to be left to

the politicians alone to inform us. Therefore, we have gone to academics, economists, business people who are impartial. This is a very complicated

subject, but we've tried to say this is a fact. This is a forecast. This is a guess. And hopefully it will help, us the voters, make a better

informed decision.

QUEST: But as you have done that, you have obviously had to do that for both sides of the argument. So for instance, those like the British

Treasury that says, GDP will be 4,000 pounds for GDP per capita lower per household and those who say that there will be a trade agreement with the

United States in the future.

HUNTER: This is what for the average voter, of which I'm one, this is so confusing. On the one hand, somebody says black. Somebody says white

straightaway. So how do you sort the wheat from the chaff? So this is why we have gone to these academics, independent thinkers and said, take each

big subject, which I think people will decide on where they land and give us where as a fact, give us where as an opinion. But I think it's much

easier for the people arguing to stay to have some forecasts. The other people who want us to leave are basically saying, OK, it looks like the

land of milk and honey, but we don't have much factual backup to prove this.

QUEST: You say this book is designed to eliminate obfuscation, hyperbole and bluster. Aren't all three of those things inevitable when, frankly,

this is not an economic issue? Because the economics can be used either side. It's a political issue. It's a social issue. It's if you like a

nationalistic issue.

HUNTER: Yes. I think people will decide when's important to them in this and some people it's finance. And some people it's a case of sovereignty.

And sovereignty's a very difficult thing to define, never mind debate about. But I think by providing some facts and dissecting some of the

arguments and hopefully are readable form and, remember, I'm not trying to convince people of my point of view. Like the politicians are. Because

I'm not telling you my point of view.


16:55:00] QUEST: Now, book makers say the odds of Kim Kardashian next president of the United States, 2,000 to 1. That's more than twice as

likely as the odds of Leicester City winning the league at the start of the season. All of that we'll discuss that after you've had a chance to "MAKE,



QUEST: This time last year, they were rock bottom of the England premier league. Now Leicester City are one game away from one of the biggest

shocks in sporting history. Rock bottom, from worst to first. Potentially. There are three games left in the task is simple. If they

beat Manchester United this weekend, they will win the league for their first time ever. To say David and Goliath doesn't do it justice. This is

like David beating Goliath every week for an entire year and you look at the numbers you'll see exactly how Leicester City. So these of all played

35, Tottenham and Manchester and Arsenal, all played 35, 122, which puts them comfortably up and lost 3 and 76 points so far. Leicester have spent

$57 million on players this year. Manchester United have spent almost three times that amount.

Now, the cynics say Leicester are no paupers. Their Thai owners have poured millions of dollars into them and they actually rank near the top of

the league in terms of net spend, never mind gross spend, but net spend. None of the teams have spent more come anywhere close to Leicester in the

league table so far. In the world sports Patrick Snell joins me now. I'm looking at the numbers, Man City is 156 million and Newcastle 118 and

Leicester's down at 47, Patrick. Can we say that -- I mean, that's what got them to where they are now? Is it the spend? Is it the players? Is

it the coaching? Is that the management? Is it everything?

PATRICK SNELL, CNN WORLD SPORTS: It's a combination of all of the parts you list, Richard. It's quite an incredible story it would be. And what I

call one of sport's great miracles. It's really a collection of players. Players that were really not close to household names, but all wonderfully

put together and weaved by the whilly Italian veteran coach. I'm talking about Claudio Ranieri, of course. Jamie Vardy has been scoring goals for

fun. This is a player who was a nonleague player just about three years ago, but now scoring for fun. The backbone of the team is rock solid. The

big German in defense, Robert Huth, as well. You look at Riyad Mahrez is the Algerian. They've spread the wealth, they've been scoring for fun and

they're playing without restriction. Their plane free football. There's been no pressure on them at all season, Richard. And you look at

Manchester City, you look at Manchester United, Chelsea, and Arsenal. With that name, with that brand there comes huge pressure and Ranieri himself

[17:00:00] -- I just want to get to the Italian head coach, because he's been critical to all of this. This is what Ranieri is saying on the eve of

what could be a historic title triumph.


CLAUDIO RANIERI, LEICESTER CITY MANAGER: Now is the real chance to win the title, next season. Never knows. What's happening. Once in the life.

It's easy to understand. For the first time in their life, the people can win the title in Premier League. It's unbelievable. It's history.


QUEST: So, Patrick, talk me through the machinations or the machinations literally that could get them the title this weekend or lose them the title


SNELL: The key stat, the one stat that all football fans will be looking at very closely indeed, Richard, is Sunday. A pivotal game on Sunday when

Leicester City, they travel to play Manchester United themselves, 20-time English top flight title winners. Leicester, if they win at old Trafford,

they will clinch the title no matter what second place Tottenham do. Now, Spurs play on Monday, a day later at Chelsea. And basically, doesn't

matter what they do if Leicester win on Sunday it will be their title. That simple.

QUEST: If Leicester draw on Sunday, what has to happen?

SNELL: If Leicester draw on Saturday, they only need to match that Spurs result in West London at Stamford Bridge, so in other words, it's really

match Spurs result on the weekend and the title is theirs. It is that simple.


SNELL: After this round, they'll be two games to go.

QUEST: Right. If Leicester lose this weekend, how do they still win?

SNELL: If Leicester lose again it depends on the result of that second place Spurs. But if they lose this weekend there are still six points up

for grabs and then Spurs will have huge momentum going into that London Derby in West London against Chelsea. But they'll go there with renewed

hope in their hearts knowing that the title race is back open, if Leicester lose. They'll have huge hope. They'll real belief that they have a

chance, at least, to take for them for Tottenham a first top flight title since 1961, Richard. Another great story, as well, gone relatively


QUEST: Sixty-one or first time ever. Either way, we have a great story coming our way. Thank you, Patrick. Good to see you, sir. Thank you.

It's difficult to tell who's the underdog in the other great sporting clash this weekend. The House of Windsor versus the first family of the United

States. Kensington Palace released a video on twitter earlier.


PRINCE HARRY: These are all the individuals who lost here during that day some 187. And the American man here was incredibly fast.

QUEEN ELIZABETH OF ENGLAND: Great player, isn't he?

PRINCE HARRY: Message? Yes, from Michelle. Will let us watch it together?


PRINCE HARRY: Let's have a look.

MICHELLE OBAMA, U.S FIRST LADY: Prince harry, remember when you told us to bring it at the Invictus Games?

Barack Obama, U.S. PRESIDENT: Be careful what you wish for.


QUEEN ELIZABETH: Oh really? Please.



QUEST: Well, it's clearly not amused by the mike drop. It's promotional video for Invictus Game, an event for wounded soldiers spearheaded by

Prince Harry. It's already been retweeted 12,000 times. The games held next month in Florida. We'll have a Profitable Moment after the break.


Tonight's Profitable Moment. So the bull market is now the second longest in history, but the truth is it doesn't feel like it. And I've been asking

myself why not? Why does it feel worse than maybe, for example, the bull market of `87 to 2000? And the reason seems to be quite simple. Most of

the gains over 57 percent of the bull market so far since 2009 have all been just recouping what we lost in the great recession when the markets

fell so sharply. Quite simply put you don't feel like you're making gains if all you're doing is getting back what you have given away. It's only

when you start to make real profits that you feel like a bull market. Well, let's just hope the one continues for a few more years. Don't put

too much money on it. This bull is looking sickly and you wonder if it's going to keel over and drop dead. And that's QUEST MEANS BUSINESS for

tonight. I'm spritely Richard Quest in New York. Whatever you're up to in the hours ahead, I hope it's profitable. We'll do it again on Monday.