Return to Transcripts main page


Deadline for Travel Ban Legal Battle; Fillon Apologizes After Corruption Claims; Can White House Quell the Infighting; New Zealand Plans Post-TPP Trading Future; Super Bowl Ads Break New Ground During Historic Patriots Victory; Alan Greenspan on the American Dream. Aired 4-5p ET

Aired February 6, 2017 - 16:00:00   ET


[16:00:00] ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: That marks the end of another day on Wall Street. The Dow hovering down about 25 points. It has, a quiet day

on the street. It is Monday, the 6th of February. Tonight, a legal battle over the president's power. The deadline is looming for the Justice

Department to defends Donald Trump's travel ban.

And Francois Fillon says "sorry" to French voters but rejects accusations of corruption.

And war inside the West Wing. Whispers from the White House says they are troubles inside the Trump administration.

Hello, everyone, I'm Zain Asher and this is QUEST MEANS BUSINESS.

All right. Good evening, everyone. Tonight, we have breaking news out of Israel. The country's Parliament has passed a law that legalizes around

3,000 housing units built on private Palestinian land in the West Bank. I want to go straight now to our Ian Lee who joins us live from Jerusalem.

Ian, walk us through. What exactly does this mean in terms of Arab/Israel peace?

IAN LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Zain, what this means is there are dozens of these outposts that dot across the West Bank. And previously, according to

Israeli law, these were illegal, because they were on private Palestinian land. Thousands of people lived in these small settler communities. But

with this law passing, this means that now according to Israeli law, these outposts are now legal. And the Palestinians whose land they occupy will

be compensated. But what this means for -- there's a lot of concern, for what this means for the Arab/Israeli peace talks for future peace deal.

Because what it does is it creates, the West Bank more resembles swiss cheese than actual viable Palestinian state. The goal of the international

community and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The U.N. special coordinator for Middle East Peace said that this will have far-reaching consequences for Israel, and greatly diminish the

prospect for Arab/Israeli peace. But it isn't over now, Zain. Expect this law to be appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, where it could

likely be struck down because, at least as we've seen in the past, the Israeli court saying that the Knesset, Israel's Parliament, does not have

the right to create laws that pertains to land that is not part of Israel proper.

ASHER: Obviously, this is hugely controversial, Ian. Is there a sense that the Israeli government has somewhat been emboldened by the new Trump

administration, when it comes to building settlements?

LEE: Well, we heard from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, telling his coalition partners that until President Trump took office, he didn't want

any surprises, he didn't want to do anything that could illicit a reaction from then President Obama. But since President Trump has taken office,

we've seen a large push to increase the number of settlement units, across the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Over 6,000 have been announced in the past few weeks. It does seem we have an emboldened Israeli government that is driving to create more settlements

and more settlement units across the West Bank. And when you look at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition partners, that has been one of

their main goals, is to expand settlements.

ASHER: All right, Ian Lee live for us there. Thank you so much, appreciate that.

I want to get you caught up on the latest when it comes to Donald Trump's executive order, the so-called immigration ban. Because this is a very

sort of quickly moving story. The U.S. Justice Department has just hours now to make its next move, as legal challenges to President Trump's travel

ban continue to mount. The government has two more hours, just two more hours to convince judges of the order to stop people from seven

predominantly Muslin countries from entering the U.S. should be reinstated.

The travel ban is currently suspended after appeals from several states. That means that people can now travel to the U.S. as they had been,

previously, in the past. Their lawyers argue that the president unleashed chaos by signing the order. Mr. Trump spoke earlier today. He defended

the travel ban, saying that it was crucial to protect Americans against terrorism.


[16:05:00] DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: We've been seeing what's been going on over the last few days. We need strong programs. So, that people

that love us and want to love our country and will end up loving our country are allowed in. Not people that want to destroy us and destroy our



ASHER: And for now, the legal fight is centered on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. It will decide whether Trump's travel ban

remains suspended. Two states, Minnesota and Washington, filed lawsuits against the Justice Department and others are joining in. A third state,

Hawaii, wants its own objections to be heard, as well. Today, former U.S. Secretaries of State, John Kerry and Madeleine Albright signed a

declaration supporting the freeze. And almost 100 companies, mostly in Silicon Valley, mostly in the tech industry, are also challenging the ban.

What's next? Legal experts say that regardless of what the ruling is, the case is likely to go all the way to the Supreme Court. I want to bring in

Sara Sidner, who's joining us live now from San Francisco. So, Sara, this is somewhat confusing for a lot of people who might not be familiar with

the American justice system. Just walk us through what exactly the next step is. What exactly are we waiting for at this point?

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's a very simple system that works the same way each time, when someone's unhappy with the ruling by a federal

judge. A judge in Washington made a decision saying, I'm going to temporarily halt the travel ban and restrictions, thereby allowing people

to come in, if they had valid visas. And then the Department of Justice said, we don't like that decision, and said, we're going to go above your


The next court above that court is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. In this area, there is one right here behind me in San Francisco. And this

court of appeals has three judges who are on what's called a motions panel. And they're here for an emergency. And this was an emergency stay, is what

the Department of Justice asked for, basically saying, look, as this case goes through the courts, we think that we're going to be harmed if you do

not allow the travel ban to stay in place. And that really is what the argument that the judges here will be looking at. Is whether or not they

agree with the Department of Justice, or agree with the federal judge who made the ruling that actually, this ban can be halted for now, as we decide

the merits of the case.

What these judges will not be doing is deciding the merits of the case, which is something that will stick for the entire nation, eventually. That

would likely be decided, eventually, either by the Supreme Court or the Supreme Court says, you know what, we cannot decide on this. We're going

to let the federal judge in Washington decide on this. Then it will be decided in his court. Zain?

ASHER: Sara, as you mentioned, it could go all the way to the Supreme Court. There are only eight justices right now. There is still that seat

open. But for people who are watching this right now, perhaps from one of those seven countries that were essentially banned, what can they do right

now if they were planning to travel to the U.S.? They do have a window open right now, but could that change at any moment?

SIDNER: It absolutely could change at any moment. You've seen this swing back and forth. The minute that the order was signed, basically,

implementation happened very quickly, although it did cause a lot of confusion. But people were kept out. Some people had their visas

canceled, unknowingly signing papers that allowed the government here to cancel their visas. And now just as suddenly as the ban was put in place,

it has been on hold because of a judge's decision. What happens next is up to this court and then likely the Supreme Court. But yes, these things can

happen very quickly. And what many groups, that are Muslin advocacy groups or civil right groups are telling people who have valid visas, come

quickly, they don't know how long this window might be open, at least for now, Zain.

ASHER: That is important to remember for a lot of people who are considering traveling to the United States. Sara Sidner live for us there

in San Francisco. Thank you so much.

OK, let's talk a little bit more about what happens next and the legal process here in the United States. I'm joined now by Paul Callan. Paul,

thank you very much for being with us. So just explain to us, because the Justice Department actually has to file a legal brief in just a few hours

from now. What are they aiming to prove in that brief? What is their main argument going to be?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I've been looking over the massive amounts of papers that have been filed in this case so far, and more papers are

still coming in, but what I'm seeing in the Justice Department approach is a focus on the national security of the United States. And they're saying

this. The president of the United States has broad powers as the chief executive of the United States to limit aliens from entering under what

circumstances he judges as being meritorious in terms of a threat to national security. And they're saying that this judge in Washington is

interfering with the powers and prerogatives of the President of the United States.

ASHER: But doesn't the president or the Justice Department have to prove that those seven countries pose an imminent or immediate threat?

[16:10:00] CALLAN: In their brief, they say they have proven this, because the Obama administration designated those seven countries as countries that

harbor terrorists and countries a that are a greater threat than other countries around the world. So, they're saying preliminarily, they have

made a showing that there is a danger to the United States if people come from those two countries.

ASHER: This is somewhat embarrassing for Donald Trump when it comes to -- you know, he obviously signed this executive order and now, it has met

challenges. What does this mean, perhaps, just to broaden this out, what does this mean for other executive orders that Donald Trump had?

Obviously, there are checks and balances in this country.

CALLAN: There are checks and balances in this country and we're close to a constitutional crisis. I can't remember a situation where the chief

executive, the president, has attacked a federal judge the way Donald Trump has, calling this federal judge a so-called judge. This is a mistake,

because the judiciary in the United States is an independent, sovereign branch of government and I'm sure they're not going to take kindly to

personal attack.

ASHER: And they have equal powers than the executive branch.

CALLAN: They have equal powers. But in some ways, in some ways I think the judiciary is more powerful. Although they don't have an army and a

navy, they have the ultimate right to decide what's constitutional and what's unconstitutional.

So, to attack them personally I think is a strategic error in the Trump administration. But on the other hand, we have separations of powers and

these important concepts are being briefed and argued.

ASHER: Donald Trump has said, listen, I'm going to make sure this ban is reinstated. How exactly is he going to do that?

CALLAN: There's only one way he can do it, and that's winning in the court system. He hopefully from his standpoint will convince these judges in the

ninth circuit to go along with the administration's position. I'm doubtful about that, because this circuit court of appeals is a liberal court, and

they tend to rule against the administration in cases like this. So, we'll have to see how strong Trump's case will be made by the Department of

Justice when it's argued later this week.

ASHER: I can tell you this for sure, it has been a fascinating two weeks, especially for people like yourself, who are students of the law.

CALLAN: Keeping the lawyers busy. Very busy.

ASHER: Paul Callan live for us, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Well, technology companies are leading the corporate fight against president Trump's travel ban. Ninety-seven companies, including Apple,

Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Netflix filed a court motion on Sunday. Here's what they're saying. They're basically saying that Donald Trump's

executive order, they're arguing that it violates the immigration laws and the constitution. I want to go straight now to our CNNMoney's Samuel

Burke, who joins us from London. So, Samuel, we have seen other lawsuits filed by some of these companies. What is different about this one? What

is different this time?

SAMUEL BURKE, CNNMONEY BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Zain, this time around, you have the biggest tech companies in the entire world,

almost all of them joining this lawsuit. And what they're saying here is they're not just tweeting or Facebooking or putting out a press release,

they are saying, these companies you're seeing right now on your screen, among them, that they believe that this executive order is


And perhaps even more important, they are saying that they believe this executive order and bad for business. Let me just read you one of the key

parts of this document, the amicus brief, the friend of the court document that these companies filed, where they say, "The order represents a

significant departure from the principles of fairness and predictable that have governed the immigration system of the U.S. for more than 50 years --

inflicting," they say, "significant harm on American business, innovation, and growth."

Long story short, I've spent a lot of time in Silicon Valley, you see all across these tech campuses, foreign-born workers, and they believe if they

can't have these foreign-born workers there, that they will have their businesses suffer, as a result. And the backdrop to all of this is they're

not just worried about the people from these seven countries, they're also worried that next could be their beloved H-1B visa system negatively


ASHER: And so, a lot of people, Samuel, people in the United States, believe though -- after sort of play devil's advocate -- a lot of people

believe when you hire these H-1B visa holders, when you hire foreigners from perhaps these seven countries, as you mentioned, you are essentially

taking away American jobs. Is that a fair and valid point?

BURKE: Listen, there are a lot of people, including in Silicon Valley, who want this system changed. But they were hoping for reforms that would

result in more tech companies getting more of these visas. When Trump was elected president, we heard and we continue to hear from many of these

companies that they believe Trump will be good for business. But what's happened, the whole situation with the executive order and those seven

majority Muslin countries has made the tech consult very nervous.

[16:15:00] They didn't see this coming and they're worried now that they could have an unexpected result with the H-1B visas. No matter what

targets for and against, they're now in a period of uncertainty with all these visa programs. And as you and I know from covering businesses, the

thing they hate the most is uncertainty.

ASHER: All businesses hate it. Samuel Burke, you are absolutely right, thank you so much. Have a great night my friend.

When you're running for president, you'll be put under intense scrutiny. The man standing as France's Republican candidate has found that out the

hard way. But Francois Fillon says despite the scandal that has engulfed him, he is quite simply, not backing down. That story, next.


ASHER: I'm going to talk to you now about European politics. One of the front-runners in France's presidential election says that he is going to

continue, he is going to fight on. That is despite being the target of a corruption investigation. Francois Fillon denies accusations in the French

media that his wife and children were paid hundreds of thousands of euros from public funds for jobs that they didn't really do. So-called phantom

jobs. I was speaking earlier to the republican party candidate said he wasn't guilty of any wrongdoing, but admitted that he had made an error of



FRANCOIS FILLION, FRENCH REPUBLICAN PARTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE (through interpreter): The first courage in politics is to recognize one's

mistakes. To collaborate with one's family in politics, that is a practice henceforth rejected by the French people. What was acceptable yesterday is

no longer accepted today. Working with my wife and my children, I gave priority to this collaboration in confidence, which is now a cause of

suspicion. I regret it, I deeply regret it, and I apologize to the French people.


ASHER: And there has been so many moving parts in terms of the French election and who's leading and the uncertainty around all of it is

certainly rattling investors. The yield on the French ten-year bond continues to rise. And the gap between borrowing costs in France and

Germany is wider than it has been for four years. Here's our Melissa Bell with more.


MELISSA BELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What we saw today was a Francois Fillon determined to get back into this French presidential race. The Republican

candidate, Zain, announced that he had nothing to hide. In fact, he said that he will be publishing the details of what he owns and what his wife

has earned, going so far as to make public his tax returns. Francois Fillon remains under the cloud of an inquiry that is looking into those

allegations about whether or not his wife and two of his grown-up children actually carried out the parliamentary work for which they were paid over a

number of years.

Until that inquiry becomes public, until it gets to its conclusion and its findings, that cloud is likely to remain. And yet, Francois Fillon

determined to battle on, determined to get back into a race that has largely forgotten him.

[16:20:00] Over the course of the weekend, we heard from Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate who launched her campaign. She's now leading the

polls. We heard also from the man who is now, largely thanks to Mr. Fillon, immediately behind her. Emmanuel Macron, the former socialist

government minister, who is now standing as a centrist independent.

We also heard from the far-left candidate, Jean-Luc Melenchon, who is making a speech as well in Lyon this weekend. The campaign of Francois

Fillon has been dented by these allegations. He's lost a substantial lead that he enjoyed in the polls. He'll now have to claw his way back and try

to convince the French that he really is the man to take on the far right's Marine Le Pen in the second round of the French presidential elections,



ASHER: Alexander Stubb is the former at that of Finland. He joins me live now from London. So, Alexander, thank you so much for being with us. When

you think about the wave of populism sweeping across Europe, you've got candidates like Marine Le Pen in France, basically talking about, if she

gets into power, she's going to have a referendum on leaving the EU. What sort of message do you think that sends to investors?

ALEXANDER STUBB, FORMER FINNISH PRIME MINISTER: I think investors nowadays have to follow politics and world politics probably much closer than they

would have in the past, because the market implications are always quite big. Then you have, obviously, the dilemma of expectation and outcome. A

lot of people thought and felt, including myself, that Brexit was going to be the Lehman Brothers moment in Europe. And then the markets haven't

really reacted. Same thing goes for Trump. So, it's very difficult to say, but all I would advise investors to do is try to understand the change

that we're seeing in world politics right now.

ASHER: So, when you look at events like Brexit, why has the U.K. economy and more broadly, the Eurozone economy, why have they been so resilient, do

you think?

STUBB: Well, I think you have to look at these things long-term and the kinds of implications that they have. A lot of our economies, obviously,

are cyclicals. And as you've probably seen today, there's been analysis that the European economies are on the return and on the bound and actually

doing a little bit better than the U.S. ones. It's very difficult. The markets react short-term, but we have to look at this long-term. What the

implications are, for instance, on a U.K. trade or what the implications are on U.S. trade.

ASHER: So, what is your long-term major concern for 2017? Are there any sort of major head winds on the horizon, when it comes to, for example, the

Italian banking crisis, the Greek financial crisis, or even Brexit when it comes to triggering Article 50?

STUBB: Well, you're probably going to have to split it into two. One is the election cycle, which you mentioned in your previous story. I think

the Dutch elections are very important. The French elections are probably the most important This year in terms of who gets elected. And of course,

the German elections. That's the normal European election cycle.

The other thing you want to look at in 2017 is we can probably not say that it's exactly the 1989 moment, but we will probably see a sequence of events

which will change the world. In 1989, it was the Berlin Wall that came down and eventually then led to the collapse of the Soviet Union and

basically, to a system of liberal democracy, free trade, and globalization. And now after Brexit and Trump, we really don't know where the world is

going. The jury is still out, but we are, right now, everyone, trying to figure out what's going on.

ASHER: You're right, the one constant in this world has certainly changed. I'm just curious, you, of course, were -- you are the former Finnish Prime

Minister. I'm curious, how concerned are you now about a situation in Europe compared to when you were in power?

STUBB: I was in government for eight years. And you end up seeing a lot of things and you sort of move from one crisis to another. When I started,

it was the war in Georgia, 2008, and the financial crisis. And then we moved on. I would argue that probably the most turbulent times that we saw

from a European perspective with a euro crisis, 2011, up to about 2014.

And then came the immigration and asylum crisis. And that was huge. We shouldn't underestimate that. But now we're seeing sort of tectonic plates

being shifted in world politics, where the undisputed superpower of the world, the United States, is basically giving the key away and saying,

listen, we're going to build some walls. We're going to basically protect and put America first.

So, this means that there's a power vacuum. And the question is, who is going to take it? Is it Europe? Is it China, is it Russia, or a

combination thereof? Or will the United States do a comeback? So, these things come and go, so that at the end of the day, we should remain cool,

calm, and collected, which in this world and day, I do admit, sometimes a little bit difficult.

ASHER: All right. Alexander Stubb live for us, thank you so much. Appreciate that.

[16:25:00] Well, French businesses are trying to persuade British bankers to hop the channel because of Brexit. I want to go live to our Nina dos

Santos who's following the story live from London. So, Nina, how strong is the rivalry, do you think, between London and Paris when it comes to wooing

top financial talent?

NINA DOS SANTOS, CNNMONEY EUROPE EDITOR: This is a rivalry that's been going on for centuries. In fact, most recently, Boris Johnson, the former

mayor of London, rekindled it by rolling out the red carpet towards French bankers who are fleeing, as he said, the high taxes back home in France.

And now we're seeing it go in the opposite direction. We had members of the senior French, business, and political elites arrive here in London for

the first in a series of charm offensives that they're going to be giving over the next few years, as the U.K. heads towards the Brexit-shaped exit

door of the EU.

What they're trying to do is convince the business community here in London, not so much to leave the U.K., but instead of planning on moving to

any other European capital, why not move to Paris? That was their pitch today. So, they're trying to steal a march on other European cities like

Dublin, Amsterdam and also Frankfort, keen to keep their eye on the crown jewels of the U.K. economy. The burgeoning financial sector, which makes

up a huge portion of this country's GDP.

Part of that pitch here, to 80 senior business figures today, Zain, was about how real estate, when it comes to office space, that's a lot cheaper

in France, particularly Paris. That there's access to a significant pool of very well-educated talent, and they're also going to be bring taxes

down, corporate taxes, and giving individuals who are moving to France some very significant tax breaks and holidays, as well.

This is what the current chairman of one of the biggest energy companies who's also chairing the lobbying group who's trying to promote Paris in the

world had to say, as well as the head of the asset management association, as both of these individuals pitched Paris to the people here.


GERARD MESTRALLET, CHAIRMAN, PARIS EUROPLACE: No, France is much more flexible than probably its image. In the labor market, for example, we

have had during this term, three laws improving the flexibility of the labor market. Of course, it's not enough. That's what we consider a

place. We have white papers, sent to all the candidates, to the presidential election, and of course, we are asking some additional

reforms, in terms of labor market flexibility, and also in terms of taxes.

JEAN-LOUIS LAURENS, AMBASSADOR, BRANCH ASSET MANAGEMENT INDUSTRY: Asset management is the most regulated industry in the world. You need to have a

passport. You need to have a passport for your products and also for your company. And if you need the EU single markets, you would lose these

passports. And use of this regulation does not even envision an external country who could benefit from the passports. So, all of this has to be

reinvented, but it's not there. So effectively, you need to address these issues now.


DOS SANTOS: Now, all of this is under the assumption, Zain, that the U.K. will be losing its right to passport financial transactions. As you just

heard those two individuals talk about before. Because it will be leaving the single market, as Theresa May has made clear. At present, we don't yet

know explicitly whether the U.K. will be losing that ability to passport financial transactions, but a lot of European capital, are trying to

position themselves in a good position at the moment at the front of the cue to be able to accept financial houses, if they decide to move, we

already know that HSBC is going to be moving 1,000 staff.

ASHER: So, Nina, we've seen how France is trying to woo top financial companies, but I am curious how does the uncertainty of the political

situation that is going on right now, how does that play into their decision-making process, do you think.

DOS SANTOS: I'm really glad you asked that, Zain, because it was a question they put to these four members of the political and business

elite, who are presenting their case to these 80 people today. I wasn't the only journalist who raised this. Basically, the point is that the

U.K., yes, it's a polarized place at the moment, because of Brexit. It's increasingly euro skeptic, but France has its own issues with that, as

well, with the rise of Marine Le Pen's far-right party, Front National Party, in the polls. She's made no secret of the fact that she doesn't

have a lot of time for the EU.

So, the question of -- politically, where France is going these days is something that will be resolved in about three months from now. So, you

can bet these individuals will probably be making another trip here to the U.K., because there were a lot of questions in the room about where

politically France was heading, and indeed, whether it's quite the center of Europe as they're pitching it today. So, that's a question that will be

answered after three months from here.

[16:30:00] But I should also mention that just as these individuals were taking to the stage in London to make their pitch about Paris, we also saw

the Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, decide to hold her own charm offensive to try to turn back some 300,000 French men and women who she wants to move

back to France. London has historically had a number of French people live here. The U.K.'s home to one of the biggest ex-pat French communities.

And the Mayor of Paris is keen to get a lot of those people back, just as at the same time, business leaders and also the president of the region of

France are also keen to get more finance houses and more foreign workers there, particularly from the financial services sector, Zain.

ASHER: So, the French is certainly turning the charm on. Nina dos Santos, live for us there. Appreciate that.

Political uncertainty in France and Germany pulled the European markets lower. Let's take a look. The Dax was one of the day's worst performers,

closing down 1.2 percent. A new poll in "The Build" newspaper, put the party of Chancellor Angela Merkel in second place with German voters,

behind the Social Democrats.

All right, well, 17 days into his presidency, Donald Trump hits out at concerns about his leadership style, as sources reveal in-fighting inside

the White House. That story, next.


ZAIN ASHER, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. I'm Zain Asher. Coming up on the next half hour of QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, the New Zealand trade minister

tells us what the TPP countries are planning next, now that the U.S. has pulled out. And history was made at last night's Super Bowl, both on and

off the field. We'll speak to the team behind the first-ever live commercial. First, these are the top headlines we are following for you at

this hour.

Israel's parliament has passed a law that declares around 3,000 housing units with built on private Palestinian land in the West Bank are legal.

Under international law, all settlements and outposts are illegal, because the West Bank is considered occupied territory. Israel disputes that

claim. The law is widely expected to be appealed to Israel's supreme court.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met his British counterpart, Theresa May, in London and he urged, quote, responsible nations to sanction

Iran. Last week, the U.S. slapped new sanctions on Iran after the country's latest ballistic missile test. Mr. Netanyahu says other

countries should follow the Trump administration's move.

And Downing Street says it's looking forward to welcoming U.S. President Donald Trump to the U.K. later on this year. The statement comes after the

speaker of Britain's House of Commons says he doesn't want Mr. Trump to speak to lawmakers there. John Bercow said an address by a foreign leader

to both houses of parliament is not an automatic right, but an earned honor.


JOHN BERCOW, SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS: I must say to the honorable gentlemen, to all who signed his early day motion, and to others with

strong views about this matter within either side of the argument that before the imposition of the migrant ban, I would, myself, have been

strongly opposed to an address by President Trump in Westminster Hall. After the imposition of the migrant ban by President Trump, I am even more

strongly opposed to an address by President Trump in Westminster Hall.


ASHER: A new deadline is approaching in the legal battle over U.S. president's travel ban. It's suspended for now, while an appeals court

takes up the case. The lawsuit filed early Monday accuses Donald Trump of unleashing chaos by imposing the ban. The justice department's response is

due in roughly around 90 minutes.

French presidential candidate Francois Fillon is vowing to fight on and is rejecting corruption allegations. This comes after an investigative

newspaper published new claims involving both his wife and his children. Fillon says he never before -- he's never before seen what he called

incredible violence against him.

South African rugby legend Joost Van Der Westhuzen died at the age of 45 after battling ALS.

[16:35:00] He is considered one of South Africa's finest rugby players. He helped to win the world cup back in 1995. His success was the inspiration

for the film "Invictus."

Donald Trump says he calls his own shots as commander in chief, even as Republicans in Washington say they're worried about his leadership style.

The president tweeted this morning that he makes his own decisions based on an accumulation of data. Let's go now to our White House correspondent,

Sara Murray. Sarah, just explain to us, is there a difference between the managerial style of Trump, the candidate versus Trump, the president? What

are your thoughts?

SARA MURRAY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: There has not been that big of a difference. I think that what we learned from Donald Trump during his

campaign is that he is fine operating in a tumultuous environment. He is fine when he has multiple, powerful figures around him that are engaged in

a turf war. That doesn't particularly bother him. He feels like he can be productive anyway. And he sort of carried that same dynamic over to the

White House.

Now, the one thing that did upset and irritate Donald Trump was the fact that his travel ban rollout was so rocky. He got hammered on television.

He got hammered by his Republican allies on Capitol Hill. He caught criticism from government agencies, who didn't know how to implement this

policy priority that Donald Trump campaigned on. And so, he went to his team and said, look, chief of staff, Reince Priebus, is going to be the guy

who is running point on these agenda items from now on. They have to go through him.

They have to be scheduled, they have to be signed off on. We need to start crossing some T's and dotting some I's, but I don't think there are a lot

of people who know Donald Trump well or who are close to him, or even Republicans in Washington, who have watched so many of these cycles play

out, who believe that suddenly, we're going to see a very disciplined and buttoned up White House.

ASHER: So, the bottom line is, if the style worked for him during the campaign, why on earth would you change it now? I do have to ask you,

though, we did get a CNN/ORC poll. I want to talk about Donald Trump's approval ratings. According to this poll, some 53 percent of Americans

disapprove of the way that Donald Trump is handling his job in the first 17 days. Does that bother him at all?

MURRAY: I think, absolutely, we know that he looks at the polls. He's been tweeting about how the polls are fake. But this is someone who is

acutely aware of his approval ratings, he always has been, he has been since he got in this race. And I think when you look at those numbers, the

thing to remember is that the people who voted for Donald Trump are probably largely happy by what they have seen these past couple of weeks.

He has delivered on a lot of the things he said he would do on the campaign trail in a very rapid fashion.

But for some other people, they look at his policy priorities, they either didn't agree with him during the campaign or didn't really believe that

Donald Trump would go through with things, like pausing the refugee program, or attempting to, and trying to build the wall, and they're

alarmed. So, it will be interesting to see over the next couple of weeks if Donald Trump can try to add a layer of calm to his White House, and if

more Americans are responsive to that and which direction those poll numbers move. You can bet that Donald Trump is going to be watching that.

ASHER: Absolutely. But just in terms of the Republicans in Congress, how concerned are they about, a, the reports of internal conflict within the

White House, but also, Donald Trump's leadership style as president?

MURRAY: I think that they are concerned with President Trump's leadership style, is that he's not necessarily keeping his allies in the loop. If you

want to know a really good way to alienate one of your Republican allies on Capitol Hill, it's to surprise them with a huge policy priority or

initiative like the travel ban, and have their phones be lit up all weekend long and all week long, from constituents who are angry or upset about it

or are trapped at airports or have family members who are trapped at airports as a result of it. That is not a good way to make friends on

Capitol Hill.

People who are Republicans, people who even think this is good policy, want to be looped in ahead of time. What are the priorities? Why are you doing

this now? What are the talking points for what this accomplishes? That's one of the steps a lot of people say the administration could take to

ensure that there aren't Republicans bashing Donald Trump on the hill day to day.

[16:40:00] And to the administration's credit, some Republicans have said, that communication has begun to improve, and that privately, Donald Trump's

aides admit, look, we underestimated keeping you guys in the loop, we'll do a better job of that going forward and we'll see if that remain true.

ASHER: Sara Murray live for us, thank you so much.

New Zealand's trade minister says the countries that wanted to be part of the TPP owe it to their citizens to explore a new trade deal without the

United States. It follows talks between Todd McClay and his Australian counterpart Steve Ciobo in Sydney. He told Richard Quest both countries

have much to gain.


TODD MCCLAY, TRADE MINISTER, NEW ZEALAND: New Zealand and Australia are very close trading partners. We have a similar view of the world. It was

an opportunity to take stock. So, certainly we think there's merit in the asset agreement for the pacific. But as far as TPP is concerned, we have

agreed to cautiously have a look and see what the merits are, or perhaps the agreement going ahead without the U.S., too early to say, but we're

going to have a conversation around it.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN, HOST: How realistic is it to have a TPP minus one? Bearing in mind some countries like Singapore have already said they don't

think it's a runner.

MCCLAY: It's certainly worth exploring. New Zealand stands in favor of trade liberalization. We can show our country has benefited significantly

from it. So, I think the TPP parties are willing to have a look, but really too early to say whether it can go ahead without the U.S.

QUEST: So, who's going to give the leadership for a TPP minus one? Countries like Singapore have already said, without the U.S., it's not

worth it.

MCCLAY: I think you're seeing a number of countries say, without the U.S., it can't go ahead in its current form. But ultimately all of the TPP

countries have shown they're in favor of trade agreements by signing up for TPP. So, I think we owe it to our citizens to see whether or not there is

still value in the agreement without the U.S. and perhaps look to leave the door open to the U.S. and others in some stage in the future to play a

greater role in regional trade.

QUEST: What's your time scale going to be on this, minister?

MCCLAY: There'll be a meeting of ministers the in the next month or so. I don't think this is something that needs to happen quickly, but certainly a

conversation we want to have around the world.


ASHER: A live advert, which seems to go horribly wrong, has got the advertising world buzzing. When we come back, did this Super Bowl

commercial go off with a bang? That story, next.


[16:45:00] ASHER: If you watched the Super Bowl last night, you will have noticed that politics took center stage as the theme of this year's Super

Bowl ads. Airbnb launched the campaign using the hashtag "we accept." basically, the message here was, it doesn't matter who you are, where

you're from, we all belong. And the ad, take a look at this for 84 lumber actually featured a giant wall. It even sparked calls by conservatives to

boycott the company who weren't happy, obviously, about this ad. Well, Snickers tried a new gimmick to make its message stand out. And that

gimmick was a live advert. A live commercial. The joke was, things don't go entirely as planned when you're hungry. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jeremiah! Time to make your good-byes.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, third quarter.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the third quarter! Jeremiah, you got us!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, Jeremiah, you got us.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jeremiah. You have saved our -- town.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just doing what's right, ma'am.


ASHER: Well, was it a hit or a miss? I'm joined now by the publicist, Vice President of Mars North America. She joins us here. So, thank you so

much for being with us. A live TV commercial. What could possibly go wrong? How much of a risk was this for your company?

BERTA DE PABLOS-BARBIER, MARS CHOCOLATE NORTH AMERICA: Well, we wanted to be innovative, we wanted to take some risk at the moment where everybody's

looking at our advertising.

ASHER: 111 million people tuned in.

PABLOS-BARBIER: That was it! And they tuned in there, but they also tuned before our Super Bowl ad, so we were already engaging with nearly 1 billion

consumers and fans that were talking about our ad.

ASHER: So, let's me talk to you about feedback. I looked on Twitter to see what people were saying about this Snickers commercial. And some

people said it just went so perfectly that people couldn't even tell that it was live.


ASHER: So, what are your thoughts on that?

PABLOS-BARBIER: So, we did rehearse a lot. So, I think the innovation was about going live, but it was also about generating the conversation. So,

after the Super Bowl ad, we actually getting the apology about the things that went bad. The whole set got destroyed. So, then we continue to

engage in that discussion.

ASHER: Can you talk to us about costs of putting on a live commercial during the Super Bowl? I mean, how much does that set a company back?

PABLOS-BARBIER: Well, the important thing is that it was a great collaboration between everybody. So, the main different thing, wherever

you have a new storyboard, a tape ad, you see exactly what is on the storyboard. With this thing, we were actually working to the last minute.

Because live everything can change. We are live now, we don't know what is going to happen now. We don't know.

ASHER: Live television. Absolutely right.

PABLOS-BARBIER: So, I think it was the same thing you can improvise and you can collaborate, and so you can generate a lot of conversations. Our

fans were interacting with us. They were participating into how do you want to call the saloon. What do you want him to wear? So, it generated

that engagement and we had about 150 million engagements during the Super Bowl ad, as well as people were watching.

ASHER: Is that how you decide, whether or not a commercial like that has been successful? Is it all about the number of people engaging and talking

to you online, on Twitter, that kind of thing, or is it about, what people actually thought of the ad?

PABLOS-BARBIER: It's actually, our strategy was always to leverage the maximum time possible. The Super Bowl game is four hours. We wanted to

make sure we were engaging with them before, and we managed to do that. That we were actually during the game, but also after the game. So, we had

what we called our 30, 30, 30 approach. We have a 30-second ad for 30 hours of live streaming. And 30 days of talk.

ASHER: So, talk to us about, and we just saw a snippet of the commercial. I just played like 45 seconds of it for our viewers. But talk to us about

the concept.

PABLOS-BARBIER: Yes, so Snickers has a very successful campaign. We've been running it for about seven years. The concept is, you are not you

when you are hungry. So, we wanted to make sure we use the same campaign, which is what fans like about the brand, and leverage in a completely

different way. We leverage with a lot of innovation and we keep pushing the bar into how the brand communicated with our fans and consumers.

ASHER: But in terms of people actually -- obviously, you had a sign that came up at the top, saying, "live," but in terms of people actually knowing

it was a live commercial without necessarily being told, you did mention the score, for example. And the score, at that point, was 21-3.

Obviously, it changed a lot. It changed dramatically. But at that point, it was like 21-3. How important is it or was it for you that people

actually knew that it was live?

PABLOS-BARBIER: Well, it was the key. If you look about how consumers are consuming content, and they want more authentic content. So, we're always

wondering, what is the best way of being authentic. And we say, what better way of being authentic than being real.

[16:50:00] So, that's exactly what we tried to do. And we achieved. We don't only achieve it during the ad, but as I was mentioning, we had

actually 36 hours of live streaming. So, the engagement started before, 36 hours, 30 seconds, and it continued to increase today. So, today we posted

the apology. So, Adam Driver is very sorry for walking into Snickers, so he's apologizing and we continue the conversation with our customers.

ASHER: It is all about getting people talking. When you have 111 million people watching, you've got to bet people talking. Berta, thank you so

much for being with us. Appreciate that.

PABLOS-BARBIER: It was lovely being here. Thank you.

ASHER: Alan Greenspan says he is living proof that the American dream is alive and well. We will hear from the former chair of the U.S. Federal

Reserve, coming up in just a couple of minutes after this break.


ASHER: As I'm sure you'll remember, Donald Trump told voters throughout last year's election campaign that he was the man to restore the mythical

American dream. In a special series of interviews, CNN has been asking major figures in both finance and business, talking to them about what the

American dream actually means to them. First up, we have Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chair. He speaks to our Cristina Alesci. Take

a listen.


ALAN GREENSPAN, FORMER FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIR: I haven't been back to my neighborhood in, I would say, 50 years. And the reason I don't want to go

back is because of -- I'm aware of the selective memory and I don't want to go back and say, oh, this place is awful. My parents are divorced, so I

live with my mother. My mother was basically working all the time. I did see my father periodically. But he was an absent father, in that sense.

CRISTINA ALESCI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: What was it about that neighborhood that really characterized its people?

GREENSPAN: Well, they were all hard-working. There was no real backup and so everybody worked away the best they could. They had to work or they'd


ALESCI: George Washington high school was a very competitive school.

GREENSPAN: I assumed so, but I didn't know it at the time. I was a bright kid. I didn't always do my homework, but in things I could do well, I like

to do. I was good at math. I didn't realize that I was a good student until I went to college. Now, if you would ask me, when I was in high

school, would I end up with a bachelor's degree, summa cum laude, I would say the chances were zero.

ALESCI: Did you ever feel professionally disadvantaged or judged because of where you came from? Did you ever feel that?

GREENSPAN: Oh, of course. But, the strange thing is that, you know, I thought I wouldn't be let into the upper echelons of American society but

it wasn't true. I mean I ended up in all the best clubs in my 20s. And I must say, looking back in retrospect, I kept taking the right path all the

time and ending up where I never expected to be.

[16:55:00] ALESCI: How did you feel when people came at you, saying that the fed was responsible for the housing bubble?

GREENSPAN: Do I like it? Of course, not. But since I know they are wrong, it does tilt the evidence of how I feel. Part of the issue is that,

well, they're not terribly smart, because they don't understand what they're doing. And the fact that other people have misunderstandings of

how the world works, I'm not going to fret about that. It's not my job. But what's remarkable about our system is that it works.

ALESCI: So, do you feel like you've achieved the American dream?

GREENSPAN: Oh, of course. I mean, I look back and I say, how in the world did I get here?


ASHER: And that was QUEST MEANS BUSINESS. I'm Zain Asher. I'll see you tomorrow, same time, same place.