Return to Transcripts main page
WORLD RIGHT NOW WITH HALA GORANI
Hammond says he regrets calling EU negotiators "enemy"; Odinga speaks after withdrawing from election rerun; Court reinstates corruption charge ruling against Zuma; Trump: US will not recertify Iran Nuclear Deal; Vanity Fair: Advisers concerned Trump "unraveling"; Using history as a guide to fight slavery today; More women allege abuse by Harvey Weinstein. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired October 13, 2017 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ROBYN CURNOW, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm Robyn Curnow sitting in for my colleague and friend,
Hala Gorani, tonight. Welcome.
So, we, of course, begin with breaking news this hour. Donald Trump has just delta blows the Iran nuclear agreement in a major, major break with
America's allies. The U.S. president is refusing to recertify the deal essentially leaving it to Congress to attach tough new conditions.
Now Mr. Trump said a short time ago that the United States will never allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons accusing the country of being the leading
state sponsor of terrorism.
While he didn't tear up the deal entirely as he's threatened in the past, he did leave the door open for further action.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: In the event we are not able to reach a solution, working with Congress and our allies,
then the agreement will be terminated. It is under continuous review and our participation can be canceled by me as president at any time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CURNOW: Iran's president is blasting Mr. Trump's decision and he says his speech was full of, quote, "baseless accusations." Hassan Rouhani spoke
just a few moments ago saying, "Mr. Trump has a fundamental misunderstanding of how the agreement works."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HASSAN ROUHANI, IRANIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): This is an international multilateral deal that has been ratified by the U.N. Security
Council. It is a U.N. document. Is it possible for a president to unilaterally decertify this important international deal? Apparently, he
is not in the know.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CURNOW: We are covering this reaction, this story from all angles, in the United States and Iran and beyond. Our senior international correspondent,
Fred Pleitgen, is live tonight in Tehran.
We are also joined my senior diplomatic correspondent, Michelle Kosinski, who is at the State Department. Michelle to you in just a moment. Fred,
you there on the ground. Hassan Rouhani just made himself very clear.
FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Certainly, made himself very clear and I think one of the first interesting points about
this is how quickly Hassan Rouhani came out after President Trump's speech and just absolutely blasted the U.S. president here on national Iranian
And on top of the fact that he was saying that all of President Trump's claims were baseless. He also went on to say and I think this was very
strong where he said tonight show that President Trump is against the Iranian people.
Because keep in mind one of things that President Trump kept saying in his speech, he kept talking about the Iranian people being, quote, "oppressed"
by the either government that they have, but it's certainly something that Hassan Rouhani took issue with.
But I think the most important thing that I heard in Hassan Rouhani's speech was the fact that he was defending the Revolutionary Guard because
that's something that he has not done in the past.
If you look back just a couple months in the election campaign that Hassan Rouhani ran here to get a second term in office, he had like heavily
criticized the Revolutionary Guards also for interfering with the nuclear agreement as well, he said.
At one point, he said that launching these missiles and that's something that's very bad for the nuclear agreement and so now he came out and
defended the Revolutionary Guards showing that both the moderates and the conservatives, the hardliners at this point in time seemed to be uniting
rather than falling apart the way that President Trump thought that they might.
So, if President Trump was trying to disunite the powerbase here in Iran, it certainly looks as though at least initially that's not something that
happening, but certainly a lot of very interesting points in Hassan Rouhani's speech, but also a lot of very blatant clear anger towards
President Trump tonight.
CURNOW: And also a lot of uncertainty. Stay with us, Fred.
Michelle, there at the State Department. The spokeswoman is actually spinning this announcement differently to the president. She just tweeted
this, "Don't be fooled," she wrote, "by TV headlines. We are staying in the #Irannucleardeal while we broaden our approach to account for Iran's
terror activity." I mean, is this mix messages here?
MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT: I think -- this is so interesting. I just feel like a book could be written out all the
angles and sub-angles that have emerged over the last week leading up to this and then the possibilities from there.
I mean, you see the State Department going along with this plan at times seeming extremely reluctant. The secretary of state feels like he has to
say, well, yes, we want to see Iran's other activities outside the nuclear realm stopped.
[15:20:05] We want to see, you know, you more control over that, but the question has always been, we'll do it outside the nuclear deal. Why do
have to link those two together when they were always kept separate for the reason of getting the deal.
So, Tillerson, you have to think would rather tackle these issues well outside the deal because the president feels for some reason he either
wants to speak directly to his base or he wants to keep something of the promises that he made repeatedly or stick to that constant criticism of the
Iran nuclear deal.
He wants to wrap this in together. So, yes, the State Department has to be united in that, but again, you hear them sort of saying opposite. I mean,
yesterday, there was a conference call, Secretary of State Tillerson had a lot to say.
But what he wanted to emphasize over and over again was almost as reassurance that we are still in the Iran nuclear deal. We are not trying
to change it. We are not trying to scrap it. We are still in the deal.
But then today, of course, if you're the president speaking to his ability to leave the deal when he deems that necessary.
CURNOW: And decertifying it anyway. The Treasury declaring, Fred, today, the Revolutionary Guard as a terror group. When you were talking about how
the hardliners and moderates in many ways are being united by this. Is it going to some kind of blowback expected from that added development today?
PLEITGEN: Well, I certainly think that there could be some blowback from that added development, Robyn, especially since that something that
politicians here in Iran have said, if you look at the head of Iran's atomic energy agency, also, someone with the past has been quite critical
of the Revolutionary Guard.
He came and he said that if they were declared a terrorist organization by the United States that that would almost be a declaration of war towards
Iran because, of course, the powerbase here in Iran does see the Revolutionary Guard as part of the defense structure here in this country
and certainly a very important one.
So, while there is some criticism at this point time it really appears as though those who are power here really are moving together. So, there
could be blowback very difficult to see what that would be at this point.
Obviously, if you look militarily in a direct confrontation, it certainly would be very little to gain from the Iranians, from such a confrontation,
but certainly the Iranians can cause a lot of trouble for the United States in places like Syria, certainly in places like Iraq as well.
I think the Iranians are also very well aware of the fact that they can do that so there's could certainly be some blowback as far as that
announcement is concerned and you can really feel that while the part about decertifying the nuclear agreement is certainly something that has caused a
lot of anger here.
The things that President Trump said about the Revolutionary Guards that is really something that has caused a lot of effect here in this country and
we can see that already.
CURNOW: The view there from Tehran, Fred Pleitgen, so much and Michelle Kosinski at the State Department, thanks to you both.
OK, so now President Trump is essentially leaving it up to Congress to figure out the way forward with Iran. Lawmakers we know now have 60 days
to come up with a strategy, but neither Republicans nor Democrats are showing any sign that they really actually wanted to take up another
If Congress reimposes sanctions then Iran will likely walk away from the nuclear deal. The White House wants lawmakers to adopt new parameters for
imposing sanctions if Iran violates the agreement.
So, let's get a global view of all of this to try and unpack it all, Reza Marashi, joins us now from our Washington bureau for that. He's research
director at the National Iranian-American Council. Thanks so much for joining us.
You just heard Fred's perspective from Iran there, how does this play to the hardliners what we've heard in the past few hours?
REZA MARASHI, NATIONAL IRANIAN AMERICAN COUNCIL: Well, certainly empowers them to a certain degree. I mean, hardliners in Iran have been saying for
decades that America can't be trusted. There's another school of thought, I would say the predominant school of thought inside Iran's foreign policy
and national security establishment that that is not about trust.
It's about crafting diplomatic agreements that are predicated on verifiable assurances which the Iran nuclear deal was. So, if anything else is going
to unify hardliners, pragmatists, reformists against what they perceived to be as American aggression.
CURNOW: And what does this mean? We've seen all America's allies, its fellow Security Council members, a lot of the international community
saying first of all, they don't agree with this, but they'd also trying to put on a brave face I supposed saying we are going to continue. We are
going to try and -- you know, it is still stands for us this deal. Can they go on as normal?
MARASHI: If not outside the realm of possibility, but it's going require especially the European Union and individual countries within the European
Union to grow a backbone and stand up to the United States, which is not something that is --
CURNOW: So, what do they need to do?
MARASHI: Well, they're going to have to resist attempting to being strong- armed into adhering to unilateral American sanctions that adversely affect not only the Iran nuclear deal, but their sovereign business interests vis-
[15:25:08] Because Iran is complying by the deal, by all verifiable standards, we've known that for quite some time now, but European Union
does not want this kind of transatlantic rift and that's precisely why the Trump administration is pursuing this course of action is trying to force
Europe to choose.
CURNOW: What is -- as people have suggested that this is really not about Iran or even American allies, or even Mr. Trump trying to forge a new
foreign policy. That this is really just about Mr. Trump trying to dismantle Mr. Obama's legacy, his predecessor's legacy. It's still though
has implications way beyond these domestic considerations?
MARASHI: Precisely. I mean, Donald Trump has a track record in eight short months, nine short months of trying to undo President Obama's
signature foreign policy achievement and signature domestic policy achievement with regards to healthcare.
But it's safe to say that Donald Trump knows little if anything about the actual details of the Iran nuclear deal and it's very telling that his
secretary of defense, his national security advisor, the intelligence community, his top military advisers all told him that it's in the American
national interest to stay in the deal.
So, what we've really seen as a result of Trump decertifying Iran today is Trump placing his ego ahead of American national security.
CURNOW: So, what are the implications then for the world? I mean, if we are looking at possible scenarios, how is this potentially going to play
out? What are we looking at here?
MARASHI: Well, we are looking at scenario where one of two things is going to happen either the international community meaning Europe, Russia, China,
and even other countries that are not signatories to this agreement are going to back down and capitulate to frankly unreasonable American demands
as they exist today or the Trump administration is going to have to back down and soften its position and meet up with the rest of the world in
acknowledging that this deal is actually working.
Now we don't know which one is going to play out, but there's really no middle area to craft because the JCPOA, the Iran nuclear deal cannot be
renegotiated. The European Union and the rest of signatories aren't interested in renegotiating.
So, we really put America in a precarious position today and really risk the kind of isolation that we've not seen certainly in mine or your
CURNOW: No. Certainly not. It sort of brings back memories of sort of pre-war isolation and it's a whole different world anyway. So, this is
uncharted territory. Reza, thanks so much for your perspective and your analysis. Thanks for joining us.
MARASHI: Thank you.
CURNOW: OK. So, still ahead, we will bring you some on the other news making headlines around the world, including a hasty retreat, Britain's
chancellor back tracks quickly after calling E.U. negotiators, quote, "The enemy."
ROBYN CURNOW, CNN HOST, THE WORLD RIGHT NOW: I'm Robyn Curnow. You're watching CNN. And when it comes to complex negotiations, words matter.
And there are few negotiations more complex than Brexit.
In just the past few hours, Britain's chancellor has had to make a very quick backtrack after calling the European Union the enemy. Have a listen
to what Philip Hammond had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PHILIP HAMMOND, BRITISH CHANCELLOR: The enemy, the opponents are out there on the other side of the table. Those are the people that we have to
negotiate with, we have to negotiate hard to get the very best deal for Britain.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CURNOW: So, not long after he said that, he sent out a tweet saying, "In an interview today, I was making the point that we are united at home. I
regret I used a poor choice of words. We will work with our friends and partners in the EU on a mutually beneficial Brexit deal."
Let's get more on all of this. I'm joined by economist Vicky Pryce. She's in London. Oh dear, oh dear, he certainly backtracked very quickly. One
word, calling the Europeans enemy has not gone down at all well.
VICKY PRYCE, ECONOMIST: Oh, that's absolutely true. But, of course, it needs to be thought in the context of what's been going on within the
Conservative Party itself.
I think what he was trying to say is that we're not fighting amongst each other, even though, of course. we know that they're, we're really all
focusing and are united in dealing with Europe and things actually are not going particularly well there at this stage.
And, of course, using that word wasn't very clever perhaps, but I think he was trying to emphasize that they are at least trying to show the world
that we're united over here and really have to be dealing with is the people over there with whom we're negotiating instead of backstabbing back
CURNOW: So, in many ways, you say the sentiment that he's trying to express was correct. That said, the fact that he's been jumped on so
vociferously for the use of this word also indicates the kind of divisions within the Conservative Party.
Do we know there have been calls to fire him? And there have been fire Boris Johnson. Of course, we know Theresa May was also under threat
perhaps a weekend ago, last weekend. I mean, everybody seems to be trying to keep their heads.
PRYCE: Well, I'm afraid this is absolutely true. And that must be looked at and viewed by the Europeans with, on the one hand, great amusement, on
the other, quite a lot of concern about where we're going to get to in the negotiations that are happening right now and who to trust in terms of
having the mandate to negotiate with them.
And what's been going on, of course, is that the various factions have been asking for various heads to roll. And more recently, it has been indeed
the Chancellor who has been under attack because he's perceived to be rather pessimistic about the outcome of any negotiations, particularly
pessimistic about the type of Britain we will have in the future in terms of growth and so on.
He is due to give a budget. In other words, a very, very important occasion next month. And, obviously, he's trying to say that he hasn't got
very much money to spend on ensuring that the economy continues to grow and he's been attacked for that as well.
It is a very, very tricky situation we're finding ourselves in right now.
CURNOW: Where are we with the situation? I mean, in terms of Brexit. I mean, I think there's a deadlock. I mean, and also that they are running
out of time.
PRYCE: What is going on, of course, is that the Europeans hold all the cards. If they see the UK not being united, of course, that's even better
for them from that point of view.
But what is happening is, of course, that we haven't really moved an awful lot at all. There are still big, big issues to negotiate in terms of the
divorce bill. There's still no agreement really in relation to the EU citizens who are here. There are still huge chunks of what the Europeans
had asked for that haven't been addressed by the Brits.
And then, of course, there's still Northern Ireland.
What has happened at least now is that the Europeans have said that we may have - it's not completely guaranteed, but certainly a draft suggests they
may start talking between themselves in relation to what type of trade deal they may want to see or at least what sort of discussions they may want to
have with the UK.
But we're still a long, long way from really starting to talk seriously about what the post-Brexit world might look like.
CURNOW: Vicky Pryce, thank you so much for joining us.
OK. Let's move on now to Kenya, where the country there lurches from one political crisis to another. Opposition leader Raila Odinga is now
speaking out after he dramatically quit a presidential rerun.
But, but he says he would run again if his basic requirements are met on how the election is held. He was speaking to our very own Nima Elbagir.
NIMA ELBAGIR, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The Kenyan Supreme Court's decision to annul the results of the previous election, it was seen
as not just a seminal moment in Kenya's election history, but in Africa's election history.
[15:35:07] But you have now chosen to withdraw in spite of that. Why?
RAILA ODINGA, OPPOSITION LEADER OF KENYA: Well, it is true that this is a historic decision not just in Africa, but in the world. This is the only
fourth time that presidential elections have been annulled by a court.
And everybody was very optimistic. Kenyans and Africans celebrated this victory, ushering a new dawn on our continent. Unfortunately, events
subsequent to that nullification have not inspired any confidence that the repeat is going to be very different.
ELBAGIR: If your basic requirements are met, you would stand again in an election?
ODINGA: Certainly, yes. If our requirements are met, we will stand for elections. We are ready - I was ready yesterday because we are the people.
So, why should I fear going for an election? I know that I won. I know that I will win again. So, I was ready yesterday for an election.
But the conditions must be right that we do not have a repeat of what happened last time.
ELBAGIR: Isn't there a doozy perhaps to stand aside if it saves Kenyans from the violence that we saw post the 2007 elections?
ODINGA: It is very unfortunate that it has to come to this. This is a government that is trigger happy, that is willing to slaughter its own
people to protect itself in power.
ELBAGIR: But what about your critics who say that your calls for your supporters to go out on the streets every day sets the stage for these kind
of confrontations with the police?
ODINGA: Our constitution human rights section grants every Kenyan a right to assemble, to strike, to picket and to demonstrate.
ELBAGIR: The worry that so many are talking about is that this will further inflame a country that is currently pretty deeply divided along
those community lines?
ODINGA: I don't think this is a community affair. I think Kenyans are fairly united. There you can call it, it's an ideological divide, but I
don't think that you can call this an ethnic issue.
The division between us are basically those who want to support a retention of the status quo and those who want to change our country.
CURNOW: Raila Odinga there speaking to Nima Elbagir.
And now to a corruption scandal in South Africa that has trailed President Jacob Zuma for years and years now. Now the country's constitutional court
has upheld a ruling to reinstate corruption charges against the president.
That means he can now face a staggering 783 charges over payments made to him and his family. Zuma says he's appointed with a decision, but that it
was anticipated. We'll keep you posted on that.
And in the past couple of hours, Donald Trump has done something that risks driving a wedge between the US and some of its greatest allies. The UK,
Germany and France have all announced they stand committed to Iran's nuclear deal despite the US president saying he will no longer certify it.
Iran's leader has also responded, inviting Mr. Trump to study the history books. But the man himself was steadfast when he made his commitment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Based on the factual record I have put forward, I am announcing today that we cannot and will not make
this certification. We will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion is more violence, more terror and the very real threat of Iran's
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CURNOW: So, for more on this and some of Donald Trump's wider shifts on the international stage, let's bring in CNN's global affairs analyst David
David, good to see you. Good to speak to you. Happy Friday. So, what we're seeing here is that the US president won't certify the deal. He
won't unravel it for now.
This unleashes various scenarios. How do you think this is all going to play out?
DAVID ROHDE, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I think the most likely scenario is that - he's essentially handed this over to Congress.
This is the latest in a variety of issues where Trump makes a bold pronouncement, but the details and the concrete steps about what should be
done - healthcare reform, tax reform - he leaves that up to Congress.
So, what will Congress do? Will Congress reimpose sanctions on Iran? That would abrogate this deal. I'm sorry?
CURNOW: How likely is that?
[15:40:05] ROHDE: I don't think it will happen. There's some talk in Congress of setting up some conditions where sanctions would automatically
be reimposed, let's say, if the US determines that Iran is within one year of making a nuclear weapon.
But I don't think there are enough votes in Congress at this point to reimpose sanctions, Congressionally-mandated sanctions and abrogate the
CURNOW: So then, what happens in 60 days.
ROHDE: I think very little. I think this is Donald Trump sort of scoring domestic political points. He ran against this deal, declared it the worst
deal in the world, but I think - but he doesn't have a long-term strategy.
So, it's a question of how Iran responds. This does create a dangerous situation, but there is a chance that all sides sit back.
As you mentioned earlier, European governments and other governments, China and Russia, support this agreement.
CURNOW: I mean, they've come out in their support. They've voiced support for it before this announcement. So, are they going to then just park what
the president's just said and try and go on regardless. This is Iran as well. And can they do that?
I know I've asked everyone I've spoken to today, but is there a sense that they can kind of ignore what they heard today just on the ground and
practically keep on as they've been going on for the last year or so?
ROHDE: From here, I think European governments can. There is already large business investments going on between European companies in Iran.
The question is what does the Iranian government do. Does this kind of rhetoric force the Iranian hardliners to somehow push back against Trump?
All politics are local. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the hardliners there can't sort of feel to be publicly humiliated. So, it's unclear to
me. I mean, they could respond rhetorically. Will they take some other provocative action? Something in the Gulf with an American ship, I don't
But this is a sort of dangerous dynamic that Trump is starting and it is not clear where it will lead. And I just - again, I don't see a clear
strategy from Trump himself or even a really decisive move here. Again, this does not abrogate Iran nuclear.
CURNOW: We're trying to gain this out. And it's unclear whether he's gained this out.
With that in mind, this is not the only withdrawal we've seen this week from this administration. I mean, I've been trying to count it because
it's Friday afternoon here in the US and it's been a pretty big week when it comes to the US president at least pulling back from a number of
You have this nuclear deal. We talk about the healthcare act. We've also had the EPA, the environmental department, here removing caps on carbon
emissions, which is against the spirit of the Paris climate change agreement. Pushing back on NAFTA with Mr. Trudeau, the Canadian leader.
He has also promised to withdraw federal emergency aid from Puerto Rico prematurely.
In many ways, we're trying to assess the foreign policy are just the policies of this government and this administration, this White House.
It's not just isolationist. It's dangerous as many observers have said. And some of them have said that from within the administration.
ROHDE: Yes, it's destabilizing. Another example would be the withdrawal from UNESCO.
CURNOW: It is. I forgot that one. And that's just this week.
ROHDE: Yes, yes. It's scoring short-term domestic political points that rallied his base and that has tremendous impact internationally, it has
economic impacts in the US, it will have huge impact on healthcare here.
So, that's what I question. There is no strategy. And there's no detailed plan. Again, he promises a huge tax cut, but doesn't actually present a
He's going to contain Iran; again, there's no detailed plan for how he's going to do that. He drops the problem as he often does with the US
CURNOW: So, if you say there's no plan, I mean, is there also - if I play devil's advocate here - is there some sort of brilliant incoherence to
this, some strategic chaos theory playing out, or are these the decisions of a man "unraveling" as "Vanity Fair" suggested this week.
I mean, in a quite stark article, with sources from within the administration and the Oval Office, this was an article that spoke to
Trump's increasingly unfocused and consumed by dark moods. We read words about unstable, losing step to describe Mr. Trump.
It was quite stark. And this came from Gabriel Sherman, who is a man with a lot of contacts in this administration.
There are some serious questions being asked, aren't there?
ROHDE: There are serious questions being asked. But I think, in the end, any attempt to remove Trump is going to depend on Republicans in congress.
And, at this point, in this very deeply divided American political scene, Republicans still support Donald Trump.
They have shown infinite patience. They hope to get their agenda through Congress. So, I think it's wishful thinking to believe that 25th Amendment
or somehow he's going to be declared incompetent.
[15:45:06] Democrats have to focus on the next elections in 2018 when the House - if they win the House, they could impeach him. But there's
concerns, but if you see it from a political perspective, he's keeping electoral promise after electoral promise.
Many of these promises were wildly inaccurate. Build a wall to stop immigration, that actually isn't happening. Illegal immigration is flat in
the United States. But this is what he's doing. He is keeping these promises.
Again, many experts say, like Iran deal, most countries believe it's working and Iran is abiding by it. Trump is saying no.
CURNOW: It was a campaign promise. Thank you so very much, David Rohde. Appreciate it.
ROHDE: Thank you.
CURNOW: Still ahead here on CNN. Fighting modern day slavery by revisiting the past. We take a history lesson that goes far beyond the
CURNOW: Sometimes the fight against modern day slavery can mean looking at the past for insights on to how to bring it to an end. As Lynda Kinkade
shows us, some students are learning lessons from the great emancipator himself, US President Abraham Lincoln.
LYNDA KINKADE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's summer, but this is no break.
The subject matter, ending slavery. Now in its fifth year, the Students Opposing Slavery summit or SOS provides teenagers actionable skills for how
to start human rights campaigns in their own country.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What I would do in order to bring it back to my school, probably like start a club or something. And we can spread
awareness to my school because I'm sure a lot of other students in my school don't know about these problems.
KINKADE: The setting for the summit is equally impressive. Known as Lincoln's Cottage, this is where President Abraham Lincoln spent his
summers when he needed a break from the White House.
(on-camera): And even more significantly, this is the place where President Lincoln drafted the Emancipation Proclamation, a landmark piece
of legislation setting the path to free slaves.
ERIN CARLSON MAST, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LINCOLN'S COTTAGE: Lincoln wants to declare that all slaves everywhere shall be free.
KINKADE (voice-over): Erin Carlson Mast is the executive director at Lincoln's Cottage. In preserving, this cottage there was an inclination to
bring Lincoln's legacy into modern times.
MAST: Lincoln said that the fight for freedom was unfinished. And so, we see doing things like making sure we have slavery free rugs part of
carrying out that unfinished work.
KINKADE: As this summit was taking place, in another part of D.C., US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson outlined the global response to human
trafficking with the release of the US government's "Trafficking in Persons" report. It ranks every country's response to the problem.
[15:50:15] REX TILLERSON, US SECRETARY OF STATE: It is our hope that the 21st century will be the last century of human trafficking and that's what
we are all committed to.
KINKADE: And perhaps nowhere where will you find more commitment to the future of freedom than with this makeshift group of idealistic classmates
gathered in an historic cottage.
Lynda Kinkade, CNN, Washington.
CURNOW: Still to come here at CNN, another woman accuses Hollywood mega- producer Harvey Weinstein of abuse. Now, he's facing legal pressure from both sides of the Atlantic. More on that next.
CURNOW: On to Hollywood and the growing number of women coming forward to accuse Harvey Weinstein of abuse. The list just keeps on getting longer as
the extent of Weinstein's alleged harassment unfolds in front of the world.
The movie mogul faces police investigations in both London and New York. Actress Rose McGowan is the fourth woman to claim she was raped by
Weinstein. He denies any allegation of non-consensual sex.
Well, for more on all of this, let's bring in Brian Stelter. He's in New York.
Hi, Brian. Rose McGowan alleges Harvey Weinstein rapes her. What's clear is she says she was silenced for years, but she's not staying quiet now.
BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: That's right. She's using Twitter to share the story that she felt she was not allowed or able to
share for 20 years.
This dates back to 1997. McGowan received a settlement payment from Weinstein stemming from an incident in 1997. She has remained quiet about
it ever since because there's usually a nondisclosure agreement attached, basically people paid to be silent in cases like this.
So, earlier this year, McGowan talked to Ronan Farrow. Ronan Farrow was working on a piece for "NBC". She said on camera that Weinstein raped her.
However, months later, she received a legal threat from Weinstein. She called up Ronan Farrow. She said please don't show that, please don't
broadcast it. And, eventually, Farrow kept her name out of the story.
But, now in the wake of these Weinstein stories, these investigations, she feels able now to express it for the first time. She's saying on Twitter
that Weinstein raped her. His representative continues to deny all allegations of non-consensual sex.
CURNOW: I mean, she's even got a hashtag #RosesArmy and her outcry in bold caps sometimes on Twitter also got her suspended. Now, Twitter has an
explanation for that.
But either way, you're seeing women boycotting Twitter. I mean, how much momentum is there now and where and how does this outrage get channeled,
particularly when it comes to social media?
STELTER: McGowan certainly is the leader - is one of the leaders of this sort of informal movement, this effort to support other women who have been
harassed or assaulted, who want to come forward.
We've seen such a sea change in the United States. Even just a few years ago, with regards to women feeling they can come forward without being
shamed, without being re-victimized, without being sued in some cases by accusers.
So, McGowan, one of those leaders. She's left Twitter for this boycott effort, but she'll be back tomorrow, continuing now to challenge the
Weinstein Company board.
This company is dissolving before our very eyes. Partners are pulling projects out. People are thinking about resigning. This board is trying
to figure out a way to preserve the company.
But without Harvey Weinstein, there may be no Weinstein Company movie studio anymore.
[15:55:13] CURNOW: Yes. Even if they are trying to change their name. And, I mean, when we look at comments made online, I thought Ryan Gosling's
was also interesting. And he is one of quite a few male stars that have put out some sort of public statement on their profile.
And he used the words, "I have worked with Harvey Weinstein and I'm deeply disappointed in myself for being so oblivious to these devastating
experiences of sexual harassment abuse. He is emblematic of a systematic problem and men should stand with women and work together."
Do you think that has also been - something that has been an eye-opener, all of this, for many of Hollywood's biggest male stars? And how much
pressure is on them sometimes to do a little bit more, open their eyes a little bit more?
STELTER: Open their eyes is a key phrase. I think a lot of folks either looked the other way or were happy to be kind of blind to what was going on
between Weinstein and these women.
I interviewed a male assistant of Weinstein's who said, we knew he cheated on his wife, we knew he used his job at the Weinstein Company to meet young
women. We didn't know that there could be something criminal going on. And that isn't the distinction I think some of these male stars are getting
Now, you can make the case that folks just didn't want to know, so they turned the other way, they tried to be blind to it. And I'm hearing guilt
from both male and female staffers of the company about that, that people feel they should have paid more attention, they should have looked more
That, of course, is just second guessing at this point. But maybe it means that if there's someone like Weinstein in the future, apparently, with this
kind of predatory behavior, that it won't go covered up for so long.
CURNOW: Yes. There's certainly a lot of soul-searching about complicity, whether there's even criminal complicity or even just a sense of enabling.
And I think a big question also is about the responsibility on agents, for example, sending these young models and actresses to hotel rooms alone with
A lot of soul-searching, hopefully, being done.
Brian Stelter, thanks so much.
CURNOW: Well, this has been the world right now. I'm Robyn Curnow, thank you so much for watching and joining us here at CNN. And "Quest Means
Business" is next.