Return to Transcripts main page
HALA GORANI TONIGHT
Dow Up 100 Plus Points After A 500-Point Fall; China Hits Back At U.S. With New Tariffs Proposal; The Politics Of A U.S.-China Trade War; Facebook: Info Of 87 Million Shared With Cambridge Analytica; Roger Stone Predicted Devastating Info From Wikileaks; Trump Will Keep U.S. Troops In Syria, Wants Exit Soon; Putin, Rouhani, Erdogan Meet To Talk Syria; CNN Witnesses The Trauma Facing Displaced Syrians. Aired 3-3:30p ET
Aired April 4, 2018 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Live from CNN London this Wednesday, I'm Hala Gorani. Tonight, fears of a trade war have
markets bouncing worldwide. We'll be live in New York with the very latest.
We're also taking a closer look at a very real war, the quagmire that is Syria. Now, America is clarifying its position. We're live in Damascus
and we'll have full analysis as well.
And on this day, remembering a civil rights giant, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., was fatally shot 50 years ago today. We'll hear from two men who were
with him the night that he died.
And we begin this hour on Wall Street on what's been another wild day brought about by a sharp escalation in the trade dispute between the
world's two largest economies. Now we've just entered the final hour of trading. This is how the Dow is looking right now.
As you can see, it is up after having started the day firmly in the red, gaining 125 points. That's quite a turnaround from the open when it was
down as much as 500 points. The main factor in all of this, China has retaliated today against the fresh round of U.S. tariffs, and it happened
within just hours.
So, people are concerned. Our Richard Quest is with us to talk us through what's happening. He's in New York. So, these are some -- this is a wild,
wild roller coaster. What's going on here because it seems as though investors aren't quite sure which way to go at this stage.
RICHARD QUEST, CNN ANCHOR, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS": Well, I have no idea, frankly, Hala. I mean, you know, you and I have been looking at markets
all our professional lives. There is no rational explanation for a market that opens 500 down and will probably end up maybe 100, 200 higher.
When nothing has happened during the day except the president's new economic adviser like (inaudible) came out to say he didn't think there
would be a trade war with China, but he couldn't say for certain, and anyway, the president was committed to in his policies.
So, nothing has really happened, but what we can say with an element of certainty is, yes, probably this morning's selloff was overdone. It was
overdone on the basis of fear, concern, worry.
And the market is basically now going to seek any form of direction. It is going to look for something that's going to tell it that things are not as
bad as they might seem.
GORANI: Right. And we are not getting that direction from the White House. We have mixed messages from the president on Twitter, a few days
later on Twitter saying there's no trade war. That it's always to the U.S.' disadvantage all these signed deals his economic advisers saying they
probably won't go into effect.
But just what we do know are the China tariffs on U.S. products involve U.S. soybeans, planes. U.S. tariffs on China involve -- I believe we have
some graphics here to help our viewers through this, products as you can see there, car parts, chemicals, aluminum, airline parts, dishwashers, et
cetera. But the thing is, these do not go into effect right away.
QUEST: No, but let's remember the steel tariffs almost do, right? And the steel tariffs have been suspended for the European Union, Australia, and
Canada, obviously in terms of NAFTA pending negotiations and discussions there.
So, steel issue is still very real. There's no, so far as we can see discussions as yet or at least fruition with China only with South Korea.
On this other set, bring back that list. Bring back that list and you'll see -- well, we already know that washing machines and solar panels, they
were done early on.
These are the new China proposed tariffs. They go to the heart of American manufacturing, airplanes, automobiles and the heart of Republican areas and
Republican states with (inaudible) and soybeans.
Hala, we don't know how much of this is a pure negotiating strategy. We don't know what the risk is ultimately, but what the market is telling us
is that they are worried. And that is volatility that really is disturbing.
GORANI: So, and I read in one article that one analyst, one expert saying this is tariff poker, this is seeing who is going to blink first. It's
basically a negotiating tactic.
QUEST: Look, we always -- look, you and I have covered enough trade talks, they always go down to the wire and whether it's the Seattle talks, the
GAT, the WTO, they always go down to the wire. And it is a battle of wills between the two sides.
But it doesn't normally get negotiated in public. It doesn't normally have one of the protagonists basically hurting hand grenades. The other side
waiting for an inflammatory response.
[15:05:08] And to their credit -- look, the real sad part about this, Hala, is that the U.S. has a very strong case against China. China has been
dumping steel. China does have intellectual property theft. China does have issues of these to be dealt with, but you do not deal with them in the
sort of way in 280 characters or less.
GORANI: All right. Richard Quest, we'll see you at the top of the hour on "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS."
QUEST: You're welcome. Thank you.
GORANI: So, that's the dollars and cents of a trade war, which the president says really isn't a trade war right now and his economics'
adviser is saying these tariffs might not go into effect. Everyone is searching for direction. You see it very clearly on the stock market.
Down and then up, and maybe we'll finish down again. Who knows?
But who are the political winners and losers? Let's look at that with our White House reporter, Stephen Collinson. Stephen, my first question is
when China threatens to impose tariffs on American soybeans and car parts and other agricultural products, it is hurting areas that help get Trump
elected so why is Trump playing this game?
STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right. What China is rathe shrewdly doing is it's targeting directly the Trump coalition. When
you talk about tariffs on soybeans, for example, Trump won eight of the ten top soybean-producing states in 2016.
If you look at, pork, it's really interesting. If you look at a map of the top pork producing states, it's almost the whole of the Midwest of North
Carolina. The swing states that helped Trump get to the White House.
So, it's ironic, you know, one of the president's big applause lines during the campaign in these states was I'm going to get tough on China because
they've stolen our jobs, yet when China responds and gets tough on the United States potentially, that can, first of all hit these industries in
places like Iowa, which were very important for Donald Trump to get elected.
And when Trump raises tariffs, for example, on Chinese goods, that can put the prices up in somewhere like Walmart, which is, you know, a destination
where many lower income people who voted for Trump, you know, get their groceries and everything else.
So, if this goes ahead and goes into a full trade war, the president could pay a price. Having said that, if both sides blink as you were talking
about there with Richard and Trump can say, look, I stood up to China and I got us a better deal, he could get --
GORANI: I got it, but politically speaking right now this is a risk, right, because you have areas that could be economically hurt by this
threat of launching a trade war with China in order to, you know, get a better deal maybe because it is some sort of tariff poker that he's playing
to see who blinks first. But it is a risk.
Because it's not just those soybean producers, it's the people who buy the products in not just Walmart, in most retail outlets in the U.S. A lot of
goods are produced in China that Americans buy every day.
COLLINSON: That's right. President Trump is playing tariff poker, if you like, with his own political future, and that's why this is such a high-
risk strategy. Having said that, if he takes China to the WTO and goes to the dispute resolution process that doesn't really get him very much
politically. No one's going to notice that.
So, if he gets China to back down and the tariff strategy is successful, I think he can then go back to the Midwest and say, look, I got a better
deal. But you're right, we don't know how this is going to end.
And on the other side of this, of course, is every time the market gets hit, middle income voters, they see their 401(k) pension plans hit in the
stock market --
COLLINSON: Some of those voters will be important in the midterm elections in November and in his reelection race in marginal states in suburban
areas, slightly richer voters, Republicans who voted for Trump. So, he's really, really playing a high-risk game.
GORANI: All right. We'll see how that pans out either way. The market is higher now. So, it seems as though investors digested the initial news and
are deciding to look on the slightly brighter side. Thanks very much, Stephen Collinson. We'll be speaking to a trader on the New York Stock
Exchange floor a little bit later.
I want to bring you some breaking news now just in to CNN, Facebook is making a sharp revision on the number of users, who may have had their
information improperly accessed by a controversial data firm, Cambridge Analytica.
Listen to this number, and now says as many as 87 million people may have been affected by the improper sharing of their data with Cambridge
Analytica, most of them in the United States. That's, obviously, if you've been following this story, far more than the previous estimate of 50
The disclosure came near the bottom of a Facebook blog post that promises to better protect user information. So, this is a fresh number, 87 million
Facebook users that could have had their data improperly accessed by Cambridge Analytica.
[15:10:10] We are getting new insight into the Russia investigation today and how it relates to President Trump himself. CNN can now confirm that
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team told Mr. Trump's lawyers back in March that he was not a, quote, "criminal target at that point."
The issue came up in discussions about whether President Trump will agree to an interview with Robert Mueller. Sources say Mueller raised the
prospect of writing up a report that could focus on obstruction of justice, however, and "The Washington Post" first ran the story.
"The Washington Post" says the goal of such a report would be to, quote, "answer the public's question." So, let's understand this properly because
there are a lot of strands.
CNN crime and justice reporter, Shimon Prokupecz, joins me now. So, the Mueller team told Trump's lawyers he's not a criminal target. What does
that mean exactly in the context of the probe?
SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, for anyone who certainly who is told by federal authorities here in the U.S. or perhaps
outside even in some cases that they're not the target of a criminal investigation would mean that essentially an investigator may want to use
you as a witness, may believe that you have information certainly in this case with this investigation, of Russian interference.
That they may want to use the president as a witness against people outside of the U.S. It could people in the U.S. as well, but we know that the
special counsel is certainly investigating people for the Russian interference outside of the U.S.
So, this essentially would mean at least signal to the president that at this point he would -- he's unlikely to face any kind of criminal charges.
Look, there's also this longstanding guidance here from the Department of Justice that says you can't charge a sitting president.
But certainly, I think this kind of news for the president's lawyers is probably good news, but it does not mean that the president would
necessarily agree to sit down and meet with investigators because, again, if they do find that he's not being truthful, if he's lying, they could
charge him for that potentially.
Clearly, there would be some hurdles for them to clear to do that, but there has always been the concern that you would expose the president or
perhaps some kind of perjury charge if you allowed him to testify, which is to come and meet with the special counsel.
GORANI: So, if the Mueller team has told the president's lawyers he's not a criminal target, yet they're still investigating potential obstruction of
justice, could that be something that -- I mean, what I don't understand, I guess what confuses me here is if obstruction of justice is still hanging
over, you know, the president's team during the campaign, which is what Robert Mueller's investigating, is that not a potentially -- potentially a
-- could it not potentially involve criminal wrongdoing?
PROKUPECZ: Well, certainly it can, but if you believe what our sources are telling us that it does not appear that the president is facing any charges
in connection with obstruction. Now there could be other people in his circle, other people who are connected to the president, who may
potentially charge -- face some kind of obstruction charges.
Because there's always been this idea that it was the president's ultimate decision, but did anyone perhaps suggest to the president in some way to
tip the scales here into forcing him to fire the former FBI director?
Was there something else going on? Was there some other kind of pressure from someone inside the administration to put pressure on the president to
fire the former FBI director? That could be an avenue certainly that's still ongoing.
The other thing with the obstruction is it is the special counsel's job here, that's what they were tasked with is to investigate this obstruction.
The other thing that they're doing, as you said, is compiling this report.
And it could list in that report a lot of the information that the investigators have learned about the obstruction, about any other kind of
perhaps conduct at the White House that would potentially be problematic for them.
That could all come all in a report, and then that report would go to the deputy attorney general, who would either make it public or perhaps make
some suggestions to Congress. And that' where the president could potentially face some issues with impeachment.
GORANI: Shimon, I just -- before I let you go, I want to tell our viewers about a development that could prove interesting to Mueller's team. On the
same day that longtime Trump associate, Roger Stone, sent an e-mail claiming he had dinner with Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, appeared on
a radio show warning that devastating information would soon be released.
Listen to this clip from August 4th, 2016, three months before the American election.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (via telephone): The Clinton campaign narrative that the Russians favor Donald Trump and the Russians are leaking this information,
this is inoculation because, as you said earlier, they know what is coming. It is devastating.
[15:15:08] Let's remember that their defense to all of the Clinton Foundation scandals has been not we didn't do it. It has been you have no
proof. Yes, but you have no proof. Well, I think Julian Assange has that proof and I think he's going to furnish it to the American people.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
GORANI: So, that' a pretty remarkable development here. Sends an e-mail, you know, and then tells a radio show, Julian Assange is going to release
damaging material on Clinton.
PROKUPECZ: Right. And Roger Stone has repeatedly denied that he had dinner with Julian Assange, that he had any kind of communications about
these e-mails. It's significant issue for him because this issue, the Wikileaks issue, Julian Assange, the hacking of the e-mails that were
eventually released by Julian Assange.
All of that is part of the special counsel investigation. And one of the issues certainly that the special counsel is looking at is whether or not
Roger Stone was a Trump adviser somehow may have been coordinating with Julian Assange.
When you listen to that radio interview it seems to indicate that he has some kind of information, but Julian Assange has denied that he's had --
that -- I mean, Roger Stone has denied that he had any kind of heads-up, any kind of information ahead of its release.
And as you said, this radio interview occurs on the same day that he sends an e-mail to another Trump campaign adviser essentially saying, I had
dinner with Julian Assange. So, it's certainly a lot of coincidences, a lot of interesting detail that Roger Stone keeps denying.
GORANI: How would he have had dinner -- I mean, unless he was in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, wouldn't that be easy to check?
PROKUPECZ: Yes, it would be, but it's not something that we can easily find out or easily -- officials would tell us. That is a good question.
That is something that U.S. authorities would be able to easily find out. They can look at his travel records. He claims -- Roger Stone claims that
he has travel records that show that he never went there, but this keeps coming up and it continues to be an issue for Roger Stone.
GORANI: All right. Julian Assange has no more internet connection we understand, at the Ecuadorian Embassy. So, even online communication would
be difficult with him now presumably. Shimon Prokupecz, thanks so much for joining us.
Still to come tonight, Trump apparently makes up his mind after triggering confusion over the future of U.S. troops in Syria. Are American troops
staying in Syria? Are they leaving? We'll try to get some answers after this.
GORANI: President Trump is trying to clarify his position on whether he wants to keep American troops in Syria. A senior White House official says
that Mr. Trump has told his national security team that he's willing to keep American troops in the war-torn nation for now, but that he wants them
[15:20:06] This comes after we heard mixed messages about the administration's policy on Syria. I mean, you'll remember during a news
conference this week, the president said I want them out. He appeared as though he was saying he wanted them out immediately.
Well, there' a very different message on Syria elsewhere. The presidents of Russia, Iran and Turkey are gathered in Ankara to discuss an endgame for
the seven-year conflict. They issued a joint statement. The three countries underlined their commitment to the country urging, quote, "calm
on the ground and a lasting ceasefire."
These are all obviously warring parties. It's worth noting Syria itself, though, not represented at the meeting.
Joining me here in the studio with more is senior international correspondent, Nick Paton Walsh. So, President Trump not for the first
time mixed messages on Syria, the troops leave right away, no, they can stay, but short term. We won't fight beyond the mission to defeat ISIS.
What do we know for sure?
NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think you could look at the last five days is sort of an elaborate bargaining theater
where he began sadly at a time when they just lost one U.S. soldier to ISIS, a land mine laid there.
But the beginning of last week, we had messages that the $200 million of aid could be held up potentially. That was followed by the idea that
troops should be leaving and then more recently just yesterday at a press conferences of Baltic presidents, he suggested that he'd like to see Saudi
Arabia step up and start paying. And the last --
GORANI: Pay for American troops?
WALSH: It sounded like that. You think it was reconstruction, but this sort of suggestion was that they'd spent -- this is a staggering quote,
they've spent 17 years there and $7 trillion and got nothing.
He repeated the word nothing three times in one sentence, and then later said, they got nothing but death and destruction. It was an
extraordinarily negative depiction of exactly the U.S. sacrifice over the last 16 years to be inaccurate in the Middle East.
So, what we've seen today is through back channel suggestion that actually things are going to stay exactly as they have been before, but the
suggestion they'd like to leave relatively soon. So, an elaborate we must say real statesman's bargain to try to get someone else to put the bill,
but at the same time, they are changing policies.
GORANI: And how is Vladimir Putin -- I mean, what is he rearing? Because what he's hearing is here I am with Erdogan and the Iranian leader and
we've all been majorly involved in the conflict in Syria, and here's the U.S. basically saying we're there for the very short term. We're
WATSON: (Inaudible) seeing a regional opportunity. Obviously, no one can judge Trump by his word because it constantly changes. But I think he's
also possibly seeing an adversary values, the destruction, the fear of what he's going to say, what's going to happen next, is he going to stay? Is he
going to leave?
It's more valuable than the longer term strategic issue here because the U.S. is there outside of the (inaudible), but it isn't finished yet. White
House were clear they need to continue eliminating ISIS.
They are also there to limit Iranian influence for an important ally, Israel and Saudi Arabia as well. The Iranians have moved into that vacuum
in the Syrian desert where ISIS used to be, and they are using as kind of a thoroughfare between Lebanon to pressure Israel many say.
The Iranians say (inaudible) the Syrians to some degree. The broader takeaway from all of this is it does sound, if you listen to Donald Trump
like that longer term strategic goal of a regional input or a regional dominance is less important to him.
It's more important to bring people home and to remind Americans the last 16 years didn't really get them anywhere.
GORANI: You were with the U.S. special forces in Syria just remind me in January.
WALSH: In February, yes.
GORANI: Oh, February, and I remember at the time asking you, what are they doing there and what is the endgame here? Do we know?
WALSH: It's kind of a remarkably efficient mission to some degree because they have about 2,000 people there or so going to public figures. But they
do about three or four different things, they're tracing down the remnants of ISIS at the same time in the west, they are sort of patrolling the
border space between the Syrian Kurds, who they back to defeat ISIS and the Turkish-backed Syrian rebels, who occasionally come into skirmishes with
To the south, they're keeping their regime out of areas have been cleaned of ISIS and assisting the Syrian Kurds there too was more broadly being
there to kind of act as a speed bump for Iranians heading south back and forth to Lebanon.
GORANI: I followed Syria every day of my life.
WALSH: And you lost in that.
GORANI: Because it's become such an incredibly complicated war zone with so many actors and shifting (inaudible) --
WALSH: This difficulty, how do you explain this to the American electorate? People we don't know half the time that there are U.S. troops
in Syria. How do you explain why if, you know, you and I, who have spent the last five years pouring over this and struggling? I'm struggling all
day frankly to put into adequately short sentences, why this is still important, why this is still going on?
GORANI: Nick Paton Walsh, thanks very much for joining us this evening with more on that. CNN's senior international correspondent, Fred
Pleitgen, is inside Syria this evening. He joins me live from Damascus. You did some reporting today, Fred, on more evacuations from Eastern
[15:25:01] FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, from Eastern Ghouta, of course, the outer suburbs in the east of Damascus
where more and more civilians are fleeing the area, and more and more rebel fighters are also being bussed to the north of the country.
But you do have an increasing number of displaced people, many of them who have lost everything and are now in shelter. We went to one of them, Hala,
it has 20,000 people in it. Here's what we saw.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PLEITGEN (voice-over): After escaping the violence in the eastern outskirts of Damascus, for these kids, getting a haircut is a new and
welcome distraction from the traumatic world they just got out of.
The 10-year-old Mohammed Mezza (ph) describes the fighting he endured. When it was calm we could go out, he says, but when there are air strikes
we had to go into the basements. Rebels held the Eastern Ghouta area just outside Damascus for almost seven years, but recent government offensive
forced tens of thousands of civilians to flee.
Many of them ending up at this camp ran by the government and aid groups. Workers here say there have been around 21,000 new arrivals from besieged
areas in the past weeks and they are struggling to keep up.
(on camera): Malnutrition and even starvation were major issues in the encircled areas of Eastern Ghouta. Now that thousands of people have fled
just to this one center for displaced people, simply keeping them fed is a major logistical challenge.
(voice-over): Medical care is another challenge. NGOs across doctors and even a mobile clinic to the camp, but the camp's director tells me
psychological care for the traumatized civilians is an even bigger problem.
We're doing what we can, but it isn't enough, he says. A siege of seven years and planting thoughts in the minds of children who were 6 years old
when it began, this is the generation that we have the biggest problems with.
Tired and worn down and with an uncertain future. The people who have made it here don't know when or if they'll be able to go back to their
neighborhoods or whether they will still have a home to go back to.
But some, like this man, say they used to fight with the rebels but laid down their arms and came to this government-controlled area. If you're a
fighter with them, they won't let you go, he says. If you think you can escape, this option doesn't exist.
After going through years of violence and losing almost everything they have, many here are happy to have just escaped with their lives.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PLEITGEN: Hala, we talk so much about movements on the battle fronts, one side losing territory and other side maybe winning territory, but you go to
a place like that and it's certainly goes to show just who is really bearing the brunt on all of the fighting that's been going on here to Syria
for seven years now -- Hala.
GORANI: All right. Fred Pleitgen, thanks very much live in Damascus.
In the United States, police say the woman, who opened fire at YouTube offices yesterday didn't have any link to the three people she shot. Those
victims are all doing better today. Two are out of the hospital.
There's the shooter, a picture of the shooter. CNN's Kyung Lah tells us authorities are getting a clearer picture of her motive after the break.
We'll be right back.
[15:30:44] HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Let's update you on that shooting at YouTube headquarters in California yesterday. I was discussing
before the break that police now have a clear idea of the motive of the woman they say shot three people and then killed herself. Kyung Lah has
the very latest.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We have a report of subject with a gun. This will be from the YouTube building.
KYUNG LAH, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: New details about the woman police say shot three people at YouTube's headquarters before taking her
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She shot that person up really bad, no remorse, nothing. I mean, it was death row.
LAH: Authorities identifying the shooter as 39-year-old San Diego, Nasim Aghdam. The L.A. Times reporting that law enforcement is looking at this
website create by Aghdam as part of their investigation. On the site, Aghdam repeatedly criticizing YouTube, accusing the website of filtering
her channels to keep her videos from getting views, something she blames on new close-minded YouTube employees.
NASIM AGHDAM, SUSPECT IN THE YOUTUBE SHOOTING HEADQUARTERS: You see that my new videos hardly gets views and my old videos that used to get many
views stopped getting views.
LAH: Aghdam's brother, who did not want to be on camera, telling CNN affiliate KGTV that his sister used YouTube to advocate against animal
cruelty, one of her passions.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She's a nice person, innocent person. She never hurt any creature.
LAH: The San Diego Union Tribune posting this picture from 2009 of Aghdam protesting with PETA. Aghdam's brother tells KGTV that his family reported
her missing this weekend after she stopped answering her phone. They then located her car in a city near YouTube's headquarters.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She has a problem with YouTube. So we called the cop again and told them that she might -- there's a reason she's been all the
way from San Diego to there.
LAH: Local police did not immediately respond to CNN's requests for comments. Authority say Aghdam opened fire on a group of YouTube employees
shortly before 1:00 p.m. Tuesday.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All of a sudden we heard two sirens, and then we saw some people quickly running out of the building.
LAH: Two minutes after the first call, police arrived as employees fled the scene before locating Aghdam's body and ushering the injured to safety.
GORANI: Kyung Lah there with the very latest on what we know about the shooter who shot three people at YouTube headquarters in California
Some breaking news now coming to us from the White House. President Trump will sign a proclamation to send the National Guard to the southwestern
border with Mexico. This is what the secretary of homeland security announced a few moments ago. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KIRSTJEN NIELSEN, U.S. SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY: The President has directed that the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland
Security work together with our governors to deploy the National Guard to our southwest border to assist the border patrol. The President will be
signing a proclamation to that effect today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: And that is from Kirstjen Nielsen there announcing that --* you'll remember President Trump, I believe it was two days ago saying that the
military should be sent down to protect the border, that the border is highly penetrable. Well, this announcement that the President is due to
sign a proclamation coming just moments ago.
Let's take another look at the Dow Jones now less than 30 minutes before closing. Remember, it plunged more than 500 points shortly after the open
in response to China's proposal to slap new tariffs on U.S. imports like soybeans, planes and cars. And right now, the Dow Jones is up more than
Tim Anderson is the managing director of brokerage firm, TJM Investments. He joins us now from the New York Stock Exchange. Thanks for being with
us. So, what's going on? Because this is quite a wild ride for stocks in the U.S. today. What's going through investor's minds?
TIM ANDERSON, MANAGING DIRECTOR, TJM INVESTMENTS: It's certainly a very positive reversal that we've had. And I think that what investors have
come to realize is that these trade negotiations really that are going on between the U.S. and China when China comes out with what they had to say
this morning, that doesn't mean that those tariffs are going to take place immediately or even at the beginning of week. They wouldn't go into effect
for 60 days, similar to a period when we announced the 50 to 60 billion of goods from China that we were going to put tariffs on, there's a 30-day
comment period. And frankly, I think this is all part of the negotiation between the Trump administration and the Chinese toward the goal of trying
to reduce our trade deficit with China by about $100 billion and also off to the side trying to curtail some of their infringement on intellectual
property from companies that do joint ventures in China.
[15:35:46] GORANI: Right. But it's very unusual -- Tim, it's very unusual way to negotiate a trade deal, isn't it? Because people are getting a
little concerned here because it's a tit for tat situation between China and the United States, the world's two largest economies. And I guess
people want slightly more direction, don't they?
ANDERSON: It's certainly true that in the past, a lot of these negotiations would go on behind the scene and you would not get the 24/7
play by play that we're getting with these negotiations. Now, the other thing about it is also that we're not completely out of the woods here
because the market, there's an old adage in the market that the market embraces good news. It can handle bad news, but it really hates
uncertainty because it just can't model it. So we really don't know what the final, final is going to be, but I think that China is probably highly
motivated to avoid a serious trade skirmish or war because they're running a surplus with us and they'd probably take the worst of it. Si I'm pretty
confident that by when push comes to shove and when we get to whatever the final resolution of this is, it's not going to be as negative as it looks
like when we get these really severe reactions in the market.
GORANI: Quick word on Amazon, because the President has just bashed Amazon relentlessly on twitter.
GORANI: The last time I checked the share price was flat today but it lost a lot of ground over the last several sessions. What's your take on that?
Look, Amazon has had an unbelievable move the last three years, if not longer. It certainly then part of the big things, and there's no doubt
that Amazon and Netflix can have a valuation correction here and still be in a very strong long-term uptrends.
GORANI: All right. Tim Anderson, thanks so much for joining us from New York. We appreciate it. We'll keep our eye on the Dow in the final
minutes of trading.
Let's return now to the news details in the Russia investigator. Sources saying that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team told Donald Trump's
attorneys last month that he's not a criminal target in the probe, but he is more than a witness. What does that mean?
Let's talk about whether U.S. President can even face criminal charges while in office. We're joined by CNN legal analyst, Paul Callan. So what
does it mean when Mueller's team tells Trump's team he's not a criminal target? Is he -- is he breathing a big sigh of relief now?
PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, let's say he's breathing a little sigh of relief, but he's still in a very, very dangerous position, because
in federal prosecutions, they view people as either witnesses, subjects or targets of an investigation. Now, he's been told he's not the target. The
target they have a lot of evidence linking the person to a crime. That guy's in big trouble.
A subject, which is the next category down has engaged in suspicious activity that warrants investigation but the prosecutor, at this point,
doesn't have a definitive proof of a crime. And a witness on other hand, of course, is just somebody who saw something that's relevant. So what
Trump is being told or what his attorneys are being told is that Trump is a subject of the investigation. That's how I read that wordings. And
subjects often turn into targets in normal cases. So it's not a great position to be in, but, of course, it's better than being a target.
GORANI: Right. But he's a sitting U.S. President which means he cannot be criminally charged while he's a sitting U.S. President. So Bob Mueller is
going to prepare a report and then that report will be made public, we hope, and then it becomes a political decision, not a legal one, right?
CALLAN: It does, Hala. But getting back to the issue of whether a sitting President can be indicted, there is a dispute among legal scholars about
this issue. And I would say the majority of them think you cannot charge a sitting President with a crime. He has to get impeached first and then he
can be charged with a crime.
[15:40:13] Now, there's a minority of constitutional scholars who think you can charged a sitting President. But the signals coming from Mueller is
that he doesn't look like he believes you can indict a sitting President, so -- then it becomes, as you say, political because he would have to be
impeached and that means there would have to be a majority in the house of representatives who would vote for impeachment and, of course, the
republicans currently controlled the house and to be convicted in the U.S. Senate, two-thirds of the senators have to go to convict. So even if the
democrats take the House, they're not going to have two-thirds of the Senate, so I think he's relatively safe from being tossed from office by
GORANI: What do you make overall now of this Russia probe? Because Donald Trump himself was told by some of his advisers that it could -- you know,
it could have ended in January, it's on. Where are we headed here?
CALLAN: It looks like he's coming to a conclusion. But you know prosecutors could take several months to finally wrap things up because of
the number of people under investigation. There may be other people who are unrelated to Trump. There might be members of the Trump family. Who
knows what else he's looking at that would cause a long-term wrap-up? Now, he could within a month or two issue a report, but that goes back to
Rosenstein, the number two guy in the justice department and it's up to Rosenstein to release that report to the public or not. He could choose to
keep it confidential. I think that would be a huge error politically if he did that, but he would have the right to under existing law.
GORANI: The expectation though is that this report would be seen by the public. But then what could the impact of such a report -- what kind of
impact could it have even if it reveals wrongdoing during the campaign or collusion or that kind of thing? What kind of impact could it have?
CALLAN: I think it'll have a major impact because with the upcoming congressional elections, if the Trump administration is criticized heavily,
if he says that the conduct wasn't criminal but it was very, very close to the line and it certainly maybe was unethical, who knows what he may say.
I doubt that anybody's going to get a really clean bill of health on this.
So I think it's going to be very damaging any way you look at it politically to the Trump administration, but on the upside to the Trump
administration, if the President is not accused of a crime, of course he'll say he's been totally exonerated and he will paint it as a victory and
he'll be happy to move on and start focusing on other issues.
GORANI: I think he's already painted a victory while the investigation is ongoing.
CALLAN: Well, yes, there's no collusion, as he likes to say. No collusion with the Russians.
GORANI: Paul Callan, thanks very much. Appreciate your analysis and expertise as always.
Still to come tonight, a deleted tweet raises major questions over how Britain is handling the investigation into Sergei Skripal's poisoning.
And honoring an icon on this day. It' the anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.'s assassination. We'll bring you an exclusive interview with the
two men that were by his side at Lorraine Motel in Memphis on the day he was killed. We'll be right back.
[15:45:37] GORANI: Let's get an update now from Britain on the condition of Prince Philip Buckingham Palace says the 96-year-old is progressing
satisfactorily after a hip surgery earlier today. The palace says the operation was a success, but the prince will likely stay in the hospital
for several more days while he recovers. They say he's comfortable and in good spirits.
It was one month ago that former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter were poisoned with a nerve agent here in the UK. Since then,
Britain and its allies have blamed and punished Russia for the attack. But today, the UK foreign secretary Boris Johnson is under pressure over how
he's handling the whole case. It follows an admission from the foreign office that it deleted a tweet that claimed UK experts had confirmed the
nerve agent used in Salisbury was produced in Russia.
Yesterday, Britain's top military lab said it could not verify the poison source and Russia has seized on this revelation as proof that the UK is
using the attack to vilify Moscow.
Phil Black is in Salisbury where the poisoning took place and with the very latest. I mean, the experts, those who have tested this substance, say
they can't say that it originated in any one country. But that's not really their role. Their role is to identify the substance, right?
PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's what they said, Hala. That's right. So the defense science and technology lab is just up the road from
Salisbury, at Porton Down. They say they've identified what family of nerve agents the substance it belongs to, that's what worry it got so much,
Novichok, but what they haven't determined yet is precisely where the stuff that was used here in this city was actually made. They say it's not their
job, they're still working on it anyway regardless. This has all been seized on by Russia. They say get more proof to the allegations against
the hasty and based on flimsy evidence.
But on top of that, as you touched on. It's another peer problem. It's not the example of self-harm in Britain's efforts to maintain a focused
message on this. And that is this claim that Boris Johnson in an interview contradicted that and said that the scientists have, in fact, determined
where it was made and the same thing was done on a foreign office tweet which was then deleted because it was inaccurate. But to be fair, those
are two blips in what has been some pretty consistent messaging from the UK. And that is they believe that Russia did it, the intelligence points
at them having the capability and the motive and there is no other plausible explanation. And tonight, Britain is still standing by that and
they say their allies are standing by that as well.
GORANI: The Russians are saying give us proof, show us proof that you've tested this substance and you can trace it back to Russia. Now, Britain's
top experts say they can't do that right now, which I guess leads us to believe that perhaps they came to that conclusion based on other things,
intelligence, things like that, that they can't publicly share with Russia or anyone else. So Britain's in a tough spot here in a way with regards to
BLACK: They are indeed. And they do make their point. They say their assessment is not based purely on what the scientists up the road can say.
That's not the full intelligence picture. They say there is other information which they haven't been able to make public, and because of all
of that in totality, they say that's how they've made their assessment.
Now, you're right that they're in a tough spot because they won't release all of their intelligence specifically if they don't want to reveal the
source of some of that intelligence. What they're hoping is that another investigation that's also being carried out by the organization for the
prohibition of chemical weapons and independent investigation where they've had their own technicians on the ground here taking samples from the
environment and the victims, they're working on that. We expect results from that early next week. They hope that that will go somewhere towards
backing up and concurring with the British assessment as well. But for that, we're just going to have to wait and see.
GORANI: Phil Black, live in Salisbury. Thanks very much. In the U.S. there are ceremonies and remembrances honoring the legendary civil rights
leader Martin Luther King, Jr. commemorations are taking place across the U.S. to honor the icon. He was assassinated 50 years ago today at the
Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. Today, people have been attending marches, rallies and concerts. This is Washington, D.C., for instance.
And later, bells across the nation will toll 39 times to symbolize Dr. King's age of his death. It's remarkable to think he was only 39 years old
when he was killed.
In a CNN exclusive, two of the men who were with him on that fateful day spoke with our Victor Blackwell to honor and remember Reverend King.
[15:50:14] VICTOR BLACKWELL, CNN ANCHOR: Does it feel like it's been 50 years?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It feels like it was yesterday.
BLACKWELL: It was April 4th, 1968 in Memphis, Tennessee, before Andrew Young was an ambassador to the world, before Jesse Jackson became a
reverend and a groundbreaking political figure. They were two young men dedicated to the cause of equality led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and it
was a chilly Thursday afternoon at the Lorraine Motel.
ANDREW YOUNG, FORMER UNITED STATES AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: I was talking to him telling him he needed a coat, and he suddenly raised his
head to kind of see, test the weather and pow.
BLACKWELL: A single shot to his chin and King was dead. He was 39 years old. Now, a half century later, Young and Jackson return to the very spot
where their friend and leader was assassinated.
YOUNG: His shoes got caught under here and it knocked him out of his shoes.
BLACKWELL: A photographer who was staying three rooms down snapped this iconic image as King lay dying.
YOUNG: We were pointing over there, because the police were here. They were running over this way. And we were trying to tell them to go back
that way, that's where the shot came from.
BLACKWELL: Do you think he heard the shot?
YOUNG: I don't think he heard the shot or felt it. I think it was a beautiful death. And my first reaction was to be mad and second reaction
was to say, well, if anybody's entitled to have a reward, you have sure earned it. And, you know, take your flight to heaven.
BLACKWELL: Young went on to serve as congressman, as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and as mayor of Atlanta. Jackson continued social and
political activism and ran for President twice.
JESSE JACKSON, AMERICAN CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: Every move I made was demonstration or run to presidency. I always felt his spirit and somewhat
touched base with him for doing it.
BLACKWELL: Jackson now 76 and Young, 86, say King did not fear death. And even as they stand on the balcony that was once stained with King's blood,
they're convinced that he will never die.
YOUNG: I've been to 152 countries. I've never been anywhere where people have wanted to ask me about Martin Luther King. If he had been nine years
old, he'd be just an old preacher. He's preaching his sermons (INAUDIBLE) his spirit is alive.
BLACKWELL: Victor Blackwell, CNN, Memphis.
GORANI: Stay with us. We'll be right back.
GORANI: Two English football teams are battling it out in the Champions League tonight. Liverpool is leading three now against Manchester City and
early in the second half. Now, I usually don't give you sports stories, right? But the reason we're talking about this is because I want to go
back to Tuesday night when Ronaldo lifted an entire stadium, even supporters of the opposing team with a pretty magical moment. Patrick
Snell tells us about it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then Ronaldo. What a goal by Cristiano Ronaldo.
PATRICK SNELL, CNN INTERNATIONAL SPORTS ANCHOR: The entire stadium rose to its feet. Fans of both Real Madrid and opposing team, Juventus cheering
after what some are claiming was the greatest goal in the history of the sport.
[15:55:08] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What a goal by Cristiano Ronaldo. On Cristiano Ronaldo's 120 Champions League goals, this one was different. In
Tuesday night's quarterfinals, the 33-year-old defying gravity to throw himself into the air and acrobatically smashing ball into the back of the
net. Even the Real Madrid manager seemed taken aback and he wasn't the only one. U.S. basketball star LeBron James posting picture of the goal
commenting to Cristiano, "That's just not even fair." Even Ronaldo had to pat himself on the back.
CRISTIANO RONALDO, FORWARD, REAL MADRID (through translator): It was spectacular. I jumped very high. Obviously, it is a goal that remains in
your memory. Perhaps my best goal.
SNELL: Soon after the game, the Portuguese Instagramed a video of his remarkable strike with the caption, hard work pays off. A tribute to years
trying to perfect the move. For Ronaldo, practice did indeed make perfect. In training on Monday, he tried the very same kick numerous times which
paid off in a big way in Tuesday's game. Of course, no goal like that will go down as the best of all time without several challenges, even by the
manager of Real Madrid who compare Ronaldo's move with one of his own when he was still a player.
ZINEDINE ZIDANE, COACH, REAL MADRID (through translator): We could say that this is one of the most beautiful goals in the history of football.
But maybe it's not more beautiful than when I scored in 2002 Champions League final.
SNELL: Whether or not Ronaldo's goal will go down as the best of all time may be debatable. But it's a fact that Ronaldo has now set a new record
scoring in 10 successive Champions League games making him and his very acrobatic strike at the very least legendary. Patrick Snell, CNN.
GORANI: All right. Nine feet up in the air, I believe, was the highest point. OK. Let's take a look at the Big Board here for you. Because as
we were discussing at the top of the show and throughout the hour, the Dow jones started much lower, 500 points down. And it's going to end the
session higher, about 270 points. And this is after investors kind of thought a little bit longer, about these trade tariffs that China and the
U.S. have said they will impose on the other. And that it will be an immediate measure. And so therefore perhaps, this is just a negotiating
tactic and everybody calm down just a bit.
We do need a bit of direction though for the market. And for that, we're going to "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS, which is coming up next for the latest.