Return to Transcripts main page


Trump And Kim Make History At Summit In Singapore; Trump: U.S. To Stop "War Games" In South Korea; U.K. Prime Minister Wins Vote On Key Amendment In Parliament; AT&T, Time Warner Decision Will Impact Future Of Media; U.K. PM Wins Vote On Key Amendment In Parliament; Trump And Kim's Working Lunch, What Was On The Menu? Aired 3-4p ET

Aired June 12, 2018 - 15:00   ET



HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Welcome. Hello. I'm Hala Gorani. Tonight, we're live outside the British Houses of Parliament where Theresa

May has avoided a major defeat after a crucial vote on the future of Brexit negotiations. We'll have much more on that this hour.

But first we begin with North Korea and in Singapore, extraordinary, unprecedented, even surreal, Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un made history in

Singapore. We will bring you all the dramatic moments of their summit that ended with a pledge on denuclearization.

Now we will get to the nuts and bolts of what exactly was achieved. But first, we want to show you how history unfolded as it happened. So many in

Europe and other parts of the world were asleep when all these very important historic moments took place.

Now the leaders of the world's most powerful democracy and North Korea's dictator first approached each other on a red carpet at a luxury hotel.

They warmly shook hands and stood as equals before their nation's flags.


GORANI: That's as it happened. Hopes were high on both sides just before the leaders sat down for talks accompanied only in the room by their



DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I feel really great. We're going to have a great discussion and I think tremendous

success. Going to be tremendously successful. It's my honor. We will have a terrific relationship, I have no doubt.



GORANI: Every little glimpse of the leaders sent photographers into a frenzy. Here is Mr. Trump and Kim walking along a balcony above the press



PRESIDENT TRUMP: Very good. Very, very good excellent relationship. Thank u. Thank you very much.


GORANI: Well, at first, they were alone, but later, both leaders were joined by aides. They've broadened out their talks at a working lunch.

Here are those pictures.


GORANI: I want to continue to bring you these pictures to give you a sense of the occasion. After lunch, it was time for a stroll, then brief remarks

to reporters. Here is what happened at that moment.


[15:05:10] PRESIDENT TRUMP: Very great, a really fantastic meeting. A lot of progress. Really very positive. I think better than anybody could have

expected. Top of the line, really good. We are going right now for a signing.


GORANI: Interesting to see these images play out. Look at the body language and see for yourself what the relationship between the two men

looks like. At one point, President Trump took a break for show and tell. He walked Kim Jong-un to his limousine for a quick look inside.


GORANI: They got back to business again at a signing ceremony. In a joint statement, the leaders agreed in broad terms it has to be said to work

toward complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Take a look at that moment.


PRESIDENT TRUMP: We are signing a very important document. We've had a really great (inaudible) together, great relationship. I will be giving a

news conference at 2:30, which is in a little bit less than two hours. We will discuss this. I believe they will be handing it out on behalf of

Chairman Kim and myself. We're both very honored to sign the document. Thank you.

KIM JONG-UN: (Inaudible).


GORANI: Then it was time to say good-bye with a parting handshake and an invitation that generations of North Korean dictators have only dreamed of.


PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Absolutely I will.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Kim, would you like to come to Washington?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Thank you, everybody.


GORANI: Well, after Kim left Mr. Trump gave a long, free-wheeling, some said rambling news conference. It went on for more than an hour. He

apparently -- this is very significant, apparently, blindsided ally South Korea by announcing a big concession to Pyongyang, the end of joint

U.S./South Korean military exercises which he called war games. Listen.


PRESIDENT TRUMP: It's inappropriate to be having wargames. So, number one, we sav, money, a lot, and number two, it really is something that I

think they very much appreciated. I've used to say this during my campaign as you know probably better than most. I want to get our soldiers out. I

want to bring our soldiers back home. We have right now 32,000 soldiers in South Korea. I'd like to be able to bring them back home.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The man you met today, Kim Jong-un, as you know, has killed family members, has starved his own people, is responsible for the

death of Otto Warmbier. Why are you so comfortable calling him very talented?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, he is very talented. Anybody that takes over a situation like he did at 26 years of age and is able to run it and run it

tough. I don't say it was nice or I don't say anything about it. He ran it. Very few people at that age -- you can take one out of 10,000 probably

couldn't do it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wonder what you would say to the group of people who have no ability whatsoever to hear o to see this press conference, the

100,00 North Koreans kept in a network. Have you betrayed them by legitimatizing the regime in Pyongyang?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I think I have helped because I think things will change. I think I have helped them. There is nothing I can say. All I

can do is do what can do. We have to stop the nuclearization. We have to do other things. That's a very important thing.

So, at a certain point, hopefully, you'll be able to ask me a much more positive question or make a statement. But not much I can do right now at

a certain point, I really believe he's going to do things better.

I think they are one of the great winners today, that large group of people that you are talking about. I think, ultimately, they are going to be one

of the great winners as a group.

[15:10:10] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In the document that you signed earlier today, North Korea agreed to commit to denuclearization. To borrow a

phrase that you have used to criticize your predecessors and political opponents, how do you ensure that North Korea is not all talk, no action?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I think can you ensure anything? Can I ensure that you are going to be able to sit down properly when you sit down? I mean,

you can't ensure anything. All I can say is they want to make a deal. That's what I do, my whole life has been deals. I've done great at it.

That's what I do. I know when somebody wants to deal. I know when somebody doesn't. A lot of politicians don't. That's not their thing, but

it is my thing. Again, this really could have been done I think easier a long time ago.

But I know for a -- I just feel very strongly. My instinct, my ability or talent, they want to make a deal. Making a deal is a great thing for the

world. I think he is going to do these things. I may be wrong.

I mean, I may stand before you in six months and say, hey, I was wrong. I don't know that I will admit that. I'll find some kind of an excuse.


GORANI: He acknowledged he could stand before us in six months and say maybe I was wrong, though, I probably come up with an excuse then to

explain that away. Among the more bizarre items, Mr. Trump also referenced a Hollywood-style video that he showed Kim Jong-un during the summit.

The veteran of reality television says the North Koreans were fascinated by it. He rejected suggestions that it could be used as propaganda. This is

a U.S. government-produced video. Take a look.


GORANI: This was a 4-minute plus video that aired as well before the very long one-hour plus news conference in Singapore that the president gave.

John Kirby, our CNN military and diplomatic analyst joins me now. First of all, let's talk about what some analysts have said that by ending the joint

military exercises with South Korea, something that seems to have blindsided South Korea, even the military command in the region, that

Donald Trump is making a concession before North Korea offers anything in return. Do you agree with that?

REAR ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY (RETIRED), CNN MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC ANALYST: I do. That's a fair analysis. I mean, exercises are not just about, you

know, money spent, it's an investment in our security, mutual security on the peninsula and our security throughout the region.

It's not just about, as some other analysts have said, about North Korea, although, that's a prime focus of it. So, for him to give this up without

really getting anything specific in return at this summit is astounding to me.

So, we've given Kim a meeting with the president of the United States, which no other previous North Korean leader has ever gotten. And now we

have made assurances that we're not just going to curtail the exercises but halt them.

We didn't even tell our South Korean allies about that. Those are two huge concessions here as a result of this summit.

GORANI: But also even if it was the plan from the beginning and everyone had been aware to stop these joint drills, why call them war games and also

qualify them as provocative?

KIRBY: Well, those are both phrases, as you know, Hala, that the North Koreans typically use to describe joint military exercises between the

Republic of Korea and the United States. It's not a term that we use here in the United States or we ever have, and we certainly don't use it inside

the military.

They are not war games. They are usually defensive exercises to make sure that our alliances stay strong. Listen, I think going forward, you know,

there's three things that we're going to be able to tell how successful this summit was.

One, denuclearization and how that's defined and how its sequence and how it's achieved. Two, whether or not we can continue to keep human rights on

the table. I'm glad that Trump talked about it, but he didn't do it with very much specificity. I have seen nothing in the declaration that

addresses human rights.

Number three is the state of the alliance between the United States and South Korea, which is still a viable alliance. Five of our seven treaty

alliances, Hala, exist in the Pacific, the South Korea alliance is one of the most important.

And I'm worried about where that alliance goes forward with a concession like this without any consultation.

GORANI: He said he did bring up human rights when he was asked about political prisoners in Gulags. He said, I believe in fact that this deal

helps political prisoners. It's unclear how or whether or not Kim Jong-un gave him any assurances on that.

[15:15:08] But let's about Kim Jong-un because domestically this is a big win for him, right, optics-wise?

KIRBY: Yes, absolutely. Look, I mean, the main goal for the North Korean regime is survival. They achieved that through two things. One is

legitimacy and two is security. And what we did yesterday in this summit was give him a huge boost to his legitimacy.

Now, look, as you and I have talked many times over the last several weeks, I was in favor of this summit. I'm glad that it moved forward. I think

it's good that the two leaders have met. I'm not concerned abo the optics of handshakes and flags and all that. I think that's OK.

But we have to recognize that giving him this meeting and giving him this world platform, this global platform did help boost his legitimacy and

therefore, legitimacy of a very brutal regime.

GORANI: Let me just pushback, maybe this was the right thing to do. Maybe in the end every other president got it wrong. Nobody was able to succeed

in North Korea's nuclear weapons program and years of unconventional, you know, outside the box tinker, the deal maker as he calls himself and maybe

this is the way to do it.

KIRBY: Perhaps. Time will tell. Now, you know, the summit really isn't a summit. It's really base camp. If you want to use a mountain climbing

analogy, there's a long way to go and a lot of climbing to do before we get to anything meaningful in terms of denuclearization.

So, the real hard word begins. I don't fault the president for trying this gamble or for going. I do fault him for lauding and heaping praise on the

brutal dictator, Kim Jong-un, but I don't fault him for having the meeting now. The real hard work begins, and we have to see where this goes.

What I hope comes out of this is a very specific sequencing of framework for how we actually get to verifiable denuclearization.

GORANI: All right. Usually, it's the other way around, you start bottom and go up to the summit. We started with a summit, we'll go down to the

process. An upside down thing here. Thanks so much, John Kirby as always.

The optics of the whole summit were simply incredible, but how much substance was in the spectacle? Let's talk now about what the leaders

actually achieved. More importantly, what happens next.

White House reporter, Kaitlan Collins has been covering this from Singapore and she joins me now. So, we know Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state is

off to South Korea. The president is back to the United States. What's the next step?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right. The president seems to be sending his top diplomat to really iron out the

wrinkles with key U.S. allies over what exactly it was that he agreed to when he sat down with the North Korea dictator.

You saw that statement that President Trump and Kim Jong-un both put their names on in front of the cameras, everyone. Trump signed it and then held

the document up for the cameras to see.

But that document was left a lot to be desired. It wasn't very long, even though the president said it was comprehensive. It mirrored a lot of

language that we've seen from past agreements with former U.S. presidents and North Korean leaders.

So, it raises the question, what was new here? What is something -- what is new the president agreed to with the North Korean? Really, what it

lacked was a sense of a time table for denuclearization, a way to verify that the North Koreans are indeed denuclearizing, any kind of inspection.

Anything like that and it had no language about ICBMs or complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization, which is a phrase the Trump

administration has been repeating time and time again as the negotiations for this meeting have been going on.

So, there was a lot of pomp, a lot of circumstance today. The question is, what is the substance that was left in that document and right now, those

are the questions that are following President Trump back to Washington that is deeply skeptical of the agreement he just made.

GORANI: All right. Well, it was one communique, that's what we saw. We will see if we get more details from either the secretary of state or the

president in the coming days. Kaitlan Collins in Singapore, thanks very much.

So, the leaders signed this agreement, this statement. You have seen Donald Trump's signature, I'm sure, in the White House when all these

executive announcements were made in the oval office. You see it there on the left.

But you've probably not seen the signature of Kim Jong-un. There it is on the right. It's quite interesting to see how different they are. Donald

Trump's signature has become quite familiar to so many of us. There you have it on the right.

Still to come tonight, we are live in Westminster where the British Prime Minister and her government has fought off a rebellion over Brexit. We

will tell you what happened and why it matters just ahead.

And later, hope at last for hundreds of migrants stranded at sea. We have been talking about them for the last day. We have new developments on the

ship, some in Europe turned their back on them. We'll be right back.



GORANI: Welcome back. Welcome to the program. We are outside the Houses of Parliament, as I'm sure you can tell. Hours ago, the British prime

minister survived a crucial test of her government's Brexit plan, official test of her government, frankly, but only just.

Theresa May won a key vote in parliament after agreeing to a last-ditch deal. She managed to fight off a rebellion, demanding that members of

parliament have the definitive say over a final Brexit deal.

The government had to make concessions that MPs will have some kind of a meaningful vote on that. It's one of a long list of amendments that

lawmakers have been deciding on. It's part of the central legislation that will pull Britain out of the E.U. And lawmakers will be debating more

amendments tomorrow.

Here to discuss all of this is political analyst, Carole Walker. So, let's simplify this. Essentially MPs had an option to say we want to reject or

accept the final deal or not, right? They could have basically made this very difficult for the prime minister.

CAROLE WALKER, POLITICAL ANALYST: That's right. This is about who controls the Brexit process. What the government, what Theresa May wants

to do is to come to parliament in the autumn with she hopes a deal with the European Union and say to them, accept this deal that I have negotiated, or

you don't get a deal at all.

And under those circumstances, parliament would inevitably back what she had come up with. What they are saying, many of the MPs, those who are

potentially going to rebel was to say, look, we want to say that under those circumstances, parliament should able to say yes or no to this deal

and then decide what happens next.

And what Theresa May and her ministers were saying, it would be impossible to negotiate properly with the European Union under those conditions. We

would be undermined at every step and it would take away completely the option of walking away without a deal. It would have weakened their hand

in the negotiations.

GORANI: They came up with a compromise. The compromise is we will present the deal and then if you don't like it, give us a month and we'll come back

with something different. Am I understanding this correctly?

WALKER: That was some extraordinary last-minute wheeling and dealing and arm twisting, and what the government said is we are going to give you a

little bit more power and we will be telling you next week exactly what that is.

Now, there are quite a few MPs who are saying, well, I went along with it. I'm going to have look at what the government comes up with next week.

They're (inaudible) keeping their powder dry.

The government has scraped through this, but make no mistake, I think the events of today really just exposed how fragile the government is and how

deep the divisions are within the government and within parliament.

GORANI: Let's not forget, the U.K. parliament has to approve a deal, the European parliament has to approve a deal, the biggest thorniest issues,

Northern Ireland border, Customs Union, all of those things, none of that has been resolved.

[15:25:13] We're still talking about the process and we are supposed to have a deal, an exit by March of 2019. Is that realistic?

WALKER: This is a process that is really bogged down mired in detail because of every step of the process, Theresa May is trying to square two

deeply opposing factions within her own government, within her own faction.

Last week, she put off discussing what a future immigration system should look like because she knew that both sides in her government would be at

one another's throat.

GORANI: It's not -- it doesn't seem realistic. Just the question of the Northern Ireland/Ireland border alone would take years to settle probably

so I mean add everything else that's on the nu and up for discussion.

WALKER: Even the optimists think that what we might end up with is some kind of fudged deal because it suits the E.U. as well as the U.K. to have

that with lots of the difficult issues, including the Northern Ireland border, put off into a transition process for a couple of years. Then

probably another couple of years beyond that while all the rest of the details work out. A lot of people are really worried.

GORANI: But business people, markets, everyone hates this because we don't know what's ahead. It's murky. It's uncertain. They hate it. The

question I have and that so many people around the world have is could there be like so many remainers want, a second referendum in Britain? Is

it possible?

WALKER: It is possible but unlikely at this stage. I think what -- the only circumstances when it could come about is if parliament voted for it.

I think that if things go really, really badly, there is just the possibility of that.

But at the moment, I think most in parliament think that the divisions are pretty much where they were when we had the Brexit vote. You would you

have pretty much the same result. A second referendum would not resolve anything.

GORANI: Some polls indicate remain would win the second time around.

WALKER: Most polls underlying suggest we would be back pretty much where we are now. No one really wants to unpick the original Brexit vote. What

both sides now fear, is this going to be so much compromise on both sides that the U.K. will end up in a sort of halfway house when we are just about

outside the European Union.

But still accepting many of its rules and regulations without the same clout to shape what those rules and regulations are and only limited scope

to form trade deals around the world. This is a very difficult process the government survived today. But there are many more very difficult votes

coming up in the coming weeks.

GORANI: I have a feeling we will both be sitting on this beautiful lawn for many more shows in the coming year and a half, however long it takes.

Carole Walker --

WALKER: Several years.

GORANI: All right. I will see you maybe even tomorrow. Carole Walker, thanks so much.

Still to come tonight, they met, they talked, they shook hands, but what is the follow-up? We will ask that question when our coverage of the Trump-

Kim summit continues. We'll be right back.

Also, the U.S. media industry hangs in the balance. We are waiting for a crucial court ruling on a merger, the AT&T-Time Warner merger. It's due in

about 30 minutes. We will explain why it's so important coming up.


[15:30:07] GORANI: Back to today's big story. The world is weighing in after U.S. President Donald Trump's historic summit with the North Korean

leader Kim Jong-un. Some observers are hailing the meeting of the first step toward the eventual denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Others

say it was a little -- really it was little more than a photo op, needing with only vague promises from Kim. By the way, promises we've heard from

North Korean leaders before. They're also questioning president Trump's promise to end joint military exercises with South Korea. Where did that

come from? Some people were blindsided. We have reports from both sides of the pacific.

Nic Robertson is in Seoul. Michelle Kosinski is at the U.S. State Department in Washington. Nic Robertson in Seoul, it doesn't seem as

though the South Korean leadership and the presidency was aware that Donald Trump was going to announce that these military drills were going to end.

A major concession to North Korea.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It does seem that they were blindsided. Certainly, the military here have said that they want to understand

accurately the meaning and intention of what President Trump has said. The President Moon Jae-in speaking by phone to President Trump, because

President Trump was flying back to United States. The readout, we had about phone conversation didn't mention this particular issue. There was

praise for President Trump. President Trump told President Moon that had bonded well with Kim Jong-un there from North Korea. The meeting had gone

well. But I think that the notes that we're picking up here from the readout of that conversation and also the readout of a conversation between

the foreign minister here and Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo is both President Moon and his foreign minister here are saying that that South

Korea wants to be more involved in this process that the united states is pushing forward with North Korea. And I think that gives you an element of

understanding there that if they were blindsided by this issue of stopping the very important and key for South Korea joint military exercises, they

hope to address that through closer cooperation. At least, that's how it seems at the moment.

GORANI: Michelle Kosinski at the state department, are we going to get more details on how the United States plans to verify this denuclearization

process? Mike Pompeo is going to South Korea. We really got very vague terms from this statement and from the president in that hour long news


MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. And the sense was if we do get detail on that, then it's going to be a long ways down the road. I

think when you talk about this being a meet and greet, that was at best. But at worst, there was a lot of talk here on Capitol Hill among analysts,

even within the state department over whether the president gave away too much without really getting anything in return from North Korea. I feel

like that is the debate of the day.

In a press conference during this trip, Mike Pompeo did say -- he answered in one word. When a reporter asked, well, have you at least begun to close

that gap? Are you any closer in definitions between the U.S. and North Korea on what denuclearization even means? He says simply, yes. But would

he give any more detail? But we know for a fact that the South Koreans were blindsided by this supposed end to joint military exercises, so now

it's the task of the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo while he is there to try to hash out with the South Koreans, what exactly that would mean and to

try to explain the Trump administration side of that. Because as of right now, on Capitol Hill, there was just a briefing for members of Congress

given by the vice-president and it doesn't seem like there's any clarity coming out of that either as to, will there be joint military exercises?

Will they be on hold indefinitely? What is the timeframe? What does that mean exactly? Is it all joint military exercises? But I think it's worth

noting that that's exactly what China and Russia wanted to see the U.S. do is to stop those what they called wargames, and now the president of the

United States is also calling them war games. Hala.

[15:35:38] GORANI: And calling them provocative as well. Thanks very much, Michelle Kosinski at the state department and Nic Robertson in Seoul.

The new question on everyone's mind is what's next? Jean Lee is director of the Center for Korean History and Public Policy at the Wilson Center.

She joins me now from New York.

So, Jean, you spent a lot of time in North Korea. What is the leadership there thinking now after this Singapore summit? Because this, by all

accounts, has gone very well for Kim Jong-un.

LEE: I'm waiting for the next issue of Rodong Sinmun, which is their newspaper come out, because I do expect this meeting with the president to

be splashed all over the front page. So he will certainly bask in this achievement. The North Koreans consider themselves a small, a tiny

country. I'm just going to tell you when I went to a kindergarten in North Korea, one of the most popular children's books was about a hedgehog and a

tiger. And they asked me do I know the story of the hedgehog and tiger. It's so fascinating. The North Koreans see themselves as this harmless

little hedgehog, little prickly but facing this big bad tiger and all they have are their little quills to try to get the tiger's attention, which is

how they see themselves as these little defenseless creature facing off against a big bad tiger and that's what they've done. They're going to say

we have tamed the tiger. We got him to come to the table. So he is going to bask in the achievement of doing something that his father, his

grandfather didn't do.

GORANI: Yes. And the reality though in North Korea is just absolutely shocking human rights abuses. Kim Jong-un himself killing off family

members, putting thousands of tens -- possibly hundreds of thousands of North Koreans in slave camps and gulags. And the president of the United

States didn't really seem to focus too much on that.

LEE: We did not get any mention or a sign of a change in behavior or policy form the North Korean leader or the North Korean regime. Now, I'd

like to say that this leader has not suddenly changed, it's just that he has shifted strategy. There is a danger to giving somebody like this

legitimacy by sitting down with them. You are also putting your stamp of approval on the path he took to get here and that sets a bad example, I

think, for other rogue nations that are looking to gain that kind of legitimacy internationally.

GORANI: Because when the president says we've never gotten this far, it is fact that no U.S. President -- sitting U.S. President has ever met in a

summit environment, shaken hands with a North Korean leader. But the rhetoric, the language coming from North Korea, those promises we've heard


LEE: Indeed and that's important to keep in mind. It's been 25 years of these types of discussions much more explicit detailed, carefully crafted

deals that go back to 1994 and there have been broken promises on both sides along the way. And so that's something that the administration needs

to keep in mind, the Trump administration. They absolutely have to focus on how to make sure that the North Koreans are held accountable for these

promises. And that they map out a very detailed timeline. We didn't get the time line. I didn't expect us to get that timeline. But they've got

to make sure that they have a time line and a way to verify everything that the North Koreans promised to do.

GORANI: He was asked by a reporter how will you verify? Will you have inspectors there? He said, we'll have many people, Americans and others.

He said -- he spoke a lot with an uncle of his, who is a professor at MIT. We talked a lot about "nuclear." That this is what informed kind of his

negotiating position in all of this. How will that be read in North Korea based on your experience having spent many years there as the Pyongyang

bureau chief for AP?

LEE: I'm sorry, I missed the first part of your question. Which part of - - which part of you asking about the negotiating?

GORANI: The fact that he said that his negotiating position was informed by something he discussed, a lot of what he discussed with his uncle who is

a professor at MIT. That they both spoke a lot about nuclear. He also said that there will be people in North Korea to verify the

denuclearization without going into more detail. How will that be -- how will all those strengths from that news conference be read inside North


[15:40:16] LEE: I think the North Koreans will get very filtered version of events. But he -- Kim Jong-un has presented himself as a champion of

denuclearization. It's just that he and the United States have very different ideas of what that means. He is saying, I will give up my

weapons, when you give up your weapons. So he will focus on this moment, this meeting. He has done some things to show his commitment. He did blow

up that nuclear test site. So his people did see that. So he's showing that he's taking concrete steps. Of course, allowing inspectors back in

would be huge. They have not been there for nine years. And this is a very sensitive issue for the North Koreans. They feel it's a violation of

their sovereignty and so that will be a big step and a strong indication that they are prepared to go down this path and to let outside, an

international experts verify what they're doing.

GORANI: Sure. There's really no other -- I mean, if you want it to be a verifiable process, that is the way to do it. So we'll see if North Korea

agrees to that.

Thanks very much, Jean Lee, the former Pyongyang Bureau chief for AP.

Before we leave our discussion of the Singapore summit, there's one more voice to be heard. Dennis Rodman. Dennis Rodman is the retired American

basketball player who struck up a controversial friendship with Kim Jong-un several years ago. In a post-summit interview with CNN, Rodman was close

to tears saying he's been trying to promote an American/North Korea dialogue since the Obama administration.


DENNIS RODMAN, RETIRED BASKETBALL PLAYER: Obama didn't even give me the time of day. I asked him, I said, I have something to say from North

Korea. He just brushed me off. But that didn't deter me. I still kept going back. I kept going back. I kept going back. I showed my loyalty

and my trustworthy to this country. And I said to everybody, I said, the door will open. When I went back home, I got so many death threats. I got

so many death threats, so I was sitting up, protecting everything. And I believe in North Korea.


GORANI: Dennis Rodman there. When he arrived at the airport, by the way, he was wearing a t-shirt advertising a company that is a cryptocurrency

company to buy legal marijuana. On this occasion, he was wearing a make a America great baseball cap.

Still to come tonight, the way we consume media and the way we use technology is rapidly changing all of our lives. Now, one judge's decision

could change the future of the industry. The way you maybe will be watching this show in the future. We'll have more on the ruling on the

AT&T and Time Warner merger.


[15:45:08] GORANI: We're turning to Brexit now. We are live outside the Houses of Parliament after a crucial test of Prime Minister Theresa May's

plan for leaving the European Union. I'm joined here by Nigel Evans, conservative Member of Parliament. Thanks for being with us.


GORANI: So she avoided the Prime Minister Theresa May. She managed the rebellion. She made a compromise and a concession to say to parliament.

OK. If we present a plan to you and you do not agree with it, give us a month to come back with another plan. Is that what happened?

EVANS: We'll see the details. This has been a great day for parliamentary, democracy and indeed, democracy generally with

congratulations President Trump and what he's done in Singapore with Kim Jong-un. Historic day. And here in parliament, we are now one step closer

to leaving the European Union.

GORANI: But parliament has more of a say because of what the rebels within the prime minister's own party have demanded.

EVANS: You'll see the detail as to what the compromise is. But there is no way that parliament will then take over the negotiating ability.

GORANI: But they can reject the deal they don't like.

EVANS: Well, we'll see what the detail is going to say, because I think what you'll see -- and I'm very confident, by the way, we've got an 80

billion pound deficit with the European Union. My own feeling is they'll want to do a deal with us. We drink more champagne than the French. We --

GORANI: You know what remainers will say too. I know the first example comes up again and again. It's one that I can understand --

EVANS: I think we've got a big problem in the United Kingdom.

GORANI: But the reality is the U.K. needs the E.U. market more than the E.U. needs the U.K. market. It is just a matter of scale.

EVANS: No, no. And it's great that you've mentioned that, because the thing that we need to do at the end of this process is to embark on all

trade deal.

Now, Donald Trump wants do a trade deal with the United Kingdom. We want to do a trade deal with them and the rest of the world. It is the rest of

the world --

GORANI: Are you confident Donald Trump is going to give you a good trade deal after what happened at the G7, after what he's done with Canada and

the E.U. in terms of tariffs, saying it was in the interest of American national security?

EVANS: No. What he's done is he's highlighted the importance of the problem of protectionism. I've got no doubt whatsoever that the European

Union is a protectionist -- and it's amazing you've got Michel Barnier on the one hand saying, isn't this awful, all these tariffs that America want

to put on us? At the same time, he's threatening tariffs on us.

GORANI: Every economy has an industry that they don't touch, that they protect, the U.K. has one, the E.U. has one, Canada has its dairy farmers.

It's for political reasons.

EVANS: Yes, absolutely.

GORANI: They all have one. So cherry-picking the one industry that has high tariffs and calling it a protectionist economy maybe is unfair.

EVANS: Yes, but no. The thing is that what we want to do is to do trade deals with the rest of the world. We want to do a trade deal with the

European Union as well. We still want to buy that German cars or their French cars, so we still want to do that. But we want to do it with the

other countries around the rest of the world. They're expanding far more than the European Union.

GORANI: Well, let me ask you. When you saw what happened with Canada and the tiff, this absolutely surreal Twitter war between Donald Trump and

Justin Trudeau, America's closest ally, how can you be confident then that the U.K. outside of the E.U. will have the kind of weight and negotiating

power that it needs?

EVANS: I don't know enough about the problems that exist on tariffs between Canada and the USA. I've been on the Michigan-Canada border and

I've seen how the traffic moves back and forth. And I know that the trade between Canada and USA is enormous. And I can understand why the president

of the United States is standing up for the American people, wanting lower tariffs. I want to see lower tariffs and maybe just maybe Britain leaving

the European Union and what President Trump is doing that we can stop to lower tariffs and protection is regulations all over the world. I think

that will be a great success for everybody if we can do that.

GORANI: All right. Let's speak, I hope, in the coming months when we have a clearer idea of what a deal might look like. Nigel Evans, thanks so much

for joining us on CNN.

And less than 15 minutes, a judge in Washington will make a decision in a trial that could reshape the media industry as we know it. Judge Richard

Leon is expected to rule on the mega merger of AT&T and Time Warner, the parent company of this network. The trial is over the U.S. justice

department's lawsuit to block the deal. This will be a landmark ruling for the media and tech industries and it could have huge implications about how

you, I, our viewers all around the world consume content. Content like what you're seeing on your TV screens or your tablets right now.

Brian Stelter is here to walk us through the implications. What are the possible options here, Brian?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It could be a ruling in favor of AT&T. That's the conventional wisdom in Washington that AT&T will win this

ruling. It could be something more complicated, a ruling that has a bunch of conditions that AT&T has to follow in order to buy Time Warner or the

judge could side with the U.S. government and block the deal. That would send both AT&T and Time Warner back to the drawing board. Of course, we're

on one of Time Warner's channels right now. CNN is owned by Time Warner. AT&T believes it needs to own more media, own more TV channels and movie

studios in order to compete against giants like Netflix and Facebook and Google. That's the argument from AT&T. The argument from the U.S.

government has been this deal is too big. This company would be too big and it would harm consumers. We have not seen the U.S. government take

this kind of action to block this kind of deal before. So there are dozens of other companies all on the sidelines watching to see what happens today

to see what the government's verdict is going to be. This could have implications for American business, all across many industries, not just


[15:50:38] GORANI: What happens if the judge issues a ruling blocking this merger?

STELTER: Then there will be an appeals process. I mean, there will be appeals either way. But if this merger is blocked, we could see AT&T and

Time Warner go their separate ways. Even if one of two companies wants to appeal. There's something called a merger agreement deadline coming up in

just a week. These two companies have only agreed to dance together for one more week. So AT&T could go off on its own. Time Warner could go out

and find a new buyer. That means CNN could be sold to one company. Warner Brothers, HBO could be sold to another. That is a giant question mark as

we head into this.

If AT&T wins, it will also be appeal by the government. However, AT&T may go ahead and do the deal anyway. In other words, take over CNN and other

channels as of next week. It will be a lot harder to unscramble the eggs once they've been scrambled.

GORANI: Now, there were accusations when the justice department brought forward this case in attempt to block this deal, that perhaps it was

politically motivated, because the president during the campaign has spoken up out against this particular merger that it came from the justice

department and was led by an official that previously said the deal should be fine and then decided to go ahead and sue to try to stop it. Is that

still something out there? Are critics alleging that this could have another motive that goes beyond anti-trust?

STELTER: Yes. That cloud describing exists everywhere except in the courtroom. In the court room, the judge did not let AT&T make that

argument. But that has been the environment around this entire trial. The question about whether Trump has somehow using his power to influence deals

and he tried to block AT&T. Now, the theory basically goes that he would want to punish CNN for covering them aggressively and this he would try to

stop the deal. There has not been direct proof of that. There's been a circumstantial evidence and the White House has denied it. So I don't

think the judge is going to bring that hangs over this deal because most mergers like this one, they get approved pretty easily in Washington. This

is going a different way and that's very unusual. That's why so many other companies are looking to see what happens.

GORANI: And of course, we work for CNN. Our parent company is Time Warner. I'm looking at my -- I'm trying to get the time. We're six

minutes away-ish from the ruling, right?

STELTER: Yes. So this has been layout in court in Washington. The judge is old school. He's going to read it from the bench. He wants to make a

bit of a show of this and this will end up impacting us and many other companies. This means CNN might be owned by AT&T next week, might be owned

by the phone company or we might see many more fights in court.

GORANI: We'll see and we'll see what means also for Time warner. Thanks very much, Brian Stelter.

In top of the hour, by the way, we will have full coverage of that ruling as it comes down.

And a task that should not be overlooked, the art of cooking up diplomacy. What Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un ate during their historic meeting? That

is coming up.


[15:55:19] GORANI: Welcome back. As we go back to our top story, here are some moments you may have missed. What the American president told the

North Korean dictator at a press conference. It seems that you can take Donald Trump out of real estate, but you can't take real estate out of

Donald Trump.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They have great beaches. You see that whenever they are exploding their cannons into the ocean,

right? I said, boy, look at that view. Won't that make a great condo?


GORANI: Well, since you can't build world peace on an empty stomach, here's what the two leaders ate during the summit. Their lunch featured a

mixed of eastern and western dishes like stuffed cucumber, octopus and French pastries. It may not have been symbolic as when the North and South

Korean leaders met, but the menu seem tailored made for Kim and Mr. Trump. The hosts catered to the U.S. president who abstains from alcohol by

serving a wine sauce on the side and for dessert, Haagen-Dazs ice cream. Donald Trump is a notorious fan of that ice cream and there you have it.

And tropezienne which is a tart.

Thanks for watching tonight. I'm Hala Gorani in London. We'll have a lot more on the AT&T-Time Warner merger ruling at the top of the hour. Stay

with CNN. "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next.