Return to Transcripts main page
HALA GORANI TONIGHT
Report: Sexual Exploitation Endemic in Aid Sector; Young Symbol Of Palestinian Resistance Speaks To CNN; Facebook Removes Suspected Russian Network Of Pages; Instruction For 3D Guns To Go On Sale Amid Controversy; Guardians Of The Galaxy Stars Stand Behind Fired Director. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired July 31, 2018 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HANNAH VAUGHAN JONES, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Live from CNN London. I'm Hannah Vaughan Jones in for Hala Gorani.
Tonight, a critical moment in Robert Mueller's Russia investigation. Donald Trump's former campaign manager goes on trial. The jury sworn in
just one hour ago.
Also, tonight, how a British national who went to cause carnage at a concert in Manchester was evacuated from Libya by the British Royal Navy
and brought back to the U.K.
And Facebook cracks down, the tech giant now saying it's taken down a suspected Russian network with pages on its site.
First to our top story then this evening, no collusion for months. That's been Donald Trump's central defense against the criminal investigation he
slams as a witch hunt, but now we are seeing a remarkable shift in the messaging as the U.S. president says, "Collusion is not a crime."
This tweet comes on the very same day the first trial setting for the Russia investigation gets underway. A jury has just been sworn in to the
case against the former Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.
It is the biggest test yet for Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his investigations. So, first up, who is Paul Manafort? Why does he matter in
all of this? Well, he is a veteran political lobbyist operating in Washington since 1980s.
He joined Donald Trump campaign in March of 2016 but resigned just five months later brought down by tough questions on his work in Ukraine. Now
prosecutors are saying he hid millions of dollars in income from politicians there.
That alleged dirty money is the focus then today, but those few months that Manafort spent leading the Trump team could spell trouble for the president
So, let's bring in CNN's Joe Johns. Joe is outside the courthouse where Paul Manafort is on trial today. Joe, the trial today not so much about
Paul Manafort's dealings with Donald Trump.
That said, how does it play in, tie in with the Trump campaign and the special counsel and their investigation?
JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Yes. To put it bluntly, the big deal here is that he was the campaign manager for short, but very
critical time in the Donald Trump campaign back in 2016.
But the other half of the story is, before that he was a political consultant for Ukraine and got something like $60 million from Ukraine
thwarted into offshore bank accounts, didn't tell the tax collectors and the Internal Revenue Service here in the United States and that is how he
finds himself here.
At least those are the allegations as you say by prosecutors. So, the tie in, of course, and probably the most important thing we have to say again
and again about this trial is that this is a faceoff between someone who was in Donald Trump's inner circle and the critical time in 2016, who also
finds himself facing off against the Special Counsel's Office, Robert Mueller, who is investigating allegations of Russian collusion interference
in the election.
So, the president said so many times that the Russia investigation is a witch hunt. This is the beginning of the trials that Robert Mueller will
or could bring forth and now it's a test, a huge test between these two sides at a critical time during the midterm elections in the United States
where everyone is watching and there will be an argument coming out of this.
Presuming there is a verdict if Manafort wins, the suggestion would be the aspersions the president has cast on Russia may be correct, and if Manafort
is convicted that suggests there is something to this case and Robert Mueller is doing things right.
So, an important point for public relations as well as the law and as well as politics here in the United States -- Hannah.
JONES: Yes, but Joe, one of the things that presumably Paul Manafort's defense are going to try to get across at least for his private feelings
but also when it comes to any potential links with Trump is that talking here in this case about Ukraine. Ukraine is very different country to
So presumably that's one of the things that the Trump campaign or Trump team in the administration is going to be saying now when lines are drawn
between Manafort and Trump.
[15:05:02] JOHNS: Right. And the prosecution is trying to make the case, albeit not, a central part of the case that it was pro-Russia forces that
he was working with when he was trying to help Victor Yanikovich (ph), the president, who had so many political problems there.
The upshot of it all, however, is this case is about bank fraud allegations of lies and fraud in the taxes and the nexus between the two. So,
somewhere down the road, the issues will certainly get to collusion, but right now, it is about bank fraud and tax evasion.
JONES: Joe, we appreciate it. There for us live in Virginia following the first day of this Paul Manafort trial. Thank you.
So, let's get some perspective now on all these developments. We are joined by CNN contributor, former White House ethics czar, Norm Eisen, and
CNN political commentator and Republican strategist, Doug Heye. Gentlemen, welcome to you both.
And Norm, to you first, we've been talking about Paul Manafort there with Joe Johns so let's stick with that. Will Donald Trump be watching this
trial closely or has he managed to put enough space legally, at least, between himself and Paul Manafort, that Mueller can't really touch him on
NORM EISEN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Hala, thanks for having me back. And I do think Donald Trump will be watching the trial closely, and it is no
coincidence that in the past 24 hours, you have seen both Trump's attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and Trump himself adopt a new mantra.
Not that there was no collusion, but that collusion is not a crime because they know I believe that everybody's mind is going to be on the Mueller
investigation and on the big questions, and so they want to fill that space. Trump will be watching very, very close.
JONES: OK. Doug, to you then. On this no collusion mantra that we've had for so long now, suddenly evolving into this collusion is not a crime. The
messaging from this White House is so opaque, let's say. Are they are running scared or I am wondering whether there is some sort of brilliant
tactics here that this is a deliberate concerted effort to muddy the waters so much that they actually win?
DOUG HEYE, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yes, ultimately their goal is to muddy this water against the investigation, against the trials, as much as
they can. That is why we've seen this shift to from there was no collusion to collusion isn't a crime.
My prediction would be that in the coming weeks or months that we end up being told, you know what we did collude, and we should have colluded. It
would have been wrong not to collude. For a lot of Trump's base voters, they will go along with him on that.
That would be I think a very troubling thing for the country. Also, very troubling thing for Republicans who are facing a very difficult election
climate in November. They would love to be talking about the unemployment numbers, the GDP numbers, the increase in wages that we've seen reported
over the past few days.
But what we know is every other day it seems Donald Trump's troubles with the Mueller investigation get ramped up more and more. It's a real problem
JONES: Yes. We have to also like we've mentioned a bit about Rudy Giuliani, the president's lawyer. He has been doing the media rounds in
the last couple of days as well. I have to know play for you both, this is an interview he called into Fox News and with the point being that he was
trying to clarify the president's position or the administration's position on collusion or no collusion.
Let's listen to it and we'll speak of the back and you can tell me if you can decide what he means.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LAWYER (via telephone): Cohen says he walked -- he was in Donald Trump's office when Donald Trump Jr. walked in
and told him about a Russian meeting that is about to start. That is also not true.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is (inaudible) and I just want to jump in. I don't think any of that really addresses the question why you would say he
was not at the meeting.
GIULIANI: Why did Cohen (inaudible)?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, why are you saying that the president was not at meeting? I understand those two meetings that you just set out there that
doesn't explain what you're saying he wasn't there? Who asked if he was there? No one asked if he was there.
GIULIANI: Cohen is alleging that the meeting took place. We are making it clear that the president was not at that meeting. Cohen doesn't even
(END VIDEO CLIP)
JONES: OK, I've tried to break this down so that I can understand it. There's talk about all these meetings. The main meeting, of course, being
the Trump Tower meeting, July 2016. That's what the focus of a lot of Robert Mueller's, the special counsel's investigation is looking into.
But, I mean, Norm, to you, I mean, he is muddying the waters so much here that it is kind of confusing as to know whether he even knows what he means
here. I am wondering about the implications for these kind of interviews on the Russia probe. Where do they go from here?
EISEN: Well, at some point, Giuliani and the president will cross the bridge of no return. They will completely lost all credibility.
[15:10:08] Giuliani has been a loose cannon. He has been a problem for the president, in my view, from the moment he started making damaging
admissions and what I think your hearing, if you can, one can decipher that a call and it was a peculiar one.
What I think you're hearing is that the evidence is starting to emerge that the president knew about this Trump Tower meeting that will be a pivotal
event as the special counsel makes a determination of whether there is -- of course, there is no single crime of collusion.
Rather, there are dozens of potential crimes under that heading conspiracy and other offenses. And I think what you are hearing is some anxiety on
the part of Giuliani and threw him the president that the president is being drawn closer and closer to that meeting.
And finally, I will say I find it extremely improbable that they would have that meeting in Trump Tower and that then-Candidate Trump would know
nothing of it. So, I think the evidence is going to continue to emerge that he was aware and may be implicated.
JONES: Norm, I just want to pick you up on that point that you are making there. I mean, the Trump campaign now saying collusion is not a crime.
You're saying, it very much is. It's that probably multiple crimes. Is it an impeachable crime?
EISEN: Well, the standard for impeachment of high crimes and misdemeanors has been held to mean whatever Congress says is a high crime and
misdemeanor. So, that's a lower standard. I don't think we are at the point of really talking about impeachment, though, and actually try not to
talk about it.
First, we need to let Bob Moeller do his work and we need to get the rest of the evidence, including is there any corroboration for Mr. Cohen's claim
that the president was aware of that meeting.
I will give you one piece of cooperation, Hala, is extremely improbable that in a close tightknit group run with a strong hand by Donald Trump Sr.
that all of his senior campaign executives would go off and have this meeting in the building while he is in the building one floor way without
him knowing about it. That makes no sense.
JONES: OK. Final word to you, Doug, then. We've been talking about Rudy Giuliani being a loose cannon. There seems to be quite a few loose cannons
within this administration and certainly in the campaign as well.
Going back to Paul Manafort, his trial that's taking place that started today, some people suggesting that the president still has it within his
capacity to pardon Paul Manafort and that given the fact that he's so unpredictable, that's a possibility. What do you make of that?
HEYE: Well, it's certainly within his purview to do so if he chooses to do. We know that he's like to dangle pardons out there to try and
potentially influence people who are subjected to the investigation.
Politically, it would be a big mistake for the president to do so. It would further cause upheaval to this whole process, which is already
damaging one to him. It would make him almost appear to be guilty before he has been charged of anything.
It would be a big mistake again -- you know, this Friday will have our jobs numbers come out, the first Friday of August. We expect those to be good
numbers. This is what this administration and what congressional Republicans want to be talking about and should be talking about.
So, any kind of a pardon just blows up any kind of good news that this administration could get, and it means that there would further get in the
wrong way, which has been a consistent problem.
JONES: All right. Well, Doug Heye, Norm Eisen, my thanks to both of you. Thank you.
Meanwhile, President Trump might be willing to make nice with Iran a week after tweeting threats and warnings to Tehran and just days away from a
fresh round of reimpose U.S. sanctions.
Mr. Trump appears to have offered Iran something of an olive branch. He now says he is willing to meet the country's president, quote, "whenever
they want to" and without preconditions. That, of course, after very publicly pulling out of the Iran nuclear deal that was back in May of this
year. And we should say that Iran has just responded.
Our international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson, joins me with more on this now. We should also say that Mike Pompeo, the secretary of state,
sort of like backtrack a little bit on what Donald Trump has said about there is no preconditions. But the Iranians have responded. Tell us more.
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Sure. What we've heard is from the foreign minister and he's calling President Trump's
speech essentially a PR stuff. He said, you know, the JCPOA, this nuclear deal, was working. It took several years to get that working with China,
with Russia, with the European nations, Britain, France, Germany and with the European Union.
So, what he is saying now is threats, sanctions, and PR stunts won't work, try respect. Respect for the Iranians and respect for the international
agreements, i.e. the fact that businesses are trying to do business with Iranian businesses and President Trump and the U.S. may imposing sanctions
JONES: And Donald Trump is obviously hugely proud of that, that he's a dealmaker. The Iranians seem to think that he's very much a deal breaker
at the moment.
[15:15:06] While the and you get deal is off the table and the U.S. has withdrawn from it, is there any hope of any communication even between the
ROBERTSON: You know, I think there is. I mean, we did not hear from the foreign minister there and we've also had a statement from the Foreign
Ministry spokesman as well, which it talks about there is no justification for calling for the talks right now. It talks about the need for
conditions and necessities before you get into talks.
But nowhere is anyone saying no and one of the lines from the Foreign Ministry spokesman I find very intriguing, he's saying what proof do we
have that President Trump meant what he said and that this isn't demagoguery, i.e., that this isn't theater.
So, is this really -- is this a real question coming from the Iranians? Are they saying prove that you have some substance here we might talk. The
reality is the Iranians are coming under huge economic pressure.
There is a political price to pay for President Rouhani who is a moderate to engage again without knowing where he would go, and we know what talk
summits with President Trump look like. No one comes out with much of anything.
So, that political price for a moderate like Rouhani to go into something like this just seems a no go at the moment.
JONES: You say that no one comes out with much with Donald Trump in summits and one person who arguably did come out with quite a lot that
would be Kim Jong-un of North Korea. New satellite images now suggesting that perhaps North Korea is building new missiles, obviously completely in
contravention to what we think they discussed or they agreed upon at that summit in Singapore. This would be very bad news for Donald Trump?
ROBERTSON: It will be if you cannot unspin it. Right now, he is very good and effective telling his base almost black is white. This is good. We've
got a deal. We are safer. That is what he came back from Singapore saying.
The reality was some of the things he said like the return of the U.S. troops missing in action during the Korean War, things like that,
dismantling of a motor test facility, things that he said were happening, weren't happening.
This is what we are getting to now is of a different order. Potentially it's still spendable. What we have now are satellite images of two
different research sites, one the research is liquid fuel ballistic missiles.
Another one that's researches enriching uranium. There was a month ago fresh work in a scientific research facility. So, these are troubling
indicators. I'd say what Kim Jong-un came away from Singapore where was not having signed up to a lot of stuff that President Trump wants.
There were full very loose points. They weren't strong agreements. So, yes, he walked away --
JONES: With a photo op.
ROBERTSON: With a photo op and he hadn't committed himself anything and now we are seeing that unraveling, but unless he test a missile or it has
another nuclear test, I think President Trump continue to spin it effectively to his base for now.
JONES: All right. Nic, thank you very much indeed.
Still to come on the program tonight, it was an attack that horrified Britain in a way few others have. Now incredible new details about the man
behind at all. Stay with us, as we reveal them in just a moment.
Plus, fired so big you can see from space. We are going to be live in California where more than a dozen blazes are still burning.
JONES: Remarkable new details are emerging about the man who killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester here in U.K. last year.
It turns out that Salman Abedi was among a group of British nationals evacuated from Libya during a civil war. Nina dos Santos has more.
NINA DOS SANTOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was worst terror attack on U.K.'s soil in more than a decade. Twenty two people died, many
of them children. More than 200 were injured. The attacker, Salman Abedi, detonated a homemade suicide vest in the foyer of the Manchester arena as a
pop concert was coming to an end.
Now more details are emerging as Abedi's movements in the years leading up to the attack. The U.K.'s Ministry of Defense has confirmed that Abedi, a
U.K. citizen, and his brother were among 100 Britons evacuated from their parent's war-torn homeland, Libya, in 2014. At the time, he was 19.
(on camera): Salman Abedi was on the radar of British intelligence agency since traveling from the U.K. to Libya, but one month before he was rescued
from that country, he was removed from a list because he was deemed to be low risk. That raises questions about the U.K. screening process at a time
when authorities were on high alert for home grown fighters returning from conflicts abroad.
(voice-over): An inquiry into that work of intelligence agencies concluded that the investigative actions taken in relation to Salman Abedi in 2014
and the subsequent decision to close him as the subject of interest was sounds on the basis of the information available at the time.
But according to the report, it wasn't Abedi's only trip to Libya. He returned there in 2017, just days before the Manchester attack although
there are no details on why. The report also notes that in retrospect there were warning signs, but they were deemed at the time not to relate to
Now more than a year on, questions still remain over how Abedi was radicalized and transformed him into a homegrown terrorist.
JONES: Nina is here in the studio with more on this now. The question being I guess, if we knew then what we know now, would things have turned
DOS SANTOS: Well, that's also a difficult question to answer at the moment, Hannah, because the law has changed quite significantly over the
last few years. In fact, the law starts changing in 2014, that very year that Salman Abedi is a 19-year-old, made his way back on a boat towards the
safety of the U.K.
Where, by the way, we should again reiterate, he was a British national. He was evacuated as such alongside his brother. Since 2014, the U.K. does
actually have the power to exclude people for a temporary period of time up to about two years in accordance with a new counterterrorism bill that was
passed in 2014.
There are especially exclusion procedures and they are applying them. We know that (inaudible), who is in charge of counterterrorism policing
network at the Metropolitan Police have said that about 200 to 300 of these foreign fighters returning to U.K. soils could have the special exclusion
measures applied upon them to prevent them from entering the U.K.
It becomes more complicated if somebody only has one passport, though, because then the question of making them stateless just complicates the
issue even further.
JONES: Yes. It complicated the fact that he was a British national as well. Questions I guess now for the security services here in the U.K.
given the fact that they have, however, many people on a watch list and they just do not have the resources to monitor these people 24/7.
DOS SANTOS: That is right. The threat is unprecedented. Remember that last year, we saw about five significant attacks, Manchester, Westminster,
the London Bridge attacks, the Parson -- green potential bomb attack there.
Now in light of all of that, what we saw was the head of MI-5, the domestic security services taking the really unusual step and going on British
television to highlight the extreme conditions that the country is facing in terms of the difficulty of detecting terrorism out there and also the
unprecedented threat level.
He said at the time that were 500 live operations on about 3,000 people been interviewed potentially extremists. And then wider people within the
potential (inaudible) of those individuals as well. About 20 attacks according to last year's figures were foiled over the last four years.
[15:25:12] That gives you an idea the government -- I've just got off the phone with the Home Office, they've continued to irritate that they are
committed to giving this country the amount of resources that they need to combat a threat like that.
JONES: And we hope they continue to do so. Nina, thanks so much indeed for your reporting on this is.
We turn our attention now to California where wildfire is so huge and intense. It's created its own weather system. More than a dozen blazes
are burning across the state, killing eight people, and leaving apocalyptic scenes of burnt out shells of houses and cars all over. People that are
recounting stories of getting out just in time.
Firefighters are making progress against the biggest of these fires, but will it hold? CNN's Dan Simon has been following this for us from the city
of Redding in California, joins us live. Dan, I know you have been hearing so many of those stories from people you have just managed to get out just
We understand how these fires are visible from space. They are far from containing it. It just seems like it is intensifying.
DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, they are making progress. This fire is out 27 percent contained and it seems to be burning away from populated
areas, so that is good news, but it's still is out of control. The fact, though, that it is burning away from inhabited communities means that
people whose houses were not burned.
Those people can begin going home and we heard at a community meeting last night how anxious people are to return to their homes, but in order for
that recovery to happen, Hannah, obviously, a few things need to occur.
You need to clear all the streets of debris. You need to get power back on and you have to clear the downed power lines. Hannah, let me show you
where I am. We are in the Lake Redding Estates neighborhood and this is just one example of what you will see everywhere in this community.
You got about four or five houses just right here and it might sound like a cliche at this point to say that a bomb went off. But I cannot really
think of a better description -- Hannah.
JONES: Yes. Is this unprecedented this level of destruction?
SIMON: Well, it is the seventh largest wildfire in California history. So, we have seen things like this before, but what is unprecedented is the
frequency of these wildfires for the last eight largest wildfires have occurred in the past year. Of course, there is a debate as to why that is
happening, but surely it is happening at an alarming rate.
JONES: Dan, good to talk to you. Thank you for your reporting on this. We appreciate it.
Still to come on the program tonight, Facebook suspects a Russian network is behind dozens of pages pushing political messages and this time a
liberal that's coming up.
Plus, a horrifying U.K. government report that sexual abuse in the international aid sector is endemic and predators are able to move around
as often as undetected. More on that up next.
[15:30:23] HANNAH VAUGHAN JONES, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A damning new report as of the U.K. details, the scope of sexual exploitation and abuse
in the global humanitarian sexes. Also numerous scandals in both in high profile charities in disaster zones. The report says victims often become
victimized again by sexual predators. Our Erin McLaughlin has the details.
ERIN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Out of one of the greatest natural disasters, one of the worst scandals in the history of
global philanthropy, the revelations that Oxfam's country director in Haiti hosted sex parties with prostitutes of a country reeled from a devastating
earthquake triggers headlines around the world.
JOHN VAUSE, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Now sexual abuse allegations --
HALA GORANI, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A growing scandal.
ISHA SESAY, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: And the judges deny covering of accusations.
MCLAUGHLIN: And for the revelations of sexual exploitation and abuse across the global charity sector, six months on a new damning report by the
British parliament warning the scandal is far from over.
STEPHEN TWIGG, CHAIRMAN, INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: What our report set out is a collective failure over a period of at least 16 years
by the aid sector to address sexual exploitation and abuse. An organization has often put their own reputation ahead of the protection of
children, women, and other victims and survivors of sex exploitation and abuse.
MCLAUGHLIN: Stephen Twigg chair the parliamentary committee which found sexual exploitation in the aid sector to be a, quote, "open secret." Noting
outrage is appropriate but surprise is not.
And that the aid sector has been aware of sexual exploitation and abused by its own personnel for years. And that the reactive patchy and sluggish
response of the sector has created an impression of complacency verging on complicity.
TWIGG: One of the most disturbing pieces of evidence we took was the suggestion that because very often humanitarian crisis are chaotic
situations with little regulation, predators will be attracted to working in the aid sector.
MCLAUGHLIN: The report calls out British charities including Oxfam and Save the Children. Oxfam acknowledges the report makes for, quote,
In a statement saying, "We know we failed to protect vulnerable women in Haiti, and we accept we should have reported more clearly at the time. For
that, we are truly sorry. We've made improvements since 2011, but recognize we have further to go."
And the statement say the children says, "Along with other charities, we've heard the wakeup call for the entire aid sector loud and clear." A wake
call that the problem is global. For example, it sites a 2018 report looking at abuse in Syria which found that, quote, "sexual exploitation by
humanitarian workers at distributions was commonly cited by participants as a risk faced by women and girls trying to access aid."
TWIGG: They can't be left to one country. There's got to be buy-in from other countries. That's --
MCLAUGHLIN: Do you see that buy-in?
TWIGG: I think there are some encouraging signs, but it's very early. It's very early. And if this is going to change it's not going to change
in weeks or months or even years. It's going to take decades to really establish a system that work in every part of the world.
MCLAUGHLIN: Erin McLaughlin, CNN, London.
JONES: Well, for more on all this, let's bring in Asmita Naik, author of a 2002 reports on sexual exploitation in the aid sector and as she gave
evidence to this committee report. This latest report. Welcome to the program. Thank you.
First off, 2002, 16 years ago. Is the report today have indication of you and your findings 16 years ago?
ASMITA NAIK, AUTHOR, 2002 UNCHR AND SAVE THE CHILDREN REPORT: Sadly, yes. It's brought together not really the 2002 report but all subsequent reports
that have continuously highlighted this issues over the years. And sadly, we're not much further forward. I mean, certainly we're setting forward in
policy turns in 2002 and a lot of work has done in that global policy level which has continued to tilt for day. But the real problem is the lack of
JONES: Why have it taken so long then? Because presumably over the aid sector has bene fully aware of all of this in all of those years. And for
your reporting as well institutions such as, well, government, and these department French national development would have been aware. But why only
NAIK: Yes. I mean, I think, you know, there's been a lack of political will both big and small piece essentially. The aid sector has been allowed
to focus on other priorities whether it's funding, reputations. At the cost of victims, rights and the experience of victims, so that's what's
[15:35:00] And particularly, essentially in the past 16 years, aid agencies had been allowed to carry on tackling this issue by themselves. There
needs to be external scrutiny and that's why I hope will be strengthen now.
JONES: I've heard you urge governments in the past, at least, who cuts their aid to charities who are involved or complicit in this. So that go
far enough. Would it just punish those people who would be the recipient of any aids in the long term?
NAIK: Now, I don't believe it that punishes recipients because I'm not advocating causing aids. I'm currently advocating, really distributing
aids to agencies who are transparent, who perform better essentially. I mean, they should be criteria that we asses when we talk about effective
delivery of aids. It's not just about being drastic laying trucks on the ground. It's also about the way you protect the most venerable. So my
augment is about redistribution, not that cutting.
JONES: And the report today said that charities, many of these charities were almost complicit, not going quite embarrassing complicit. Is it far
enough for you?
NAIK: Yes. I mean, it's far enough. I mean, for me, I would talk about essentially, I feel like it's leap service. All the policies goes upon
since 2002. All of those were in place. There's been a complete lack of action on the ground.
JONES: And we're CNN International program here. This is a report that focuses on charities, on U.K. charities and their operations abroad as
well. What kind of implications or effect is this going to have then on the global aid sector?
NAIK: Now, this is a very significant report on this issue, globally. I think it's the most authoritative work either for us on this issue,
frankly. They didn't just look at U.K. charities. They went to New York, at the U.N., they went to Washington, went to World Bank. So really it
covers the entire international aid sector.
And the reason it's so globally significant is because a, it's documents, the scope of this issue since 2002. And secondly, analyzes very
effectively all the options that are there for addressing this, including some key options, for setting up and in, and spends on ombudsman. Setting
up new regulations. So it's very comprehensive report, which I think the world needs to read.
JONES: And it could not have (INAUDIBLE) for other charities in the global setting as well, we heard. We do have to leave it there. But we
appreciate you coming. Asmita Naik, thank you.
NAIK: Thank you.
JONES: Now, she spent her 17th birthday in an Israeli prison, but Ahed Tamimi is now free returning home to hero's welcome in the West Bank as a
powerful symbol of the Palestinian course. CNN's Ian Lee sat down with
IAN LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's a life Ahed Tamimi couldn't have anticipated. Shooting to fame when she was 11 by staring down Israeli
soldiers. The young Palestinian was on a path for international prominence but also prison.
It was this video in late 2017 of her hitting a soldier that for Israel was the last straw. Moments before the incident, an Israeli soldier had shot
her cousin in the head with a rubber bullet. He survived.
Do you regret hitting the soldier?
AHED TAMIMI, PALESTINIAN ACTIVIST (through translator): I believe that I didn't do something wrong. I didn't go to the soldier. The soldier came
to my house. The soldier forced me to do this. This is a normal reaction for what happened.
LEE: Days later, police raided the 16-year-old's home and arrested her. Israel's defense minister told reporters at the time whoever goes wild
during the day will be arrested at night. Her trial in an Israeli military court lasted months, it became a lightning rod for criticism of the IDF in
its treatment of Palestinian youth.
Tamimi finally pled guilty to four charges of criminal acts where she disrupted an IDF soldier and carried out incitement. She'd served a total
of eight months in prison. Released Sunday, Tamimi received a hero's homecoming. But the teenager who became a Palestinian icon first wanted
pistachio ice cream.
TAMIMI (through translator): It's a wonderful feeling. I haven't eaten an ice cream in a long time. It's a wonderful feeling that I heard all the
female prisons are released and can eat ice cream.
LEE: Israeli officials were mute about her release. Tamimi celebrated her 17th birthday in prison and graduated high school. She says she learned
patience and studied human rights, all the while her notoriety only grew.
How do you feel that you're now a symbol of the Palestinian cause?
TAMIMI (through translator): Of course it makes me happy. I'm so proud that I succeeded to deliver the message of prisoners in my homeland and
nation. God willing, I will succeed to deliver the message that Palestinians are suffering because of occupation.
[15:40:10] LEE: Now free, her message is a Palestinian unity and hasn't ruled out a career in politics, but one step at a time.
TAMIMI (through translator): In the future, I will register for university and study law and someday I want to be a famous lawyer to defend my
LEE: The world and Palestinian society will watch Ahed Tamimi closely, so too will Israeli authorities as she's currently on parole.
Ian Lee, CNN, in Nabi Saleh, the West Bank.
JONES: Still to come on the program, Facebook suspects, Russian trolls -- or Facebook suspects rather that Russian trolls are behind dozens of new
pages at pushing political messages. More on that, coming up.
JONES: Welcome back. As the Russia investigation ramps up in Washington, Facebook has told U.S. lawmakers, it suspects a Russian group is behind
more than 30 pages advocating political positions in the United States. The tech giant says it has removed a network of accounts involved in what
it described as coordinated and authentic behavior. Samuel Burke has been following the story joins me in the studio now.
So, Samuel, what do we know about these accounts and what were they trying to do?
SAMUEL BURKE, CNN BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Well, we know that hundreds of thousands of people viewed these accounts. And I
just want to put up on the screen exactly some of the issues that they were going after because it looks like, once again, some group, maybe the
Russians, according to Facebook, were really trying to sow discord in the United States.
For instance, one of the pages promoted a counter demonstration to a rally in Virginia that sanctities place. This is coinciding with the one-year
anniversary of that rally in Virginia where a woman ended up dead. So they're trying to pit two groups against each other. It looks like here.
Also, an effort to amplify the message of some liberal groups to abolish ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the United States. So here,
they're backing a liberal group. So again, trying to sow discord. And Facebook isn't saying publicly that it knows for sure that it's the
Russians. But Facebook says they found evidence of some connections with accounts that Russian trolls used in 2016 and Facebook has already briefed
Capitol Hill on this in the United States.
JONES: And you've mentioned already there are hundreds of thousands of people who have been affected by this. What about Facebook? How is it
being affected by this? What about Facebook? How is it being affected by this?
BURKE: Well, it's interesting because we saw this huge stock price fall, not that long ago. Just a few days ago, the largest in history. In fact,
today looking the stock price, it's actually up. Just a little bit. So it's interesting to see when this type of news affects and doesn't affect
the stock price.
But I think it really plays to this bigger issue in the United States where we don't see clarity. We don't see a clear message inside the Trump
administration. We have Dan Coats, the head of intelligence, saying one thing and you have President Trump saying something else. But don't forget
that Mr. Coats just said a couple of weeks ago, this is happening now. The alarm bells are ringing and now we see this.
[15:45:16] JONES: I think a lot of people will be interested to know that post-Mark Zuckerberg giving evidence on Capitol Hill and also the Cambridge
Analytica scandal as well. But Facebook is still giving evidence, still giving information to U.S. lawmakers, so key, of course in the run up to
midterms and in the general looking to election meddling of any form.
BURKE: And perhaps one of the reason the stock price isn't down is that they're getting ahead of this. This is Facebook announcing this news.
This isn't a report in the New York Times about Cambridge Analytica. So this is a positive step the fact that you're saying this is happening, it's
happening right now. Here's how we're dealing with.
JONES: We're getting on the front.
JONES: Exactly. Samuel, thanks so much for reporting on this.
Now, imagine a gun that's mostly plastic and could be made to elude metal detectors. And imagine you could make that gun in your own home. And if
it's used in a crime, that gun can't be traced.
Well, in the coming hours, instructions for 3D printed guns will be sold on the internet in the United States. Critics say these guns will be hard to
control and several states in the U.S. are now suing.
Well, these plans are all being published under a legal settlement with the Trump administration. CNN's Tom Foreman is in Washington for us, joins us
now live. Tom, good to see you.
Donald Trump has already intervened on this matter on Twitter saying it doesn't really see how it makes sense. It doesn't really make sense to me
either. Who is pushing for the legalization of these 3D guns?
TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, some gun enthusiast were pushing forward, certainly the company that's behind this 3D printer of this
holding. There really are two different kinds of guns. We're talking about here. The one you're seeing right there where the sort of white
clunky looking one. That is made entirely out of plastic. Now, there's a metal piece in it but it's not integral to it. That could pass through
security and not be detected.
These other ones though are simply guns that can be at home that involved metal parts that can be milled at home. So essentially that's where you're
making just an untraceable gun. You could setup a sort of a gun production line in your basement and produce guns at the authorities knew nothing
Now, the one caveat to all of this is, so far, doing all of this, still takes a lot more money and a lot more effort than just buying guns here in
the United States where there are so many of them and they're easily obtained on the open market or on the black market. The real concern here
though is that, what about the people who legally can't buy them? Whether they're criminals or some of that has kind of a record that this an issue.
Can they now make them on their own in private which I will point out is legal in this country?
JONES: And what about this idea that it's a threat to national security? It's going to be legalize in the coming hours, right? Is it too late to be
calling this into question?
FOREMAN: Well, I mean, like I said, it's part of our law here anyway that you can legally make a gun for your own use in this country. What this is
really doing is just making it easier and it does raise the specter that as this technology advances, we're still in sort of the early stages of what
this can do. Do you reach a point where truly somebody could set up essentially a gun production line in their house and produce a lot of these
things and stockpile them in a way that authorities have no idea that they're out there, no idea that they've come into existence?
Yes, that raises certain question. I think this is much more debate about the future and future fears than it is the current state of the technology
although it's advancing very, very rapidly.
JONES: And, Tom, for many of our international viewers, I'm sure lots of people will be thinking why is it so hard to get gun control push through
in the U.S. that it's relatively easy and quick to seemingly get 3D guns through?
FOREMAN: Gun control has been a gigantic, political bear in this country for a long, long time. The people who defend their right to have guns
looks to the U.S. constitution and say that it's right there in the constitution. It's guaranteed to them. The people who think that the
reality of life in this country where gun deaths are so high has simply outrun that course and that demands of change are equally passionate about
it, but there's been no ability for them to produce a political change on that front. And there's no real sign that even with this technology,
jumping forward like this, that a big change is in the offing.
JONES: Tom, we appreciate your reporting on this. Thanks for joining us on the program. Tom Foreman there in Washington.
And there is more to come on the program this evening, including Guardians united. Why the cast of one of Hollywood's biggest franchises is standing
by their director, despite usually controversial messages that he once posted?
[15:50:22] JONES: They may have saved the universe once or twice, but in Hollywood, this hour the Guardians of the Galaxy are facing a battle more
sensitive and perhaps more disturbing than anything they've dealt with before.
The stars of the hit series are standing by their director after he was fired over sensitive tweets written several years ago. The message is that
he tweeted are too upsetting for us to broadcast right now, but we should say that they do include jokes about rape and pedophilia.
The cast though have released a statement saying they were shocked by his abrupt departure adding and a quote, "Given the growing political divide in
this country, it's safe to say instances like this will continue although we hope Americans from across the political spectrum can ease off on the
character assassinations and stop weaponizing more mentality."
Frank Pallotta is in New York with more on this. Frank, good to talk to you. I want to bring in one particular part of that statement, where they
talk about characters assassinations and stop -- sorry. We hope Americans from across the political spectrum to start off with. When did this become
FRANK PALLOTTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, what they're trying to really talk about is that they feel that even something like a marvel movie has
become politicized in a certain way. So these actors are coming together to really talk about this and to talk about something that happened to a
director that brought them all together.
Now, whether you think he should be fired or not is really your personal opinion. But according to these actors of this $1.6 billion franchise.
These two movies have made nearly $2 billion for Disney, feel as if James Gunn should at least be -- there should be support for him online, and
that's what they're really trying to do.
JONES: And James Gunn, he was the director of the first two, probably in line for the next one as well. He's the one who's been fired by Disney
now. What has Disney saying about the decision to fire him and what's he saying about his future?
PALLOTTA: Well, Disney said in a statement, they said it was indefensible and inconsistent with our studios values, that's why they fired him. As
you said, a lot of the tweets were in very bad taste about rape and pedophilia. You can say they were jokes or not. But they were in bad
taste for Disney. And this is a huge franchise for Disney. You're talking literally $17.2 billion Marvel Studios has brought in over their 20 movies.
And this is just something that Disney cannot live with, so they had to kind of let James Gunn go.
He originally said that he understood the decision and he's kind of stayed off the since then. But he was supposed to direct the next volume of this
huge very popular trilogy and he was a big part of the Marvel universe itself, especially going into the next phase of the future of the
JONES: And the actors involved in this Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Bradley Cooper, all well-known names across the globe as well. Is this the first
time that a team of cast have come together in support of one individual, in the days of Me Too and the like?
PALLOTTA: I can't really recall this many stars coming together to speak up for their director. What's really interesting is Pratt here. Pratt
literally said on Twitter that he completely disagrees with what Gunn said but feels as if. But still said that he thinks Disney should reinstate.
And I don't think Disney will. I think that this has happened and now they will try to move out from this with many other directors that they have
under the Marvel banner.
But it is very interesting to see and it's even more interesting to think that the studio let Gunn go. It fired him after he had brought in $2
billion. It kind of shows where everything is in terms of their values and what they want to present the company as.
[15:55:08] JONES: And I guess the cast is saying that this sort of character assassination, as they put it. People can change and he is a
reformed man now from what he did -- or what he said, rather, all those years ago.
We have to leave it there, Frank. We appreciate your analysis on this. Frank Pallotta there.
Now, we've all done it visited a zoo or an aquarium and stood in all before the majesty of nature itself. Perhaps, you've be even thought, how can I
get close to it to really connect depot with serene splendors that played before my very eyes?
But if you have, then I'm afraid our next story does not hold the answers for you. It is the story of a group of aquarium goers in Texas who decided
that after that's on the wonders of a foreign shark caused Miss Helen, the only next logical move would be, yes, to steal her by, wait for it,
disguising Miss Helen as a baby. That's right.
In fact, I'm going to say that again, because it was a lot to take in there. The protagonist of this story went to an aquarium where they
decided to steal a shark by pretending that the shark was a baby in a pram. Miss Helen, that is. Why? Well, it seems because they could, my friend,
because they could like the shark, we are also speechless. Thankfully police have intervened and Miss Helen, the shark is now back where she
In the meantime, 38-year-old, Anthony Shannon has been arrested for theft and Miss Helen fortunately is said to be doing, "great."
Thanks so much for watching tonight. Stay with us here on CNN, as ever, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is coming up next.