Return to Transcripts main page
Trump Suspends Tariff Threat in New Deal with Mexico; Dems Swarm Iowa Weeks Ahead of Crucial First Debates; Democratic Candidates Defend Abortion Rights; Pompeo Downplays Climate Change, Suggests "People Move"; Coastal Town at Risk of Being Swallowed by the Sea; police Search for Connecticut Mom; U.S. and Russia Warships Nearly Collide in the Pacific; Teams Face Off on Day 2 of 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired June 8, 2019 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:41] ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Alex Marquardt, in for Fredricka Whitfield on this Saturday morning. Thanks so much for joining me.
We begin this hour with a crisis averted. The tariffs that President Trump threatened to levy against Mexico last week have been called off for now. The President tweeting late last night quote, "I am pleased to inform you that the United States of America has reached a signed agreement with Mexico."
According to the President Mexico is ready to crack down on migrants passing through their country to the southern border with the U.S. And the U.S. is going to work to speed up the processing of asylum claims by those migrants.
For more on this late night deal, let's go to CNN's Sarah Westwood at the White House. Sarah -- these high stakes negotiations wrapping up just after the President got back from his European trip. What more have you learned about what was agreed to?
SARAH WESTWOOD, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: That's right -- Alex. And this agreement between the U.S. and Mexico came about after three days of intense negotiations between the Mexican delegation that came to Washington for the talks on the U.S. side led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
President Trump is backing off that threat to impose a 5 percent tariff on all goods imported from Mexico in exchange for Mexican officials saying that they would step up their immigration enforcement.
Here's a little bit of what Mexico agreed to. Mexico agreed to deploy thousands of national guard troops throughout its country including to its southern border to stop the flow of Central American migrants moving up through Mexico to get to the U.S. It vowed to try to disrupt human smuggling operations in Mexico. To let some migrants caught crossing the U.S. border illegally to wait in Mexico while their asylum claims are being processed, that's something the Trump administration had long been pushing to expand. And in exchange the U.S. agreed to accelerate the asylum process.
President Trump took to Twitter today to thank the President of Mexico and the Mexican foreign minister for their efforts in negotiating the deal. And he said that if Mexico does try to live up to the terms of the agreement then, in his words, this will be a success.
And we should note that President Trump initially had left his demands vague. Basically he never specified what criteria Mexico would have to meet in order for him to walk back that tariff threat. So he has been able to claim this as a victory.
Republicans on Capitol Hill had expressed skepticism about the President's tariff threat. They had been worried that this would harm American businesses, cost U.S. consumers. And some had sought a delay from President Trump.
But now, Alex, that situation seems to be completely avoided with the President for now ending that tariff threat in exchange for the immigration deal.
M1: All right. Sarah Westwood breaking it all down for us. Thanks very much.
Now, of course, this is not just an international matter. This obviously has to do with domestic politics as well. And just a short time ago we heard from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who lashed out at the President's tactics in these negotiations.
In a statement she writes quote, "President Trump undermined America's preeminent leadership role in the world by recklessly threatening to impose tariffs on our close friend and neighbor to the south. "Threats and temper tantrums are no way to negotiate foreign policy."
So let's keep breaking this down with our experts. David Swerdlick is an assistant editor for the "Washington Post"; Catherine Rampell, "Washington Post" opinion columnist; and Sam Vinograd, a former senior adviser to President Obama's national security advisor. Thank you all for joining me.
DAVID SWERDLICK, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Hey -- Alex.
M1: All right. Well David -- let's start with you. This agreement is now set. It was agreed to last night. But the political battle as we just heard from Nancy Pelosi is just beginning. What do you make of the President now claiming that this agreement is going to mean that Mexico will help prevent the flow of immigrants to America's southern border?
SWERDLICK: Ok. So, Alex -- two things. I do think it's good that he backed down from the tariff threat. And I also think that this deal, unlike some of the other deals that the President has gone out and tried to make around the world, at least had a quid and a quo, right? He wanted action on immigration in exchange for not imposing tariffs.
That being said, and with apologies to "Jerry Maguire", this agreement announced last night is only a mission statement. There are no benchmarks. There's nothing specific.
[11:04:54] It says Mexico will take quote/unquote "unprecedented steps". They've agreed in principle to deploy their national guard along the Mexico/Guatemala border which they were already signaling that they would do which potentially from the point of view of the Trump administration will be a good thing and may stem the flow of some immigrants coming from Guatemala or further south-- El Salvador, Honduras.
SWERDLICK: But there's just not exactly a clear sign of what's going to happen next.
M1: Lots of vagueness still there.
Catherine -- to you, you wrote a piece that called these tariffs deeply stupid, largely because Americans would have picked up the tab and that's what we know happens with tariffs. Do you think that its was Republican pressure internally, domestically, that forced the President to back off these threats of tariffs and cut this deal?
CATHERINE RAMPELL, "Washington Post": I think probably there were a few different factors here. This administration did not seem to have anticipated how much pushback, or at least Trump didn't anticipate how much pushback he was going to get on these tariffs. But most likely the combination of pushback and threatened rebellion, who knows that they would actually deliver, from Republican lawmakers, the weak jobs report, estimates of the economic disaster that would have resulted, as well as these some 140 business and agricultural groups that came out explicitly against this policy.
All of those things together most likely, convinced this administration, convinced the President that, you know, it's not worth delivering on this threat that was going to basically burn down our own house and that's why I think we see Trump essentially accepting relatively minor -- one might even argue meaningless concessions from the Mexico side and then again pro claiming victory by delivering the status quo essentially.
M1: And Sam -- one of the key tenets of this agreement is that the U.S. has agreed to speed up this asylum process, the processing of these migrants arriving at the border. Of course, it's going to be a hugely complex process that is already -- how do you see this happening, how do you see this, you know, put into effect?
SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, on the U.S. side, we certainly need the President to actually devote resources that would enable the asylum process to be expedited, including more immigration judges. He has been reticent to do anything within the United States and has instead preferred to blame everyone but himself for what's gone wrong on immigration policy.
We look at this joint declaration and the Mexicans have said that they're going to deploy 6,000 national guard members throughout Mexico. To Catherine's point this may be an empty victory. The national guard was just created in February in Mexico. It's a civilian agency and they're now deploying about one-tenth of their manpower to supposedly find more migrants in Mexico.
We look at the declaration from last night which says that Mexico is going to expand its role in keeping asylum seekers on the Mexican side of the border. Right now the migrant protection policy that the administration has put in place just applies to three points of entry.
And at this point it's looking like Mexico is saying that they'll keep asylum seekers trying to enter across the U.S. border. That would mean there would need to be a lot more border agents deployed across the U.S. border processing these asylum seekers and then returning them to Mexico.
I am waiting to see if President Trump puts his money where his mouth is on the American side of this agreement and actually does something to forestall the immigration crisis.
M1: And David -- to that point, do you think Mexico is going to put their money where their mouth is? They say as Sam just mentioned that they're going to be sending 6,000 troops to that border and are going to allow migrants to be returned and held in Mexico while those cases are being processed. Will they follow through on that?
SWERDLICK: So, if you assume Mexico went into this with good faith, and let's assume that, then yes sure they'll deploy troops along the Mexico/Guatemala border that might have an impact on the migration flows coming from that country from further south up into Mexico and then later up into the United States.
But again, the agreement only calls for unprecedented steps. It doesn't say specifically what they're supposed to do. How this will be measured.
And I think part of the problem, as Sam just pointed out, is what are the two sides going to devote to this in terms of resources. Is Mexico going to, at some point, agree to a safe third country agreement where they're saying yes, we too can be a home for asylum seekers, not just the United States? They didn't agree to that here.
And on the U.S. Side is the U.S. going to devote, again, as Sam said, more resources toward more border agents, more immigration judges and immigration courts, better facilities that are housing asylum seekers on this side so that people are not living in squalid conditions while they wait for their cases to be adjudicated? Nothing is clear in this joint declaration.
F1: But Alex -- you know, we as the United States used to be the leader on human rights. And we used to be the leader on ensuring the rights of asylum seekers and refugees.
And at this point our remain in Mexico policy means that asylum seekers may not have the conditions that they are guaranteed under international law, not to mention the conditions here in the United States.
[01:09:54] And from a macro perspective we are destroying our relationship with Mexico. We are an unreliable partner when it comes to economics and when it comes to security agreements. So just logically-speaking Mexico is going to be turning to other countries for export purposes and for security relationships because they fear President Trump's next temper tantrum.
M1: You both make excellent points. We talk about agreements. We talk about the wall. We talk about numbers. What we really should be talking about are these are lives that, you know, that are being impacted, people who are risking everything to come up here to try to get into the states for a better life.
Catherine, I do want to bring it back to domestic politics because this is obviously an element that runs through almost everything these days. What role do you think that 2020, the Presidential election next year is playing in President Trump's thinking in this?
RAMPELL: Well, he does seem to return to his core issue of immigration whenever there's any sort of trouble in the water, whenever there are bad headlines related to the Russia probe, or stories about dysfunction in the White House, of course dysfunction in the White House is sometimes related to immigration policy. But it does seem like when all else fails he returns to immigration.
He believes that that is the way to activate his base and that is very well part of the reason why he proposed, again, these deeply stupid tariffs that would have caused much more harm to his base than likely to Mexico. But I'm not sure he thought that through.
So yes, with an eye towards 2020 I think that might be why he proposed and reportedly overruled some of his own trade advisers on this issue. The question is will he try to play this card again and again and again as we approach November, 2020 and how much damage will he wreak along the way both in terms of damage to our domestic economy and damage to our international relationships with some of our closest friends.
M1: Yes. One of the things that we didn't get to is whether he'll try to use this card with China. But we're out of time. We have to leave it there. David Swerdlick, Catherine Rampell, Sam Vinograd -- thanks so much to all of you.
SWERDLICK: Thanks -- Alex. M1: All right. Well, still ahead, nearly half of the Democrats running for president are getting a head start flooding Des Moines, Iowa months before the Iowa caucuses. Can any of them stand out as they campaign in the midst of the city's pride festival? We're live there next.
[11:12:11] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
M1: Now, it may be hard to believe but the first Democratic presidential debate is just over two weeks away and this now really monster field of Democratic candidates is out on the campaign trail this weekend with the bulk of them descending on the state that votes first -- Iowa.
Nearly a dozen of those chasing the Democratic nomination are in Des Moines today with many of them attending Pride Fest -- this is the state's largest LGBTQ event. Even though the Iowa caucuses are still eight months away, it's an early chance for the candidates to pitch themselves to Iowa's most dedicated Democrats.
For more let's go to CNN's Leyla Santiago. She is in Des Moines. Leyla -- what are we seeing now with essentially half of the Democratic field swarming Iowa this weekend?
LEYLA SANTIAGO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, already this morning we've seen Congressman Beto O'Rourke run in the 5k here with his wife Amy. Last night we saw Senator Kirsten Gillibrand here celebrating with folks for the Gay Pride Fest. We expect it to be a very vibrant celebration today.
And I actually stopped a few voters here this morning to ask them what are you looking for? What do you want to hear from all the candidates that are here?
And here's what they told me. One woman said she wants to hear them talk about jobs. Another woman said she wants to hear about the rights of the LGBTQ community be a priority for these candidates. And one man said, and this is his quote, he says "I want to know who has the claws to go up against President Trump and who can beat him in 2020".
So I suspect many of the candidates will be making those things a priority in their talks to voters here. We expect eight of them to be at the Pride Fest today. They'll get ten minutes to talk to voters here then tomorrow will be the Hall of Fame dinner. You'll have 19 of the 23 Democrats there also trying to make their pitch and show the strength of their campaign for what will be the largest gathering thus far in this cycle.
And remember the timing of this. This is just a few weeks before they all gather on stage for the those debates. So this really could kind of set the scene and be a bit of practice for them when they go to Miami and hit that debate which will be a way that they'll all try to sort of distinguish themselves.
But one other note, a big point that people here are taking note of is who's not here. And that is the front runner, Joe Biden, not attending Iowa events this weekend. His campaign tells us that he had a family commitment that has been scheduled for quite some time now. We'll have to see how that plays out.
But keep note that tonight CNN as well as the "Des Moines Register" will be releasing new poll numbers of how all of these candidates are standing right now in Iowa. As you mentioned, very important, the very first caucus state -- Alex.
M1: First caucus state -- eight months until those caucuses.
Leyla Santiago in Des Moines -- thanks very much. Now Leyla there listing some of the top priorities for voters, one other top voting issue is abortion. And a new CNN poll this week shows that three in ten Americans would only vote for a candidate for major office rather who shares their views on abortion.
That is the highest percentage in any CNN poll since 1996. And it means that what 2020 candidates say about abortion rights is absolutely critical to voters.
So for more let's bring in CNN's Natasha Chen. She is following where they all stand on abortion. Natasha -- this was really the topic of the week for Democrats, wasn't it?
NATASHA CHEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely -- Alex. And in that poll you just mentioned we're also seeing that respondents are moving to the more extreme ends of this issue. So that's really forcing everyone running for president to take a vocal stand to whichever position they take.
CHEN: With several states banning abortions at much earlier stages of pregnancy than established by Roe versus Wade 2020 Democratic candidate are coming forward in defense of abortion rights.
SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: People who are frightened are the ones who don't get access and that's just not right.
[11:20:01] CHEN: Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar and Kirsten Gillibrand have called for Roe versus Wade to be codified into federal law.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think Kamala Harris had a good idea the other day.
CHEN: Harris is proposing the Department of Justice block what she calls dangerous abortion restrictions in states pushing unconstitutional anti-choice legislation before they go into effect. Harris is also among a host of Democratic candidates who tweeted in support of repealing the Hyde amendment, which bans federal dollars from being used for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or where the mother's life is in danger.
15 states offered their own funding for a wider range of abortion services to Medicaid recipients. The Kaiser Family Foundation reports more than half of the women of childbearing age on Medicaid do not qualify for most abortion services.
SENATOR BERNIE SANDERS (D-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This assault on women's reproductive rights is an assault on women but it's particularly an assault on African-American women.
CHEN: Joe Biden was the only candidate in the Democratic field who supported the Hyde amendment until he changed his mind this week. JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If I believe health care is a
right as I do I can no longer support an amendment that makes that right dependent on someone's zip code.
CHEN: On the Republican side of the race President Donald Trump was for abortion rights in the 90s but is now against them. His administration imposed new restrictions Wednesday on the use of fetal tissue in scientific research. His only primary challenger, former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld, penned an op-ed last week defending a woman's right to choose.
CHEN: And that sole Republican challenger Weld did not mince words in that op-ed. He said he was and always will be what the political world calls pro-choice. He also called these anti-abortion laws based on religion, not science -- Alex.
M1: All right. Natasha Chen in our Washington bureau -- thanks very much.
Still ahead the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo downplaying climate change, now suggesting that modern societies can adapt by moving somewhere else. We'll talk about that next.
[11:21:57] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
M1: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is once again downplaying the long-term effects of climate change, this time telling the "Washington Times" in an interview that if it becomes a problem, people will just move saying, quote, "The climate's been changing a long time. There's always changes that take place. Societies reorganize, we move to different places. We develop technology and innovation. I am convinced, I am convinced that we will do the necessary things as climate changes."
Now, he's made similar comments in the past. Just last month he suggested that shrinking sea ice in the arctic is an opportunity for economic development.
CNN's senior diplomatic correspondent Michelle Kosinski is with me from the State Department. Michelle -- Pompeo here essentially saying yes, we'll deal with it. It will be fine.
MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT: Yes, I mean the sea ice comment -- it wasn't clear that he was trying to say that climate change was ultimately a good thing. That might just have been an unfortunate juxtaposition of ideas.
But this time he was asked directly. First of all, do you think climate change is a real threat and do you think it's manmade? So he chose to completely ignore the manmade issue, just leave that out of the equation entirely and then paint this optimistic, rosy picture about how people can deal with the effects of climate change because in his words, first of all, climate is always changing. It's been changing for a long time. And then he used examples like the Netherlands saying, well, I was just there and they're below sea level and they have this wonderful, thriving society. And he said that societies reorganize and people move to different places. Seeming to say that people can just move their way out of the potentially catastrophic effects of climate change.
So he doesn't want to speak to the science. He doesn't even want to say that it could be manmade. And he doesn't want to say that this could be devastating or that people will be forced to move, causing a swelling of migration flows because of this -- Alex.
M1: Yes. And Michelle -- it's not just what they're saying about climate change, it's what they're preventing others within the administration of -- of not saying about climate change.
I want to ask you about another piece of reporting. The White House reportedly blocking an intelligence aide from submitting written answers to the House Intelligence Committee on the dangers of climate change?
KOSINSKI: Yes. This comes from the "Washington Post", that this intelligence staffer inside the State Department was supposed to submit this report to the House Intelligence Committee this past week.
So he talked about the potentially catastrophic effects of climate change, what could happen, how that could be a threat to national security and the fact that the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community is that people have contributed to this and accelerated the warming of the planet and climate change and more severe weather.
But the White House objected to this, especially the fact that it spoke to the science. And they removed his part of the report to the submissions to Congress. So they would not even let this voice be heard because he was quoting and citing the scientific community -- again, which overwhelmingly agrees that the climate is changing and that is because of human activity.
M1: Objecting to the science. Michelle Kosinski at the State Department in Washington -- thanks.
All right. Well, one of the places that we can already see the threat of climate change is a small village in the country of Wales in the United Kingdom. Rising sea waters could wipe it off the map forever.
CNN's Phil Black went to meet the villagers who live there to see how they're preparing.
PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: In this corner of north Wales, green and misty mountains slope dramatically toward the sea. The village of Fairbourne grew here on a flat stretch of marshland where the earth is low and wet. So low, much of it lies only just above sea level. For the 100 or so years this village has existed people here have been
fighting to hold back the sea. Now even conservative sea level rise predictions suggest that battle will inevitably be lost, perhaps in the coming decades. The people of Fairbourne could be Britain's first climate change refugees.
[11:30:00] From the air you see the village, hunkered down, hiding behind a bank of stones. When the sea gets angry, that largely natural barrier is all that protects people and their homes.
HUW WILLIAMS, ENGINEER: When sea level rises, the energy hitting the bank becomes greater.
Huw Williams, an engineer with the local council SAID all available evidence indicates the barrier will eventually fail.
WILLIAMS: In the end we'll see sea level rise is going to be of such a magnitude that you cannot build your way out of it. Climate change is here. It's not something for the future.
BLACK: Local authorities have reached an uncomfortable conclusion -- all of this, homes, shops, infrastructure, the community of around 1,000 people will one day be gone, claimed by the sea.
LISA GOODIER, PROJECT MANAGER, GWYNEDO COUNCIL: What we're doing now is planning for what we feel is realistically going to happen.
BLACK: Lisa Goodier has the job of preparing Fairbourne and its people for what she described as the village's decommissioning. She's working to a rough time frame -- from around 2045 Welsh authorities believe it won't be possible to maintain sufficient sea defenses. And soon after, it will be too dangerous for people to stay.
The estimates are based on data from local tidal gauges and the work of the U.N.'s climate change panel. They acknowledge it could all happen later or, as some scientists predict, much sooner.
GOODIER: By telling people as early on as we can we're actually given the opportunity to plan, we're actually allowing them to still have choice in what they want to do to a large degree.
BLACK: Not everyone here appreciates the well-intended advance warning because property prices have been hit hard. Mortgages, almost impossible to get.
STUART EVES, CHAIRMAN, FAIRBOURNE LOCAL COUNCIL: The turn round now and say we're going to destroy your village in 2045 or 2050 is wrong.
BLACK: Stuart Eves runs the local camping ground and believes the estimates are imprecise and irresponsible given the impact on people's lives.
It's a long-term problem so they've got to start thinking about it now, don't they?
EVES: To a degree. But if all your information is based on supposition and theory --
BLACK: Or science.
EVES: -- or science. But science has got to depend on facts. And if the facts aren't there then they come up with suppositions and say we believe.
BLACK: On Fairbourne's climate change front line we meet Phillip Hill (ph).
PHILLIP HILL, RESIDENT: It's going some time -- I don't dispute. Global warming is going to happen.
BLACK: He and his family brought a sea front home from where you can't see the sea earlier this year. To him the stone barrier still feels impregnable, the rising water a distant threat.
HILL: If we have to move, then we do. But at the moment I'll do the 20, 30 years at this lovely place and enjoy it.
BLACK: And it is a lovely place.
BLACK: Fairbourne is engaged in a difficult conversation with many awkward questions. What will happen to these people? Where will they go? Who pays for it all?
The scientific consensus says this community will not be alone in confronting these imminent consequences of climate change.
Phil Black, CNN -- Fairbourne, Wales.
M1: Our thanks to Phil Black there in Wales.
Now, the search continues for missing Connecticut mom Jennifer Dulos. Police are telling CNN that they found her bloodstains at her home and are calling an residents to help investigators track down any video surveillance on the day that she disappeared.
[11:33:33] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
M1: As police search for a missing Connecticut mother investigators are zeroing in on her estranged husband and his girlfriend. 50-year- old Jennifer Dulos went missing two weeks ago. Officials say they have found blood spatter in her home and have charged her estranged husband and his girlfriend with tampering with or fabricating physical evidence and hindering prosecution.
The "Hartford Current" reports that the girlfriend was seen with investigators on Friday in the wooded area behind their home.
CNN's Jean Casarez has more.
JEAN CASAREZ, CNN JUSTICE REPORTER: As law enforcement continue their investigation into the disappearance of 50-year-old Jennifer Dulos, legal documents say something police won't say at this point -- Jennifer Dulos was the victim of a crime.
After last being seen on the morning of May 24th dropping her children off at school, hours later a missing persons report was filed.
During a search of her home police discovered multiple stains of blood on the floor, multiple areas of suspected blood spatter and attempts to clean up the scene. They concluded Dulos was a suspected victim of a serious physical assault.
REV. PETER WALSH, ST. MARK'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: The truth of it is that people are all dealing with something that doesn't even seem real and yet it clearly is real.
CASAREZ: Reverend Peter Walsh led community members at a prayer vigil after the mother of five went missing while police focused on their investigation, calling residents of New Canaan to ask for help.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As part of this timeline we seek video surveillance from homes or businesses that have cameras which capture vehicular activity on roadways.
CASAREZ: That timeline had law enforcement searching a busy street in Hartford after city surveillance video showed what appeared to be her estranged husband, Fotis Dulos depositing trash bags into garbage receptacles -- more than 30 stops in all -- hours after Jennifer Dulos went missing.
A woman matching his girlfriend Michelle Troconis's description, is seen with him. Clothes and a (INAUDIBLE) from a recovered bags were confirmed to have Jennifer's blood on them. That led police to arrest Fotis Dulos and Troconis charging them with tampering with evidence and hindering prosecution. After an initial court appearance Troconis posted the $500,000 bond, Dulos did not and remains in jail.
Jennifer Dulos and her husband of 12 years have been embroiled in a divorce battle for the last two years. In her original divorce filing Jennifer told the court quote, "I am
afraid of my husband. I know he will retaliate by trying to harm me in some way," and claim that he threatened to kidnap their children. Fotis Dulos denied it all to the court.
[11:40:02] While police continue to conduct searches at properties he owns, they are also combing through mountains of trash for any evidence that can determine what really happened to Jennifer Dulos.
Jean Casarez, CNN -- New Canaan, Connecticut.
M1: Horrific story. Our thanks to Jean Casarez. Now still ahead, harrowing video showing U.S. and Russian warships nearly colliding. Both sides are blaming each other but the pictures could reveal which ship is at fault.
M1: Tensions are flaring yet again between the U.S. and Russia after a dangerous incident at sea. Each side is accusing the other for a near collision between two of their warships. You can see here in this video which was filmed by American sailors aboard the USS Chancellorsville how close this incident was. The U.S. guided-missile cruiser just mere feet away from that Russian destroyer.
Both ships say they were forced to perform emergency maneuvers in order to avoid the other. But the U.S. Navy is now saying that photographic evidence proves that it was the Russians who were at fault.
[11:45:00] M1: A brazen challenge. This Russian destroyer according to the U.S. Navy coming within 100 feet of the USS Chancellorsville. The American sailors recording the latest potentially deadly provocation by the Russian military.
The incident taking place in international waters in the Philippine Sea, just south of the Japanese Island of Okinawa.
The Russian action came as the U.S. cruiser was trying to land a helicopter on its deck, giving it even less maneuverability than usual.
REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: You have to be on a set course and set speed so that the winds across the deck are safe for the helicopter to land.
M1: Boxed in the captain performs an emergency maneuver called an "all engines back full".
KIRBY: You're basically throwing that ship into reverse while it's moving forward at 15 to 18 miles an hour would be my guess. It's 10,000 tons of metal moving through the water. It's not going to stop quickly. And as the ship reacts to that order, as the propellers shift direction the whole ship is going to shudder.
M1: While the Russians blame the U.S. for the incident this photo from above contradicts that according to navy officials who say the wake curving behind the Russian ship on the left could only be created from a steep turn at high speed.
Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan saying he will protest the incident to Moscow.
PATRICK SHANAHAN, ACTING DEFENSE SECRETARY: These unsafe, unprofessional acts certainly put our men and women at risk. M1: The ships so close together that Russian sailors could even be
seen on board appearing to be sunbathing on the back of their ship despite the severity of the encounter.
The incident coming as Russian President Vladimir Putin hosts the Chinese President Xi Jinping -- the two enjoying a more leisurely boat ride in St. Petersburg as the two countries grow friendlier. Analysts say this latest incident could signal a new dimension to the Russian threat.
COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: You're looking at the kinds of things that they can do in concert with the Chinese to challenge the U.S. And if it means helping the Chinese out in the Pacific they will do so.
M1: The near collision coming after two other tense interactions with the Russian military. Just days ago the U.S. accused Russia of intercepting a U.S. aircraft three times in international air space over the Mediterranean Sea. And last month the U.S. intercepted Russian bombers and fighter jets in international air space off the coast of Alaska.
M1: Of course it's not as if a Russian destroyer can sneak up on the U.S. cruiser. The U.S. Navy had been watching that ship. The Russians had been keeping their distance until this incident happened.
Now, what's unusual about this Russian harassment in this case, is that it wasn't near Russian interests. It was in China's backyard. President Putin said this week that the relationship between Russia and China is at, what he called an "unprecedented level". Of course their joint interests, Russia and China joint interests are directly at odds with American interests.
Now, coming up, action is under way at the 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup. Team USA is hoping to defend its 2015 title starting on Tuesday. We check in on how the team is feeling ahead of its first match. That is next.
But first, don't miss a new episode of "THE REDEMPTION PROJECT" with Van Jones. This week Van travels to Sacramento, California where a man shot and then left for dead more than two decades ago will come face to face with the gunman.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
VAN JONES, CNN HOST: Why is it that you want to have a conversation with him at this point? It's 20 plus years later.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, the only thing worse than what I did is not caring that I did it. I think it's important for me to take responsibility for this with him in person, that I own all of it completely.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's some apprehension. I know that I'm going to eventually be face to face with Christian for the first time since 1995 at the trial. I hope it's an honest dialogue. Christian thinks that I had a gun, which is -- I don't know how he could come up with that scenario. He's got to be honest. I'll give him a chance. But if he's going to be, you know, dishonest about what happened, that's not ok.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
M1: You can watch that all new episode of "THE REDEMPTION PROJECT" with Van Jones tomorrow night at 9:00 eastern and Pacific only on CNN.
[11:49:30] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
M1: It is day two of the 2019 FIFA women's world cup. Today marks the first full day of competition with 16 taking to the pitch to opening the group play.
Germany won the day's first match, defeating China 1-0. On Friday, host nation France had kicked off the tournament with a dominant 4-0 victory over. Now, world champions Team USA will start defending their title on Tuesday.
So for more, let's bring in CNN's Amanda Davies, who is live in Paris. Amanda, what's the energy been like in these early hours?
AMANDA DAVIS, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: Hi -- Alex. Yes, se always talk about the importance of a good start for the host of the tournament in terms of getting the buzz going. And in terms of France it really couldn't have gone faster for them in our opening game.
As you said they this couldn't have gone much better for them in their opening game. As you said, they thumped South Korea. And their coach Corin Diaz (ph) talked about really wanting to strike fear among their opponents. They certainly did that amongst the rival teams.
But in terms of the atmosphere where we were, it really sparked a whole lot of enthusiasm for this tournament. And it wasn't just French fans. I was surrounded by fans from Panama, from Mexico. Their teams haven't even made it here but they just wanted to be part of what is being described as the biggest and best women's world cup ever.
It was a record crowd for a French women's national team here in France. They dominated the front page of the newspaper,, (INAUDIBLE). I think it would be too much of an exaggeration to say world cup fever has hit Paris
Here we are on a busy shopping street on a Saturday mid-afternoon, people coming up to us asking why we're here. Some people over breakfast didn't know what the score was, didn't know what had happened.
But it is still early days, Alex. And as you mentioned. The defending champions haven't kicked off their campaign yet.
M1: Yes, Of course -- all eyes in this country on those defending champions. We know that the U.S. will kick off their first match against Thailand on Tuesday. Do you have any sense, Amanda, of what the feeling is among the defending champions?
[11:54:56}DAVIES: Yes, it's been a really interesting couple of years for Team U.S.A. Yes, they are the top ranked team in the world once again, they're the defending champions. But there's been a fair amount of criticism of Coach Jill Ellis of changing around formations, trying new players. Those memories of that all-too-disappointing early exit from the Olympics in Rio in 2016. Of course, the final defeat to Sweden, all too fresh in many peoples' memories.
And it's a very different It's a different landscape from when the U.S. Won in 2015. A lot of investments gone into the women's game around Europe, the likes of England, the likes of France, the likes of Spain have really started closing the gap.
Jill Ellis has been talking about the fact that she and her team have been using that as motivation. Co-captain Megan Rapino saying she feels the team still has a lot to prove. They have arrived in Rome about two hours east of Paris for their training camp ahead of the game against Thailand which they are expected to win.
Interestingly, the home of champagne, Alex, so I'm not too disappointed about joining them on Monday.
M1: Yes, tough assignment there, you have, Amanda. Well, our best of luck to the Americans. So all the teams there. Best of luck to the Americans and all the teams there. Amanda Davies in Paris, on her way to champagne country, thanks very much.
M1: Still ahead, an escalation in the tariff battle that's been averted as the U.S. And Mexico reach a deal to avoid the President's threat of tariffs on Mexican goods, that's at least for now.
We're live with more next