Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Remembering Glen Campbell; North Korea's Advancing Nuclear Capabilities; Retweeting Classified Info. Aired 6:30-7a ET
Aired August 09, 2017 - 06:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[06:33:15] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We have some Breaking News out of Paris. Six soldiers have been injured after a car ran into them outside of their barracks. Two of the soldiers, who were linked to a National Security operation, reportedly have serious injuries.
A manhunt is under way to find the driver who speed (ph) off. The counterterrorism department is investigating now.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Embassy in France warning U.S. citizens to avoid this area. We'll bring you more information on this breaking story as soon as we have it.
BILL WEIR, CNN ANCHOR: Meanwhile, the entertainment world is mourning and paying tribute to a country crossover giant. Legendary singer, actor, musician, Glen Campbell, who played with everyone from Elvis to Sinatra even the Beach Boys succumbed to Alzheimer's disease at 81 overnight.
CNN's Ryan Nobles takes a look back at his incredible life and career.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RYAN NOBLES, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Glen Campbell was a country boy who made it big with success in music, television and film. He was born in a small town in Arkansas.
Around 1960's the young musician moved to Los Angeles becoming a session musician playing for the likes of Dean Martin, Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra and Merle Haggard. But it wasn't until 1967 that he hit it big with the release of two blockbuster albums, Gentle On My Mind, which won two Grammy Awards and By the Time I Get to Phoenix, also garnering two Grammys.
Campbell was on a hot streak. And in 1968, came Wichita Lineman.
Sitting on billboard's hot 100 charts for 15 weeks, Campbell capitalized on his popularity and turned to television. From 1969 through 1972, he hosted a variety show, the Glen Campbell Good Time Hour. He also tried his hand as an actor co-starring in the iconic film, True Grit, and performing the theme song, which went on to be nominated for an academy award.
[06:35:14] But in the midst of his success, Campbell became insnared in controversy. His on again, off again relationship with singer, Tanya Tucker, became tabloid fodder. He also battled an alcohol and drug addiction that he would later kick.
GLEN CAMPBELL, AMERICAN SINGER: By this welcome, I said I can quit this. I know I can and I would. Like I said, I prayed and I prayed.
NOBLES: But Campbell continued to enjoy musical success. The song Rhinestone Cowboy shot in number one on the billboard charts in 1975. And he peak again in '77 with the song Southern Night.
In 2005, the star was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame. But in 2011, he shocked the music world with a stunning announcement.
CAMPBELL: What they'd diagnosed me is?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Alzheimer's.
CAMPBELL: Alzheimer's. What's Alzheimer?
NOBLES: The 75-year-old entertainer decided to bow out of the business and embarked on a final tour with a band featuring three of his children. The music world rallied around the icon.
In 2012, he received a lifetime achievement award at the Grammy's taking the stage to perform amidst a star-studded tribute.
CAMPBELL: All I wanted to do ever since I could remember was play my guitar and sing.
NOBLES: I'm Ryan Nobles reporting.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CAMEROTA: What a story. I mean that Rhinestone Cowboy was so on the present on the radio. It puts me right --
WEIR: It's one his soundtracks. Right.
CAMEROTA: -- into the back seat of my dad's old mobile, old, old mobile --
WEIR: Yes.
CAMEROTA: -- or on a plane. You know, going some place and listening to it over and over. It's just -- it was everywhere that year.
WEIR: And he was such a virtuoso guitar player. He played with his group as session musicians, the Wrecking Crew, Pet Sounds. The, you know, the -- he would fill in for Brian Wilson and then to create his own, you know, breakout solo career.
CAMEROTA: Yes.
WEIR: And if you haven't seen this beautiful documentary about his last tour, we will pay tribute to Glen Campbell tonight. I'll Be Me, it's so touching as he tours with his family as his mind goes. It airs tonight at 9:00 p.m. on HLN.
CAMEROTA: And you know, how nice that he shared that with the world.
WEIR: Absolutely.
CAMEROTA: Because that could've been product battle that he shared it.
Meanwhile, back to, of course, our top story and all of the Breaking News. President Trump and Kim Jong-un exchanging ominous threats. The rhetoric is very heated.
Is there any hope for diplomacy? We would break it down with our experts next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[06:41:08] REP. DARRELL ISSA (R), FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE: If true, it represents the greatest crisis probably since -- let me rephrase that -- undoubtedly since the Cuban missile crisis. And the correlation is very similar. This is something that can hit us and our allies, and it's with a rogue nation that we suspect would use it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CAMEROTA: Well, the escalating rhetoric between the U.S. and North Korea has many drawing comparisons to the Cuban missile crisis, but not our next guest.
Let's talk about it with CNN's Global Affairs Analyst, Aaron David Miller. He's also the author of The End of Greatness.
Aaron, great to see you this morning. I'll read the tweet you sent out yesterday about this, "Idea that we're on the verge of nuclear war or this is the Cuban missile crisis is absurd. But Houston, we do have a problem, intemperate rhetoric, North Korean nukes." How do you see it?
AARON DAVID MILLER, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: I mean, you know, certain historical parallels are often, you know, critically important to sum it up. And I think it was Mark Twain who said that history doesn't repeat, it rhymes. So you look for the rhythmic patterns.
Yes, there's tension. If, in fact, there was a confrontation, a military confrontation between the United States, South Korea, Japan on the Korean peninsula, it would be worse than the Cuban missile crisis and it would be a catastrophe. But it's not the Cuban missile crisis now.
We don't have ICBMs stationed 90 miles away. The continents -- the great continent with United States right now is not threatened. This is not --
CAMEROTA: But how do you know that? I mean the thinking is that maybe one of their missiles can hit the mainland of the U.S. MILLER: No, I don't want to trivialize the threat at all. But just take the Guam issue. I mean they've been threatening Guam now for years and they have intermediate range missiles that could probably reach Guam.
Do they have -- have they perfected a reentry system? Could they cause damage?
I don't want to trivialize the threat. But on the other hand, I don't want to exacerbate it and create a kind of panic to some degree that was reflected in the President's rhetoric yesterday. Now is the time for reassurance, it's time for cool, calculated moves and a possible strategy.
In large part, Alisyn, because look at the options. Sanctions will not work. You're not going to alter Kim Jong-un's behavior, no matter how punishing they may be. And they don't put oil --
CAMEROTA: Well, then I mean why is the Security Council, you know, the U. S. Security Council going that route? I mean if that's hopeless and that's just a futile exercise, then where does that leave us?
MILLER: I mean it's part of the package. It's necessary perhaps, but not sufficient. Sanctions isn't going to work. I don't think.
If working means bringing Kim Jong-un and the regime to its knees on nuclear weapons, that's not going to work. So then you're left with the default position.
You contract to China and China is an important player. But China cannot give Kim Jong-un what he wants. Only we can do that.
And finally, military options, which as Hertling and Kirby said in eloquent and compelling fashion, it's huge risk right now. That leads to the default position and the default position is some kind of dialogue, at least, to try to diffuse the rhetoric.
CAMEROTA: Yeah.
MILLER: Back channel, discreet, to test the proposition, Alisyn, that, in fact, there is a diplomatic solution to this. I'm not entirely persuaded there is. But not to pursue it, as long as he isn't dead because frankly, we haven't really tried it.
CAMEROTA: Yes, they're in. Look, North Korea is the one saying our nuclear program is not on the table. So how does that -- where does diplomacy start with that position?
MILLER: I mean diplomacy needs urgency, but it also needs an outcome that's going to find a balance of interest. And frankly, on this one, there is nobody in this city, there is nobody in this country, there's nobody in this world right now that can reconcile the reality that this administration and its predecessor, particularly this one, wants denuclearization.
[06:45:05] They want to basically wish North Korea as a nuclear power away, and the fact is that is no going to happen.
On the other hand, over time, five, ten years over time if, in fact, Kim gets what he wants, maybe it's possible to see a rollback. But right now, we're talking about diffusing and preempting the prospects of confrontation and maybe beginning to set of confidence building measures, some sort of freeze on production, testing, and some mutual, symmetrical freeze on the part of the United States on actions that Kim fears --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MILLER: -- in an effort to set this in a much more stable mode.
CAMEROTA: But when you say what Kim Jong-un wants, what is that in a sentence?
MILLER: You know, the guy is, what, in his 30s? Conceivably, he could be running this place for the next 50 years.
Maybe he wants a modified China model. Maybe he wants to seek the economic development of North Korea. Maybe he wants the end to prospects of regime change and the environment in which he -- and look, I'm not painting -- I'm not working for this guy. This is a despotic regime --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MILLER: -- serial human rights abuser. Look what they did to that poor kid, Oliver Warmbier.
CAMEROTA: Otto.
MILLER: I mean that's not the point. The point is can we find a way to deescalate --
CAMEROTA: Yes.
MILLER: -- and test the proposition that in fact, some modus operandi with the North Koreans can be found.
CAMEROTA: OK. Aaron David Miller, we always appreciate talking to you. Thanks so much for being here.
MILLER: Thank you, Alisyn.
WEIR: Leakers are a threat to the democracy, so says the Trump White House. So then how do they explain President Trump retweeting a Fox News story containing leaked classified information? Our media experts are here to discuss next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:50:23] WEIR: Sometime it is his tweets. President Trump is raising eyebrows with a retweets of a Fox News story yesterday morning. The headline reads "U.S. spy satellites detect North Korea moving anti-ship cruise missiles to a patrol boat. And that story contained classified and leaked information from anonymous sources. It seems a bit hypocritical from President has vowed to crack down on leaks.
And joining me now Brian Stelter, CNN Senior Media correspondent, host of "Reliable Sources" and joined by Alvin Chang, a reporter from Vox has done a deep dive into the President's viewing habits.
But Brian, let's start with this retweet. He's done this before. He seemed to reveal a CIA covert operation to arm Syrian rebels. He retweeted a Russian propaganda bot over the weekend. The question does he know what he's doing when he hits that retweet?
BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we're still not sure what that treat was from that fan named Nicole who may or may not be a real person. Now with the retweet of "Fox & Friends," the President's favorite show on television, of course it very much a pro- Trump showed that he gets a lot of information from.
And that means that show has an added responsibility to get it right when the President is paying attention. I do think when it comes to this tweet about classified information there is hypocrisy here, but there's a long history of U.S. government choices about whether to pursue leakers or not. Sometimes leaks are sanctioned encouraged by the Intel community, sometimes they're not.
I think this is one of those situations where we're seeing the U.S. Intel community leak information about North Korea purposely to inform the public.
WEIR: But it comes after Jeff Sessions sort of thundered from the podium that we will pursue leakers to the full extent of the law.
STELTER: Exactly, if I hope people see through some of that bluster about leaking to recognize that frequently it's the President or his aides that are doing the leaking.
WEIR: Alvin, let me jump in here. Looks like I wanted to give -- I can realize you were cut out.
CAMEROTA: I'm letting you --
(CROSSTALK)
WEIR: Time to be a polite guy. Sorry, Alisyn. But Alvin, let's talk about your project, you looked at "Fox & Friends" for many years, many months.
ALVIN CHANG, GRAPHIC REPORTER, VOX: I looked at 17 months of "Fox & Friends."
WEIR: Bless your heart. And what did you find?
CHANG: And what I found was that "Fox & Friends" evolved after the Trump presidency began, after his inauguration, after he won the election. The two main findings. One was that "Fox & Friends" started using restatements more things like we should do this or we should do that, almost as if to tell the President, hey, we're on the side.
WEIR: Talking to him through the television.
CHANG: Yes. There's an incredible moment a few weeks after his inauguration where the hosts say, Mr. President, if you're watching, please flicker your lights. And of course, he doesn't because he probably has more important things to do.
But eight minutes later they say, here he is, flickering his lights. And they kind of admit it's a hoax but that said, it's incredibly impression of exactly where the show and how the show will evolve.
STELTER: I think that's the suffix of the show every day, did the President is watching these? He's watching all of these morning shows. And he's learning information from them. It creates added pressure for you, Bill, for hosts or producers, but especially the Fox hosts because that's the President's favorite show it seems, to get it right and to get it to be fair and to be proportional. Especially we're talking about something like North Korea.
CHANG: Yes, the close team to know that the President is listening. Another part of the analysis, they found that they use imperative sentence more, meaning they instruct or advise the President. And they've done it increasingly more since his election. I mean it's kind of expected their most avid viewer became the President. So, you know, what do you do then? You start to wield that influence.
WEIR: Which, what's wagging the dog, right? You know, I remember a TV consultant years ago as an anchor tip would save picture one person in a specific room and talk through the prompter to them.
STELTER: Right.
WEIR: I would picture my grandma talking to the leader of the free world here as well.
STELTER: Yes. I think that absolutely right. Sometimes it's explicit. Usually it's just implicit in the conversations. There's an awareness about the President watching. And for "Fox & Friends," that's mostly in order to give him positive reinforcement, to promote his presidency, to tell him the rest of the media is out to get you but we love you.
I mean the issue is on a daylight today, a lot of days recently when the stakes are high, these shows have a responsibility to get accurate information to him, to be contextualized, to be proportional, not raise the rhetoric even higher.
And, you know, "Fox & Friends," when there's mistakes, when there's sloppiness, I think the show acts like a presidential daily brief, but it's not fact checked like a presidential daily brief.
[06:55:01] WEIR: Let me ask you guys about this -- where there's been a couple of report out lately about how his media diet is sort of, you know, curated for his ego as well. There's a young man who works in the White House whose job is to go through the mainstream media, find the best, most positive stories, present them to those outside, but inside is there a sense that he's getting a varnished view of the world?
STELTER: And an extraordinary story from vice yesterday that the president receives a packet known inside the White House as a propaganda packet, this is positive stories, positive cable news, Chyrons on the bottom of the screen things like that.
Now some our sources say it's not all positive. It's not entirely positive piece of propaganda. But the White House, just confirming he does receive this packet including cable news graphics to tell him what's being covered and what's being said.
That's unusual according to past White House veterans. Yes, all presidents care about their news coverage but they're not seeing on a daily basis pictures of themselves on television and Chyron on the screen. It's another example that feedback loop that the President wants to know what's being said about him and according to vice, he wants positive attention.
WEIR: All right, Brian, Alvin, we appreciate your insights.
STELTER: Thanks.
WEIR: Have a great day.
CAMEROTA: Well, you handled that very well, solo.
WEIR: I tried to share with you. But --
CAMEROTA: I got to thank you.
(CROSSTALK)
CAMEROTA: Thank you guys very much. So President Trump directing his fiercest rhetoric yet at North Korea. Pyongyang threatening an attack on Guam.
How can this showdown be defused? We have all the latest details for you next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: They will be met with fire, fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We very much need a cool-headed president.
MIKE PENSE, VICE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES: He is doing his best to convey exactly what's on his mind.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The rhetoric did certainly ramp up in a very unhelpful way, this is all avoidable.
CAMEROTA: In response to two bombers flying over the Korean peninsula, North Korea threatens to strike Guam.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think this is a time for us to redouble our diplomatic effort.
[07:00:02] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Effective diplomacy has got to be backed up with credible military options.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can't be engaging in full board rhetoric with North Korea. This is absurd.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're talking about incomprehensible --
