Return to Transcripts main page
New Day
Historic Conversation with Queen Elizabeth II; Trump's False Claims; Vikings Stun Saints; Hawaii's False Missile Alert. Aired 6:30- 7a ET
Aired January 15, 2018 - 06:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[06:30:22] CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking news. North and South Korea agreeing to hold more high-level talks. Their next face-to-face meeting now scheduled for this Wednesday. The two sides negotiating today in the DMZ to discuss the upcoming winter Olympics. The Koreas are considering fielding a joint women's ice hockey team at the games. They've never competed under the same flags at the Olympics.
POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: Breaking news this morning out of Indonesia. Heart-stopping video of the moment that a balcony collapses. Look at that. That's at the Jakarta Stock Exchange. Seventy-five people were injured, required treatment at local hospitals. No word, amazingly, of any fatalities at this point. Police are ruling out terrorism as a possible cause despite a chaotic evacuation. Trading actually resumed, if you can believe it there, a little bit later in the day.
CUOMO: Wow.
HARLOW: Yes.
CUOMO: To watch something like that and nobody badly injured or killed. We'll keep on that. But what a way to start your day.
All right, a royally unprecedented TV event shedding light on what it's like to be queen. Queen Elizabeth II marking the 65th anniversary of her coronation in a candid new conversation.
CNN's Max Foster live in London with more.
What do we know about this conversation?
MAX FOSTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's interesting, Chris, because the queen has done conversations like this before in front of the cameras, but is extremely rare. And the only time we really get a sense of her character. And for this one, she took us behind the scenes of the greatest state occasion of them all here in the U.K.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER (voice over): Question Elizabeth watching footage of her own coronation for the first time since being crowned 65 years ago. Her majesty speaking openly about her procession from Buckingham Palace in this stunning gold state coach weighing nearly four tons, bound for Westminster Abby. QUEEN ELIZABETH II: Horrible. It was not meant for traveling in at
all. The area's just not -- it's only sprong (ph) on lever (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So it rocks around a lot.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: It's not very comfortable.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Were you in it for a long time?
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: Halfway around London.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Really?
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: We must have gone about four or five miles. But can only go at a walking pace.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: The horses couldn't possibly go any faster.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: It's so heavy.
FOSTER: The queen offering her candid thoughts about the imperial state crown, which only three people are even allowed to touch.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: It's much smaller, isn't is it? I mean it was -- it was the same height. You know, it would be -- it would have been up to about there when my father wore it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And it was huge then.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: Yes. Very unwieldy.
FOSTER: Britain's longest reigning monarch describing the rigors of wearing such a heavy crown with its lavish diamonds and precious stones.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: Fortunately, my father and I have about the same sort of shaped head. But once you put it on, it stays. I mean it just remains (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have to keep your head very still.
QUEEN ELIZABETH II: Yes. And you can't look down do read the speech. You have to take the speech up. Because if you did, your neck would break, or it would fall off. So there are some disadvantages to crowns. But, otherwise, they're quite important things
FOSTER: The television special giving viewers a rare look at the crown and the sovereign scepter also used in the queen's coronation, which holds the world's largest, clear-cut diamond. Those, along with other sacred symbols of the British monarchy. The crown jewels have never before been filmed.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER: There was an opinion poll a couple of years after the coronation and it asked Brits about what they thought about the role of a monarch. And actually a third of Brits back then felt that the queen was directly appointed by God. And even for this documentary, the team weren't allowed to film from above the crown because that's a view that is reserved for God. So it's an extraordinarily sacrosanct moment even now here in the U.K. And I think the timing of this, Poppy, is actually something to do with a certain royal wedding coming up. It's going to be very glitzy, very glamorous. And I think actually the queen wants to remind people of the more solemn side of monarchy as well.
HARLOW: That is a good point. Max Foster, our royal correspondent. Thank you for that. We appreciate it.
Ahead for us, President Trump and the truth, calling it a complicated relationship. Probably an understatement. An analysis of his first year shows the president averages more than five false or misleading statements every single day. The fact checker who headed up that analysis will join us next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:39:03] HARLOW: President Trump playing fast and loose with the truth and the facts in his first year in office. "The Washington Post" out with a report that the president has made more than 2,000 false or misleading claims before even one year is up.
Joining us now, the fact checker columnist who did that analysis for "The Washington Post," Glenn Kessler.
Nice to have you here.
So the headline of what you found is?
GLENN KESSLER, THE FACT CHECKER COLUMNIST, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Well, as of last week, he had made 2,001 false and misleading claims. We're going to be finishing our analysis for the end of the first -- the president's first year. So he's actually obviously added to that. But on -- generally that means he's made 5.6 false or misleading claims every single day of his presidency.
HARLOW: Which ones in your -- in your analysis rise to the top?
KESSLER: Well, we have a tie at the moment for the most repeated claim. Sixty-one times he said -- first he said that Obamacare was dead, a disaster and was dying, when actually it's -- the latest enrolment numbers show it is quite sustainable and that's also confirmed by the Congressional Budget Office.
[06:40:14] HARLOW: Right.
KESSLER: And then also 61 times he took credit for business deals that have actually been announced or happened before he became president. So a company would say, we're moving a factory from Mexico to the United States --
HARLOW: Right.
KESSLER: And he would say, I did this, when, in fact, it had already been announced when Obama was president.
HARLOW: I mean he also uses these, you know, I mean, they're just not true statements, to sell really important things for the American people, like tax reform. I mean saying this is going to be the biggest tax cut in American history, just on its face, just is empirically not true. I mean like maybe on the corporate side. But if you look -- it's the eighth biggest tax cut in American history. And the thing is he repeats it and repeats it and repeats it.
KESSLER: Right. That is definitely his style. And that was one reason why we decided to start keeping track of this because, you know, we've been fact checking politicians for a decade and most politicians, when you call them out and say, look, it's really not the biggest tax cut in history, it's only the eighth, they stop saying it. But Donald Trump doesn't ever -- you know, he just powers through it. And if he thinks he has a good line, then he's going to keep saying it, even though everyone says it's absolutely not true.
HARLOW: But, Glenn, is this a strategy of the president? And what I mean is sort of this drip, drip, drip, and this saying things over and over and over again almost until you believe them yourself or the people believe you or many people believe you. Do you -- I mean do you have any reason to believe or have you found or is there a general thinking that this is a strategy, just say it enough and get folks to believe it?
KESSLER: Well, it certainly is a strategy. I covered Donald Trump 30 years ago when he was just a real estate developer in New York. And he did the same thing back then. He would say he was -- when his business was falling to pieces, he would declare he was the king of debt and he loved debt and he was going to, you know -- and he would pretend that he was solvent when he wasn't solvent.
HARLOW: What about a pattern of the way, especially lately, the president has been denying things. Just look at the two most recent examples, right, denying that he used that horrible word in that horrible way about black and brown people, immigrants coming to this country in the White House meeting with senators. You know, did not deny it on its face right away. Took two days to do so. And then also it -- with the wording of what he said about his relationship with Kim Jong-un in "The Wall Street Journal" interview, again, did not deny it despite the reporters following up in the middle of the interview, did not deny it, you know, the next day. Denies it 49 hours later. Is there a pattern here?
KESSLER: Well, there I see, there's a pattern with the communications operation that isn't really operating on all cylinders. Because ordinarily if, you know, "The Wall Street Journal" interview, that was published Friday morning.
HARLOW: Right. KESSLER: And you would have -- most White Houses that I have covered
would have immediately put out a statement and said there was a misinterpretation here. Instead, to put it out on a tweet 48 hours later, it's just a very poor communication strategy.
HARLOW: All right.
KESSLER: But people make mistakes --
HARLOW: Sure.
KESSLER: But you can -- you can correct them quickly. But this White House tends not to do that.
HARLOW: We appreciate it, Glenn Kessler. It's an interesting read. People should look at it on thewallstreetjournal.com.
Thank you.
"Washington Post." Excuse me.
KESSLER: Yes.
HARLOW: "The Wall Street Journal" on my mind.
Thank you.
CUOMO: Well, I know what you have on your mind.
HARLOW: This is true.
CUOMO: You've got the Vikings on your mind.
HARLOW: I do.
CUOMO: Poppy's from Minnesota.
HARLOW: A little lack of sleep last night.
CUOMO: And, boy, what a miracle we saw in that game. The Vikings, the NFC championship game is now their fate. This was a big play. Remember this. Boing. I'll go this way.
HARLOW: Oh.
CUOMO: Last seconds. Stunning TD.
HARLOW: I mean five seconds on the clock.
CUOMO: Hats off (INAUDIBLE). We will show you the epic finish, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:48:19] HARLOW: The Minnesota Vikings advance in the NFL playoffs after what is being called the miracle in Minneapolis. That it is. Coy Wire has more in the "Bleacher Report." Coy, 25 seconds on the clock. I'm sitting with my husband. I'm saying this happens every time. This happens every time we lose in the playoffs by a field goal. Didn't happen this time.
COY WIRE, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT: No. Now look at that smile on your face. And Minnesotans everywhere.
This game was over. The Saints had it won. The Vikings were down by one. No timeouts. A local Minnesota radio call emotes the moment that the unthinkable happened.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Lattimore 12 yards from Adam (ph). Case (ph) on a deep drop. Steps up to the pocket. He'll fire to the right side. Caught by Diggs (ph)! Stay (INAUDIBLE) --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh! Oh, my God!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: At the 30!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No way!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The 10.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ah!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Touchdown!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you kidding me?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) miracle finish!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a Minneapolis miracle!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No way!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WIRE: That is the first NFL playoff game to end on a game-winning touchdown as time expires ever. Vikings win 29-24. And watch Stefon Diggs trying to describe the magnitude of the moment after scoring that game winner.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEFON DIGGS, VIKINGS WIDE RECEIVER: Since our first day, I never stopped working. Today was when all the work payed off. And, you know, God put me in a position and I just tried to take -- take advantage of my opportunity.
EVERSON GRIFFEN, VIKINGS DEFENSIVE END: That's unbelievable. You can't -- you can't draw that up. You can't wish that. That -- it just happened.
Oh, my goodness. Oh, my goodness. I -- oh, my God. [06:50:02] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, wait a minute --
GRIFFEN: I don't know -- I'm loss of words. I don't know what to say, honestly.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We've got --
GRIFFEN: I've never been a part of nothing like that. This is unbelievable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WIRE: Chris, there you have it. The Vikings take on the Eagles in the NFC Championship game on Sunday in Philly. And the Jaguars will take on the defending Super Bowl champs, the Patriots. Winner going to the Super Bowl in Minneapolis.
CUOMO: You know, Coy, you know, we often talk in sports that sometimes -- can we bring Poppy in. She's the one from Minnesota. My Jets are all at home doing what they do best, nothing.
The magic that can happen here sometimes.
HARLOW: Yes.
CUOMO: You know, there's good pass but, you know, Coy -- as you guys know, Coy played the game.
HARLOW: Yes.
CUOMO: You know, he was in the pros for a while. Those little margins, Coy, the difference between a deflected pass --
HARLOW: Totally.
CUOMO: A defended pass. And this guy catching the ball, his ability to keep his balance, that's why we watch, right?
WIRE: That's exactly right. And that young rookie who missed that tackle, you know, the magic in that.
HARLOW: Yes.
WIRE: You know, devastating for him. But his team rallying behind him and supporting him through that tough moment. So it's like that pain -- the agony of defeat but then that thrill of victory.
HARLOW: Yes.
WIRE: One more win for Poppy's Vikings and they will be playing for the first time ever a team in their hometown in a Super Bowl.
HARLOW: Two more wins. They need two more wins, Coy. And --
CUOMO: Well, that's --
WIRE: Well, to get there.
HARLOW: And this -- and this baby's middle name is going to be Skoal (ph) if we don't --
CUOMO: Really?
HARLOW: Maybe.
CUOMO: It's strong.
WIRE: I like.
HARLOW: If we go all the way --
WIRE: I'll clap to that.
CUOMO: That's strong.
HARLOW: My due date is the Super Bowl.
CUOMO: That's strong.
HARLOW: So I can't be there. But, there we go.
CUOMO: That's OK. You'll make accommodations. You'll be there. You'll have the TV on in there. That would be awesome.
HARLOW: Thank you, Coy.
CUOMO: All right, Coy, thank you so much.
WIRE: You're welcome.
CUOMO: All right, so this warning that hit in Hawaii and had everybody freaked out for a half an hour. It comes down to human error. That's what triggered that widespread panic. There was no actual incoming missile. Do not believe what you're reading on the Internet about that crap.
Why did it take, though, 38 minutes to get the correction? The mistake, we understand. The correction, the silence from the White House, odd. We're going to discuss it, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[06:56:20] CUOMO: An emergency missile alert accidentally went out to everyone in Hawaii on Saturday. We are told that an employee pushed the wrong button. Then you had a secondary problem. It took 38 minutes for a second alert to be sent out confirming that it was actually a false alarm. Why?
Joining us now is CNN national security analyst Jim Clapper, the former director of national intelligence.
Thank you, sir. First, do you accept the explanation that they were doing some kind of drill and there was a dropdown menu and there were two choices and this employee picked the wrong one and that was enough to trigger the alert?
JAMES CLAPPER, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, that's -- yes, I accept the explanation. I do think what it points out is -- well, for one thing, a need for a say two-person authentication so that one person doesn't get to hit "send" on -- all by himself or herself for a message like that.
I'm quite sure, you know, the governor and the other officials in Hawaii are going to critique this in the interest of preventing a recurrence.
What I find even more disturbing, though, is why it took so long to make it clear to everyone that that was -- it was a false alarm.
CUOMO: So what's that about? One, I guess there's some kind of exercise now to check into the efficacy of redundancy. You know, as you said, you want two people. Should you have to click on it twice? Something like that. But then once it goes out, why didn't they have a mechanism to say, this is a false alarm? And should we have heard from the White House?
CLAPPER: Well, I don't know, again, I'm not, you know, I'm not that familiar at that state level with how their system works in Hawaii.
CUOMO: Right.
CLAPPER: And I'm sure they're going to critique that.
I do think, as far as the White House is concerned, that there's kind of a lost opportunity here for the president to be the reassurer in chief, if I could use that phrase, where instead of a tweet about the fake news media, would have been I think a great example of demonstrated public leadership had the White House gone out with reassurance not only to the people of Hawaii, but the rest of the United States, who also got -- got word of this. So I just -- again, I -- I classify it as kind of a lost opportunity.
CUOMO: But what should have happened, I mean other than depending on the president's tweet about it?
CLAPPER: Well, I think --
CUOMO: You know, when the federal government learns that this kind of alert has gone out, and I'm sure they must have to contact Hawaii. Hawaii says, no, it was a glitch, it was a mistake, whatever. Why no correcting? How's it supposed to work?
CLAPPER: Well, the way I -- I think it would -- should have worked or could have worked was for our Northern Command, which is headquartered in Colorado Springs, and kind of maintains cognizance over these things, should have known and perhaps it could have put out a statement quickly, even before the White House. So there is a -- there's a breakdown here. And I -- you know, I'm sure there -- that a lot of people are going to be doing a lessons learned critique, as they should.
CUOMO: Right. Just to be clear, Jim, the White House, the federal government, the DOD, the Pentagon, you're not waiting on Hawaii to tell you whether or not there's an incoming missile, right? The federal government would have had their own basis for analysis on that.
[06:59:51] CLAPPER: Exactly. And that's, again, is not done at the state level. This -- in a military context, within the Department of Defense, as you indicate, this is primarily the responsibility of Northern Command to make a characterization, to judge a characterization, is it an attack and what is the nature of the attack.
