Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Major Blow On Trump's Defense Happens Today; U.S. Secretary Of State Antony Blinken In Qatar To Push Israel-Hamas Truce And Hostage Release; No Details Yet On Type Of Cancer King Charles Is Afflicted With; U.S. State Secretary Antony Blinken Meets With Qatari Prime Minister Al-Thani; Football Superstar Lionel Messi Expresses Regret Over Not Playing An Inter- Miami Friendly Match; Dangerous Weather Turns Neighborhood Streets In California Into Muddy Raging Rivers. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired February 06, 2024 - 12:00   ET




ZAIN ASHER, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: All right, coming to you live from New York, I'm Zain Asher. My colleague, Bianna Golodryga, is off today. You are

indeed watching "One World". A U.S. appeals court has ruled on one of the major constitutional issues surrounding the trials of Donald Trump.

A three-judge panel unanimously agreed that Donald Trump is not immune -- that he is not immune from prosecution for alleged crimes he committed in

his bid to reverse the 2020 election results. It is a major blow to Donald Trump's defense.

In that case, the former President has argued that his conduct was part of his official duties as President. But the judges said, and I want to read

for you, quote, "For the purposes of this criminal case, former President Trump has become citizen Trump with all the defenses of any other criminal

defendant. But any executive immunity that may have protected him while he served as president, no longer protects him against this prosecution.

Let's bring in CNN Senior Crime and Justice Reporter Katelyn Polantz for more on this. I mean, Donald Trump has really hammered home this argument

for quite some time, this idea that he was immune just in terms of actions he took while he was in office, while he was President.

Obviously, these judges are disagreeing. They're saying that is not the case. Just walk us through Donald Trump's appeals options at this point,


KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Zain, there is going to be a very quick amount of action that happens now because of

the way that this D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals panel has set this up for the days ahead in six days.

That's the amount of time that Donald Trump has to get the Supreme Court essentially to intervene and put everything on hold again or else this case

goes back into the hands of the trial court and gets headed toward trial. There was supposed to be a trial in March that's not on the calendar

because of these appeals in this case.

But what happened here today is significant on so many fronts, first and foremost, that it does put in place a schedule where Donald Trump is going

to have to get relief from higher courts very, very fast, does not have a huge amount of options to do that, and is facing what amounts to a losing

battle here, meaning that it's very possible yet again that we could see a trial of the former President about what he did after the 2020 election

happening very quickly and potentially even this year before the presidential election. That is not what Donald Trump wants to happen. He

wants to hold off the trial, but it could happen.

And Zain, the other thing here to note is what's so significant about this opinion today from this Appeals Court is that they are striking down every

single thing. They're hitting back at every single thing Donald Trump and his legal team was arguing and saying, you can be tried in court.

It's the responsibility of the court to look at a former President accused of crimes and potentially hold those trials. And the former President or

the President himself is not above the law, cannot intentionally violate the laws of the U.S. Constitution and the American government. Zain.

ASHER: All right, Katelyn Polantz live for us there. Thank you so much. All right. Some legal analysis here. I want to bring in Rick Hassan. He's the

author of the upcoming book, "A Real Right to Vote". He's also a UCLA law school professor and an election law specialist.

Rick, thank you so much for being with us. So, you heard what our colleague Katelyn Polantz was saying there. Just walk us through your thoughts on

whether or not the Supreme Court is going to be taking up this case if asked to do so.

RICK HASEN, PROFESSOR OF LAW AND POLITICAL SCIENCE, UCLA LAW: So, the court today did set up. It puts the Supreme Court in the hot seat, gives Trump

only six days to write this petition on an emergency basis and it's going to be one of the most significant things that the Supreme Court does in

relation to the 2024 election.

Remember this Thursday, the courts hearing the Trump disqualification case raises a totally different issue, but the courts hearing two very different

cases that both potentially affect whether Donald Trump is going to be able to be President again.

It's possible that the court is going to side with Trump on disqualification and side against him on immunity. The result would be that

there will be a trial likely this spring in the federal district court and there could well be a conviction or an acquittal before we get to the

Republican National Committee convention this summer.


ASHER: And just talk to us about the way in which the decision was written. Our Katelyn Polantz -- our reporter there was just talking about how the

judges literally hit back on almost every single argument that Donald Trump's lawyers put forward. Walk us through how forcefully and how

definitively this decision was actually written.

HASEN: Right. So, the first thing to note is that it was two Democratic appointees and one Republican appointee to the court. They were unanimous.

They issued what's called a per curiam opinion. That's an unsigned opinion for the court.

Sometimes that's done to, you know, emphasize that this is from all the judges. Sometimes it's done also because things are on a quick time frame

and they all work together on drafting the opinion.

It is unequivocal in stating that no one is above the law, including a President or a former President. We've never had a situation before where a

President is claimed. He's essentially absolutely immune, can do any criminal activity that he wants. And unless he's impeached for it, he can't

be criminally convicted.

It was a bold and very weak theory. So I'm really unsurprised by the fact that it was rejected. What did surprise me was the quick timeframe.

Everyone understands that this could well be what determines whether or not Trump can win the election, whether or not he's going to be convicted of

these crimes.

And so, this fast tracks the case to potentially get back to the trial court. And it does so in a way that underlines the idea that no person is


ASHER: Obviously, you know, just for the purposes of Donald Trump's lawyers, the legal strategy and the political strategy, of course,

intertwined here. I mean, they are going to want to delay. They want this any sort of trial to be held, ideally from their perspective after the

election. Just explain to us the process in terms of how they might try to run out the clock.

HASEN: So they only have one option now to run out the clock, which is by Monday, they must file what's called a motion for a stay to put things on

hold while the Supreme Court decides whether or not to take up the case on the merits.

So, the court is going to get this stay petition probably by Monday afternoon.

It's going to get a response from the government. And within a few weeks, we should know the court's going to have really two options.

Number one, it's going to put the trial on hold until for months, which probably essentially means there will be no trial before the election, or

they're going to reject this idea of a stay. They're going to let this thing go to trial. If it goes to trial and Trump is convicted, he can then

appeal and those appeals can take, potentially, years.

But on the -- so he would not go to jail if he, very likely, even if he's convicted. But what it does mean is this decision that the Supreme Court's

going to make in the next few weeks, likely, is going to be the one that's going to determine whether we get this trial or not.

If he loses there, he can go to the Court of Appeals and ask for something called an -- petition to have the entire D.C. Circuit hear the case. But if

he does that, unless the D.C. Circuit agrees to hear the case, which I think is unlikely, then this trial is going forward.

ASHER: And you mentioned, obviously, the other sort of key issue that the Supreme Court is going to be looking at this week on Thursday, and that is

the Colorado case on ballot eligibility. Just walk us through. How that's going to go from your perspective, do you think?

HASEN: So, that raises a whole different set of questions. It's not a criminal case. It's a question about ballot access. Can Donald Trump be on

the ballot in Colorado? The Colorado Supreme Court said he can't be on the ballot because under Section Three of the 14th Amendment, he's disqualified

because he engaged in insurrection.

Donald Trump then brought that case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court fast-tracked that case. They held briefing over a matter of weeks. And the

oral argument on Thursday will pit those voters in Colorado who are trying to get Trump off the ballot against Trump's lawyers.

The state of Colorado is also going to be weighing in there on its interests in this case. There's going to be hours of arguments. And I

expect that we will get a decision relatively soon from the Supreme Court, especially if they're going to disqualify him.

Because, you know, the thing is, when voters go to vote, they really need to know whether or not the candidate they might be supporting is someone

who's actually eligible to serve in office.

ASHER: Right.

HASEN: And so, you know, people save.

ASHER: Right. Rick Hasen, live for us there. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. All right. So, what now? Could this ruling on immunity be one that has

an effect on Donald Trump's political future? We will discuss all of that and more in about 20 minutes or so. So, do stay tuned for that.


All right, America's top diplomat is in Qatar this hour to push for a truce between Israel and Hamas and also the release of hostages. Qatar has, of

course, played a huge role in previous hostage negotiations and is a key player in the conflict as it maintains a relationship with Hamas.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken will make it clear that the U.S. is not looking to escalate tensions even as it targets Iran-backed Houthi rebels

in the region. Earlier, Blinken stopped in Egypt. He also stopped in Saudi Arabia where he discussed regional cooperation with the Saudi Crown Prince

Mohammed bin Salman and ways to address the needs of the people of Gaza.

Palestinians are hoping that Lincoln's trip will lead to a pause in the fighting ahead of a threatened Israeli assault on Rafah. The small city on

the border with Egypt has become basically a tent city. More than a million people, about half of Gaza's populations, simply crammed into just this

tiny sliver of land living in makeshift tents.

I want to bring in International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson joining us live now from Tel Aviv. So, just in terms of Anthony Blinken's trip to the

region, Nic, two main goals here. One is of course preventing a dramatic escalation in terms of the tit for tat that we've seen between the U.S. and

of course Iranian backed militia, but also really trying to push for some kind of truce between Israel and Hamas, even as Hamas wants to push for a

deeper ceasefire. Just walk us through that.

NIC ROBERSTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yeah, and it's all about hostages as well, isn't it? And I think this really frames the day

for Secretary Blinken in Cairo and in Doha, the capitals of the main two interlocutors, as you were saying, with Hamas. Both the Qataris deal with

Hamas and the Egyptians.

And it was notable when he was in Egypt that Secretary Blinken met also with the head of Egyptian intelligence, who was part of that forum over a

week ago that put together the proposal with the Mossad chief here, the CIA chief and the Qatari prime minister, that proposal about a ceasefire and

prisoner release and hostage release and all those details that Hamas has yet to actually respond to.

But I think it is significant that he did spend time talking to the person in the Egyptian government who perhaps has the most understanding of where

Hamas is thinking is at the moment. If anyone can, he's the person, the head of intelligence there who would have best access to that.

Making comments, Secretary Blinken, in both Egypt and Qatar actually, according to his press secretary, that there should be no forced removal of

Palestinians from Gaza. This is a reaffirmation of what the Secretary of State has said many times. The foreign underscores fears that Palestinians

could be forced because of the situation, to leave Gaza.

But central to it all, trying to get that ceasefire -- trying to get that ceasefire, trying to get that hostage release, thanking the Egyptians, of

course, for all their help, getting humanitarian aid into Gaza, saying more needs to be done.

And the same meeting with the Qataris today. It's the same effort to try to find a way to shift the dial on this impasse over how long we assume this

is the impasse because we don't actually have accurate details, but this is what we best understand at the moment, that the impasse is over.

Hamas wanting all its prisoners from Israeli jails freed, and that seems to be a huge stumbling block for Prime Minister Netanyahu's government. And

also, Hamas wants a complete ceasefire and a complete pullout of Israeli forces from Gaza, and that seems to be an impasse, as well.

So, the proposition on their table is for a shorter truce, perhaps different numbers of prisoners released -- we don't know. But that's where

things are on that front. But it's the humanitarian effort, as well.

And you highlighted his visit to Saudi Arabia just yesterday. What to do the day the ceasefire does come? Ramp up humanitarian effort. There needs

to be an administration for Gaza. There needs to be a revamped Palestinian authority.

All of these issues are going to need regional buy-in. So that is also the subtext of what Secretary Blinken is trying to achieve here.

ASHER: Yeah, what exactly happens when the guns fall silent? Nic Robertson, live for us there. Thank you so much. And Steve Lincoln is going to be

speaking any moment now with the Qatari Prime Minister. We will bring you those remarks as soon as they happen.

Also, any moment now, U.S. President Joe Biden will be speaking at the White House on the Senate's Immigration National Security Bill. After

months of Senate negotiations to reach a compromise, the Biden administration is casting blame on Republicans as the bipartisan bill on

border reform and foreign aid is basically on the brink of death.

Right now from President Trump, let it be known that he wanted the House to kill the package.


The White House is seeking to show it is taking steps to secure the border while framing former President Trump and House Republicans as


In the meantime, the United States House Congress is set to hold a historic vote that could leave the Homeland Security Secretary without a job. If the

impeachment votes against Alejandro Mayorkas succeeds, it will be the first time in nearly 150 years that a cabinet official gets impeached.

House Republicans are angry at Mayorkas for not doing more to police and to secure the U.S. border with Mexico. Constitutional experts claim the

evidence does not reach that higher bar. House Democrats agree.


HAKEEM JEFFRIES, U.S. HOUSE DEMOCRAT: We're dealing with a sham political stunt in terms of the impeachment effort of Secretary Mayorkas, an

impeachment effort I should note that was demanded by Donald Trump and is being led by Marjorie Taylor Greene. What does this impeachment effort have

to do with fixing the challenges at the border? Absolutely nothing.


ASHER: For more, let's bring in CNN White House Correspondent Arlette Saenz. So, there's two things at play here, Arlette. One that we've just

been discussing is, of course, the impeachment vote. That is not only historic, but Democrats will tell you that it is extremely politically


You also have the Senate border deal, as well, that is pretty much on the brink of death at this point in time. We know that President Biden is set

to speak any moment now. What do we expect him to say?

ARLETTE SAENZ, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Zain, we expect President Biden to make the case for that bipartisan border deal as we have

seen the White House increasingly try to put the onus on Republicans in this debate. The White House and Democrats have really been quite eager to

go on offense on immigration at a time when that issue is one that is at top of voters' minds heading into the 2024 election and one where voters

have pessimistic views of President Biden's handling of the issue.

Now, if you remember, when this debate first started, Republicans had insisted that any aid for Ukraine must be paired with changes to border

policy. But now, as they've been presented with that bipartisan proposal, Republicans in the Senate and House have started to balk.

It's unclear whether the measure would be able to advance with a key test vote tomorrow over in the Senate. And on the House side, House Speaker Mike

Johnson has declared the bill dead on arrival.

This all comes as former President Donald Trump has really lobbied hard against the bill. And it really points to not just one of the challenges

the White House has, but also a messaging opportunity that the White House has going forward.

Their argument here is that they've presented policy changes to try to address the crisis at the U.S. southern border, but so far they argue it's

Republicans who are blocking that from moving forward. I think another item to watch today is to see how the president speaks about the $60 billion of

aid that he wants to secure for Ukraine.

Just moments ago, a spokesperson for the National Security Council, John Kirby, said that not passing this bill will prevent the U.S. from offering

further security assistance to Ukraine, and ultimately that will hinder Ukrainian soldiers on the battlefield.

So, the President, at this time, really trying to balance these two issues of the border, trying to get that funding for Ukraine. We've also heard

House Speaker Mike Johnson wants to hold a stand-alone vote on aid for Israel.

That is something that the White House has said President Biden would veto, because they believe that the path forward for this is still that

bipartisan deal, which includes border policy changes, as well as aid for Ukraine and Israel.

And on that impeachment vote facing Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, the White House offered a forceful defense of the Homeland

Security Secretary, as they expressed their strong opposition to the resolution.

At this time, it's unclear whether that will, in fact, past the House, but there are clearly some very major lines happening in the immigration

debate, not just with that border policy deal, but also this House attempt to impeach Mayorkas today.

ASHER: All right, Arlette Saenz for us there. Thank you so much. All right. Still to come here on "One World", Prince Harry is now in the U.K. to be

with his ailing father, King Charles III, after his cancer diagnosis. We are live for you from Buckingham Palace after this quick break.



ASHER: All right, Prince Harry has arrived in Britain to be by his father's side. One of our teams on the ground there in London says that he's in one

of these cars that you're seeing go by there, one of the black cars you're seeing.

This comes one day after Buckingham Palace announced that King Charles had been diagnosed with cancer. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak sounding quite

hopeful about the King's health overall, telling a shocked nation that the King's cancer had been caught early.

I want to take you now to Buckingham Palace, where we go to our Royal Correspondent Max Foster. So Max, at this point in time, we still don't

know necessarily what type of cancer this is. Is there a chance that we could find out? Might the King reveal more in the coming days, Max?

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT: I think there is a chance. I don't know exactly when, but if you look at how he treated his prostate -- his

enlarged prostate, he did reveal that and that had a big positive impact because the health service received a big influx in inquiries about

prostate cancer.

He does have a long history with working with cancer charities, so there may come a point where he does decide to reveal this diagnosis and that

would be a big change from the past because we never have had that sort of private information from Royals before, but I think this is a new open --

ASHER: Max, I'm sorry, I have to interrupt you. We have some breaking news. Anthony Blinken and the Qatari Prime Minister are speaking in Doha. Let's

listen in.


MOHAMMED BIN ABDULRAHMAN AL THANI, QATARI PRIME MINISTER (through translator): -- so, whether in Doha, in Washington, and today we meet

again in Doha. I would like to inform the media that we have received a reply from Hamas with regards to the general framework of the agreement

with regard to hostages.

The reply includes some comments, but in general it is positive. However, given the sensitivity of the circumstances, we will not tackle details. We

are optimistic and we have delivered the response to the Israeli party.

We met today with His Excellency and discussed the different developments in this war, notably the unfortunate expansion that we have been seeing and

their repercussions on the security and stability of the region.

In the past weeks, we have witnessed different tensions in addition to the war on Gaza that has expanded beyond the Gaza Strip to reach different

countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, and the Red Sea. I take advantage of this opportunity to express my condolences to His Excellency

for the death of the U.S. soldiers.


We, in the state of Qatar cannot accept such actions and we cannot accept the threatening of the coalition in the region. Since the first day of

confrontations, we have warned against the threats and the dangers of expansion of these confrontations, notably that the region witnesses long-

term and long-standing conflicts.

Unfortunately, these have become a reality, and it adds to the complexities. It adds to the complexity to the negotiations. That's why we

call the concerned parties to go back to restraint, to avoid the escalation, to not make any decisions that would lead to more bloodshed, to

maintain the safety of civilians.

This war has so far incurred more than 20,000 deaths in Gaza and more than 60,000 injured -- most of whom are kids and women. Therefore, we call the

international community to assume responsibility and call for a ceasefire. It is time, high time, for an international community decision to


I would like in this context to mention that defunding the UNRWA will have repercussions, catastrophic repercussions because more than 6 million

Palestinians will not receive humanitarian assistance. We believe in the importance of the United Nations and the UNRWA.

And we have to separate between the agency as a U.N. agency that has strong values and the accusations against some of its employees who are being

investigated. We cannot punish a humanitarian agency because of some accusations against some of its employees.

Throughout the past years, we have witnessed the repercussions of the lack of funding, and we fear of the complete defunding. Based on our

responsibility towards the Palestinian brothers and sisters, we affirm that Qatar will keep bringing in the people who need to be treated in Qatar.

Our efforts have led to the entry of medications to Gaza, particularly to the most affected regions and to those who are held or who are still stuck

in the strip. And thanks to His Highness' decision, we have sent more than 2000 tons of help, including the needs for shelter, including food, and two

field hospitals. And this has been successful with our partners in the U.K., France, Italy, in addition to the organizing committee of churches.

Around 200 injured and patients have been sent from Gaza to Qatar and that as part of our commitment to provide care, health care to those in addition

to 3000 kids who have become orphans in Gaza because of the war.

Despite all the efforts to de-escalate and after four months of the confrontations, we have all been unable to stop bloodshed and violence. The

hospitals are still being targeted, schools are being bombarded, and refugees are being killed while moving for the first, second, and third


Your Excellency, we appreciate your constant and our constant cooperation and collaboration in different fields, political, humanitarian. And we hope

that our efforts that have started four months ago to lead to a ceasefire and to reach a solution that is just and fair for the region.

I seize this opportunity to thank you for all your efforts, and I thank all our partners in the U.N., Egypt, France, and other partners who are

collaborating with us in different humanitarian and relief assistance to reduce the size of this humanitarian crisis.

I look forward to sustaining these discussions between our two countries in order to reach a solution and stability in this region, to put an end to

this war and to look forward for a better future for the region.


Thank you.

ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: Good evening, everyone, and Prime Minister Mohammed, thank you for the -- as always, very productive

discussions that we had today -- this evening, with the Amir and with the Prime Minister, as well.

We've had constant engagement at the highest levels of our respective governments going back many, many weeks, now months, with an intense focus

on security release of hostages and getting an extended pause to help address the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza.

And we saw the results of the last pause, the initial pause. A hundred and five hostages out, a significant increase in humanitarian assistance

getting in, the repair of critical infrastructure in Gaza, and more broadly, reduced regional tensions at the same time.

So, together with Qatar and Egypt, we put forward, as you know, a serious proposal that was aimed at not simply repeating the previous agreement, but

expanding it.

As the Prime Minister just said, Hamas responded tonight. We're reviewing that response now, and I'll be discussing it with the Government of Israel

tomorrow. There's still a lot of work to be done, but we continue to believe that an agreement is possible and, indeed, essential, and we will

continue to work relentlessly to achieve it.

We had meetings already on this trip in Riyadh, in Cairo, now today in Doha, focused on ensuring, as well, that we can use any pause to continue

to build out plans for the day after in Gaza, security, humanitarian, reconstruction, governance -- all bring real challenges with them. But

that's exactly why we are and need to be focused on them now.

We're also determined to use any pause to continue to pave a diplomatic path forward to a just and lasting peace and security for the region. That

is the best way -- the best way to ensure that October 7th and the tragic loss of life by Israelis and Palestinians is not repeated.

When I was last in the region a few weeks ago, I said then that there is a very powerful path that we can see before us to actually get to lasting

peace and security. And it's coming ever more sharply into focus.

An Israel that is integrated into the region, with security guarantees from its neighbors and partners, alongside a practical, time-bound, irreversible

path to a Palestinian state living side by side in peace with Israel, with the necessary security arrangements for both peoples.

On this visit, one of our key objectives has been to continue to hammer out the substance and sequence of all the steps that would be necessary to

enable us to move down that path. Now, that's one path. It's clear, and you can see that it gets us to a destination that would benefit virtually

everyone in the region and, as I said, bring lasting peace and security to Israelis and Palestinians alike.

But there are those who want to move the region in a different direction and take a different path, and who are actively working to sabotage every

effort to move toward lasting peace and security.

Just look at what we've seen in the last couple of months and indeed in the last couple of weeks -- attacks in Syria and Iraq, attacks on Israel from

Lebanon, attacks on international shipping in the Red Sea, attacks in Jordan that killed three U.S. service members, and of course, the attack on

Israel on October 7th.

Each and every one carried out by groups trained, armed, funded, and formed by Iran. Iran and its proxies claim that they're carrying out these attacks

somehow on behalf of the Palestinian people. That is absolutely wrong, and it's a cover for their true intent.

Not a single one of these attacks has advanced the rights, the opportunities, the security and the dignity of the Palestinians.


They are all fundamentally about Iran's quest for power. Since October 7th, we've been very clear in warning any actor that would try to take advantage

of the conflict, don't do it. We've been very clear that we do not want to see the conflict expanded. We don't want to see escalation.

But we've also been clear that if our personnel, if our people are threatened, if they're attacked, we will respond. We will defend them. We

are responding to violence, not initiating it. We're seeking to prevent escalation, not fuel it.

And as we do this, we will continue to use every tool available to us to reach an extended pause that gets hostages out, that gets more assistance

in, that brings calm to Gaza's civilians, and that keeps diplomacy moving forward toward an integrated and more secure region. In these efforts,

we're very fortunate to have Qatar as a partner. Thank you.

UNKNOWN (through translator): We open the floor to questions. Saber Ayyub, Al-Arabi TV.

SABER AYYUB, AL-ARABI TV: My first question is addressed to His Excellency, Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs. What is the evaluation of

Qatar for the regional developments, and what is its message to concerned parties with these developments?

To the Secretary of State, Mr. Antony Blinken, why it seems too hard for the United States to end the war on Gaza, or at least to push for a

ceasefire? Are you, or are we going to witness soon a ceasefire? Is it going to be signed here or true signed here in Qatar or agreed here in

Qatar in Doha?

And lastly, before you travel to Israel and meet Netanyahu, I'm going to ask the same question that "Politico" asked today -- is Mr. Antony Blinken

too nice to be Secretary of State? Thank you.

AL THANI (through translator): With regards to evaluation of the regional developments, we have since the beginning had a clear position war should

end. There shouldn't be an expansion of conflicts in the region. Unfortunately, we witness an expansion of tensions.

There are some forces taking advantage and using this conflict, whereas there are forces that seek to create these tensions. We believe and we see

that the way towards solution and de-escalation is reaching and achieving a just, fair solution for the Palestinian cause in addition to putting an end

to the war on Gaza.

We always call every -- all parties concerned parties to self-restrained. We are in communication with all and we do not want to see an escalation in

the region. We do not want to witness more death in addition to what we are seeing today to -- from challenges to the freedom of navigation, which

would affect not only the security of the region, but trade overall.


ASHER: All right, you've just been listening to a live press conference between Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the Qatari Prime Minister Al-

Thani. Blinken, when he spoke, outlined three main goals for his trip to the Middle East this time around.

This is, by the way, his fifth trip to the Middle East since the October 7th attacks. He said that his goal is first and foremost to secure the

release of more hostages, to increase humanitarian assistance to Gaza, and also to reduce regional tensions which have of course, flared up in recent

weeks, given the attacks on three American service members in Jordan, followed by the subsequent retaliation response by the US attacking Iranian

backed militia in both Iraq and Syria.

They did sort of update us on the status in terms of a truce, a potential truce deal that is being negotiated between Israel and Hamas. Right now,

obviously the Qataris are mediators. Anthony Blinken didn't give us much in terms of details, but the Qatari Prime Minister, when he spoke earlier on,

did say that he was indeed optimistic and certainly positive.


I do want to bring in our International Diplomatic Editor Nic Robertson, joining us live now from Tel Aviv. Nic, Anthony Blinken, did say that Hamas

had essentially responded to the outlines of this sort of proposed truce that exists at this point in time.

He didn't say what Hamas' comments were, but that Hamas' response had been passed on to the Israeli government and presumably, the U.S. government, as

well. Just walk us through what the potential sticking points are at this point. We know that Hamas has been pushing for a longer ceasefire here, not

just an intermediate truce.

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yeah, I think, let's also pick up on the significance of this moment as well. Because as we went

into that press conference, the State Department was briefing -- as they have been briefing since Secretary Blinken began this trip, that the ball

was in Hamas' court.

Now it's been in their court for over a week. That's what the State Department was saying until half an hour ago. That was the State

Department's line on this. So Hamas has very clearly chosen this moment, it appears from what we're being told, to now release their response when

Secretary Blinken is on the eve, and will be landing here actually in Israel, expected later tonight, is on the eve of his meetings with the

Israeli Prime Minister.

So, I get a sense here that Hamas has made a point of the timing. Again, you're right, we don't know the details, but it's significant because the

ball is now back in Israel's court to use the parlance that the State Department has been using.

What did we hear from the Qatari Prime Minister? He said that the response had been positive. He hinted that it wasn't a straight up yes, so we know

that there are still issues there. And he said it had been passed on to the Israeli government. What did we hear from Secretary Blinken?

He said, well, we've just heard from Hamas this evening their response to the offer that was put forward over a week ago now. And he said, I'll be

discussing that with the Israelis tomorrow. And this is what we understand now will be an important part of the discussions, because there will be

something on the table. What have been the sticking points?

Hamas has held the position since last weekend, since there's sort of been a public understanding that what is acceptable to Israel, to Qatar, to the

United States, to Egypt, is an offer that doesn't have a permanent ceasefire, which is what Hamas wants, which doesn't talk about a withdrawal

of Israeli troops from Gaza, which is what Hamas wants, which doesn't get into the specificity of the exchange for Hamas and Palestinian prisoners

who are in Israeli jails, which has been a central part of what Hamas wants.

They want a serious discussion about it, and the understanding is they want big numbers of their prisoners released for, particularly for IDF troops

who are held hostage.

So, I think these still seem to be the fundamental gaps. Are we talking about a four week, six week, eight week truce, which is sort of the

ballpark of where the conversation has been? Or are we talking about a permanent ceasefire, which Hamas wants, which Prime Minister Netanyahu's

right wing elements in his government has said, that won't work. If you go that route, we'll collapse the government.

So, I think that's where we are. But I think the timing here, none of this is coincidental. Hamas has clearly chosen this moment, this precise moment,

to make their response clear. And this is now front and center of Secretary Blinken's visit here with Prime Minister Netanyahu tomorrow.

ASHER: All right, Nic Robertson, live for us there. Thank you so much. Still to come, immunity rejected. A federal appeals court issues a ruling

that could have major political implications for the U.S. Republican presidential front runner. That's story next.



ASHER: All right, welcome back to "One World". I'm Zain Asher. Let's go back straight to our top story now. A decision that could have immense

political implications for this year's U.S. presidential election.

The Federal Appeals Court has flatly rejected Donald Trump's claims that he cannot be prosecuted for charges that he plotted to overturn the 2020

presidential election. The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that Trump is not immune from criminal prosecution.

Trump's legal team has now responded saying, quote, "If immunity is not granted to a President, every future President who leaves office will be

immediately indicted by the opposing party. Without complete immunity, a President of the United States would not be able to properly function.

Prosecuting a president for official acts violates the constitution and threatens the bedrock of our Republic."

Larry Sabato -- Larry Sabato, excuse me, the director for the Center of Politics at the University of Virginia joins us live now from

Charlottesville. Larry, always good to see you.

So, the U.S. Court of Appeals D.C. Circuit essentially said that overall, it was unpersuaded by Donald Trump's legal team's arguments for immunity

and that a case against him can now proceed. What sort of implications does that have, especially given that we are in an election year?

LARRY SABATO, DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR POLITICS, UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA: This is a very important decision. Now, it took longer than people expected and

time is critical because Trump's goal is to drag out all the legal proceedings so that he gets past his convention and maybe pass the November

5th general election.

But the reason this is so critical, and it will apply to Presidents, well beyond Trump and Biden. Essentially, Trump was arguing that presidents

should never be prosecuted for anything they did while in office. And that includes for the rest of their lives after they leave office.

There are a few things more un-American. There are a few things that would have destroyed the American system faster. But they knew that was going to

happen. The real question is, how long is it going to take to finish the appeal?

They've got until Monday to appeal to the Supreme Court. They've already said they're going to appeal. And we don't know how long it will take the

Supreme Court to make this decision, though I would bet it would be relatively quickly.

ASHER: So, what are the -- if there is to be a trial this year prior to the November elections, I mean, just, that would be unprecedented, right? Walk

us through what that would even look like and the political implications of that for those who support Donald Trump, those who don't support Donald


SABATO: It would have major implications for both parties. For the Republicans, of course, it would strengthen and enrage the Trump base,

which has gotten in the nomination again easily. He's going to be the nominee and it isn't going to be particularly close because they're so

angry that the establishment, or what they love to call the deep state, have been oppressing their guy.

For the Democrats, though, and for independents, let me underline independents 10 times, the fact that they're going to see one of the two

people who has a chance to be the next President in the dock being tried for very serious offenses, potentially generating a coup d'etat, which is

unprecedented in American history, it's clear from the research so far that it's going to cost Trump at least several percentage points. Well, this is

a close, hard fought election. So, it could be the difference.


ASHER: And speaking of potentially trying to overturn the 2020 elections, obviously there is another case that's before the Supreme Court on Thursday

on ballot eligibility, just given Colorado, Donald Trump potentially not being on the ballot in Colorado. Walk us through that.

SABATO: Sure. This, as you say, comes mainly from Colorado, but other states, mainly Democratic states have been talking about doing the same

thing and are holding back, waiting for the Supreme Court to make a decision.

Odds are, even though many legal authorities believe that, in fact, Trump did violate Section Three of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,

which deals with insurrection, this was after the Civil War. Even though many authorities believe that he should be taken off the ballot, my guess

is, and I think most people in the field believe this, the Supreme Court will leave him on the ballot.

And I can see why. I think he should be taken off. But I can see why they don't want to enrage his base even further and take him off the ballot.

Because the way to deal with Trump, if he's going to be defeated, is to have him defeated at the ballot box.

If the people do it and it's accepted as a legitimate result, and who knows what Trump will say, but if it's accepted as legitimate, then it will have

a major impact on the society moving forward. Maybe we can put Trump in the past. That assumes he loses. I'm not making that assumption because we all

saw in 2016 what can happen.

ASHER: Yeah, I mean, a lot of people say that not having him on the ballot despite what may or may not happen. You know, some people say that it is

anti-democratic. Larry Sabato, live for us there. Thank you so much. And we'll be right back with more after the short break.


ASHER: Football superstar Lionel Messi is expressing regret over not playing an Inter-Miami friendly match over the weekend. The stadium was

packed with fans who had paid a lot of money to see the World Cup winner. There were boos and there were chants of, "Refund, refund", when the match

ended without Messi coming off the bench. The superstar said he couldn't play because of an injury.


LIONEL MESSI, CAPTAIN, INTER MIAMI (through translator): Unfortunately, football things can happen in any game. We could have an injury. It

happened to me and I couldn't be in the Hong Kong game and it's a shame because I always wanted to participate. I hope we can come back and we can

play another game in Hong Kong again.



ASHER: Asked if he would play in Miami's match in Japan on Wednesday, the Argentine said that he wasn't sure.

All right, I want to turn now to what's been happening in California. Dangerous weather turned neighborhood streets into muddy raging rivers,

swallowing cars and leaving people and animals stranded. That's just some of the devastation left behind after a system known as an atmospheric river

wreaked havoc on Southern California on Sunday and since Sunday actually, at least two people died in the storm, which dropped record-breaking

rainfall in some areas.

More than 120 mudslides have been reported across the Los Angeles metro area. The flooding also triggered multiple rescues, including this one. A

man caught in the fast moving waters of the L.A. River Monday after jumping in to try to save his dog. Firefighters were able to hoist the man out and

then take him to the hospital. The dog thankfully swam to safety on its own.

All right, that does it for this hour of "One World". Thank you so much for watching. I'm Zain Asher. Amanpour is up next. You're watching CNN.