Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

U.S. Prioritizes Public Safety; Trump Hush Money Trial A TV-Like Series; Trump Wants Fani Willis Out As D.A.; Tornado Tore Houses Apart; From Weight Loss To New Baby; Congress Wants An Answer From Pentagon; Hamas's Brutal Abuse On Men And Women. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired May 08, 2024 - 12:00   ET




BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: Israel's operation in Rafah continues as the Biden administration confirms it has paused a weapon

shipment to the country.

One World starts right now.

So which specific weapons delivery was paused and why? We'll bring you the latest comments from the U.S. Defense Secretary.

Also ahead, what happened and when? An exclusive CNN report on Afghanistan is making waves on Capitol Hill. And later, the rise of the Ozempic baby.

Several women are reporting surprise pregnancies after taking the popular weight loss drug. For one struggling mother, it was a dream come true.

Hello everyone, live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga. Zain is off today. You are watching One World.

We begin with a direct political message from the United States to Israel. A looming high stakes report and what appears to be a growing divide

between the allies during a key moment in the Israel-Hamas war.

The U.S. Secretary of Defense confirms the White House paused a shipment of bombs to Israel amid concerns that they would be used in Israel's long

threatened ground invasion into Rafah. More than one million Palestinians are currently sheltering in Gaza's southernmost city and were told the

decision to pause this transfer of weapons was a result of the Israelis not providing the U.S. with a credible plan to protect those civilians.

The Biden administration once again made clear it's against a full-scale military incursion after Israel captured the Palestinian side of the Rafah

border crossing earlier this week.


MATTHEW MILLER, SPOKESPERSON, U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT: This appears to be a limited operation, but of course much of that depends on what comes next.

They have said, I think quite clearly, it's no secret that they want to conduct a major military operation there. We have made clear that we oppose

such an operation.


GOLODRYGA: Meanwhile, the White House is rushing to complete a report to Congress on whether Israel has violated international humanitarian law

during its war in Gaza. It comes as the Israeli War Cabinet is set to convene in just a few minutes to discuss ceasefire negotiations.

A lot to cover for us as CNN's Kylie Atwood is at the State Department, but first let's go to Oren Liebermann who joins me now at the Pentagon.

So, Oren, this had been reported, these weapons pause delivery, a couple of days ago and now we're finally getting confirmation from the U.S.

administration that it has indeed paused some weapons shipment to Israel over concerns about its operation in Rafah. What is the defense secretary

saying today?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin confirmed the pause in this weapons shipment, and it is a specific shipment

of some of the heavier weapons the U.S. has in the past provided to Israel, 1,800 one-ton bombs. Those are some of the most powerful conventional

weapons, not only in the U.S. inventory, but that the U.S. has provided to Israel, as well as more than 1,500-pound bombs.

So still significant weaponry here. The U.S. says that they looked at this shipment after it became clear that Israel was essentially confirming that

it would be going into Rafah, as that became more imminent. And as U.S. concerns grew about the steps or lack thereof that Israel had in place to

make sure it protected civilians and prevented a humanitarian catastrophe if and when it moved into Rafah in southern Gaza.

When Israel hadn't presented those answers in a comprehensive fashion, meaning there wasn't a comprehensive plan in place to protect civilians,

not one that the U.S. saw at least, then the U.S. began this review of its shipments and concluded last week that this shipment of 2,000-pound and

500-pound bombs would be paused, at least for now, based on the concerns over what such heavy bombs would do if used in Rafah.

As you pointed out, there are more than a million Palestinians now sheltering in Rafah, and not a plan in place to move them out of the way,

at least not one that the U.S. has seen before Israel were to conduct such an operation. Because of that, the U.S. paused this shipment.

As of right now, a U.S. official says it's unclear what will happen here, if this shipment will simply be fulfilled in the future or if it will be

held, at least for the time being here.


Bianna, I'll also point out that the U.S. is looking at other shipments as well. For example, JDAMs, which turn conventional weapons into smart

weapons, but those are much more in the future for potential sailor transfer to Israel. It's these 2,000-pound and 500-pound bombs that are

much more of an imminent shipment that are paused right now.

GOLODRYGA: Just quickly, can you clarify for us, Oren, is this separate from the $14 billion in international aid supplemental that was just passed

by Congress?

LIEBERMANN: It is. This isn't included as part of that. This is a separate shipment that's part of essentially a different pot of money and weapons

that could be used for Israel. So, this doesn't touch the supplemental, nor is it connected to it at this time.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Oren Liebermann, thank you. To Kylie Atwood now on this anticipated report from the Secretary of Defense Blinken on whether

Israel has or has not violated international humanitarian law. When can we expect to see this report, Kylie?

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it was due to Congress today, but we're told from congressional sources that the administration has

communicated to them that it's likely running a little bit late. They say slightly delayed, so we'll probably see it in the coming days here.

But it's looking at, studying at, you know, two major questions here. First of which, as you pointed out, if the -- if Israel is using U.S. weaponry in

a way that is not in accordance with international humanitarian law. So, the way that this national security memo 20 that President Biden signed

requires the State Department to do is to get assurances from Israel that they are in compliance with international humanitarian law.

And then the secretary of state has to make a determination as to whether those assurances are credible and reliable. We have already reported that

there is division within the State Department over this question, over if those assurances that Israel has provided are indeed credible and reliable.

So, we'll have to watch and see what that final determination looks like. And we should note that there is pressure from Congress, particularly those

in President Biden's own party, Democrats, who are saying that the State Department shouldn't just take those assurances point blank. They should

look into them. They should be getting evidence from the Israelis.

They should be getting explanations from the Israelis in terms of why they carried out certain strikes that may have created the perception of

violating international humanitarian law before they just rubber stamp that, yes, they are indeed in compliance.

The other thing that this report is going to be looking at is the question over whether Israel impeded the delivery of humanitarian assistance into

Gaza. We've heard repeatedly from U.S. officials that Israel has made progress on that front, getting humanitarian assistance into Gaza. But

they've also said repeatedly that Israel has to be doing more here.

So where do they land on that final determination? And I think it's important to note that this report doesn't require a change in policy, but

it could certainly trigger a massive amount of pressure on the Biden administration to potentially change what has been this green lighting of

continued U.S. military support for Israel.

We've now seen, of course, the first time in the last few days here with this news that they're putting a pause on one of those shipments. But to

date, we haven't seen much change from the Biden administration on this real leverage point that they have. And if Israel is found to not be in

compliance with international humanitarian law, you can expect that there will be tremendous pressure for the Biden administration to change its tact

here quite dramatically.

GOLODRYGA: And it is interesting that at least domestically that the majority of that pressure is coming from members of his own party, the

administration and president's own party.

Kylie Atwood, thank you.

Like a cliffhanger on a TV show, people glued to the dramatic testimony of Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump's hush money trial are being forced to wait

to see what comes next. And that, of course, will be tomorrow.

Daniels spent much of Tuesday giving lurid details about her relationship with Trump. Her testimony will resume on Thursday with more strident cross-

examination by Trump's lawyers.

We get more from CNN's Paula Reid.



PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Donald Trump coming face to face with Stormy Daniels in court as she took the

stand to tell the jury about her alleged sexual encounter with a then businessman.

Prosecutors asked Daniels to identify Trump in the courtroom. She pointed towards him, saying in the navy blue jacket with Trump having no visible

reaction. After walking through how she got into the adult film industry, the prosecution quickly turned to Daniel's first introduction to Trump at a

2006 golf tournament in Lake Tahoe.

That meeting turned into a dinner invitation she initially declined, but her publicist got her to reconsider. What could possibly go wrong, were his

words to me, Daniels recounted with a giggle. If nothing else, you'd get a great story.


She described Trump's hotel suite in detail, saying that when she arrived, he was wearing satin pajamas. Does Mr. Hefner know you stole his pajamas?

She teased him, asking him to change, and he obliged.

Daniels said Trump asked her about the business aspects of her adult film directing. And her possibly appearing on The Apprentice. And she briefly

asked Trump about his wife, Melania, who had recently given birth to their son Barron.

Recalling Trump said, we don't sleep in the same room. The statement causing Trump to shake his head and murmur to his attorneys. When she later

returned from a trip to the bathroom, Daniels testified that Trump was waiting for her on the bed, wearing only boxers.

I felt like the room spun in slow motion, Daniels said. I thought, oh, my God, what did I misread to get here? She testified that the two had sex.

Although Trump did not initially ask her to keep the encounter quiet, she said, I told very few people that we actually had sex because I felt

ashamed that I didn't stop it.

It was after Trump began running for president.

TRUMP: And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

REID: And the infamous Access Hollywood tape came out that her then publicist said she should sell the story. My motivation wasn't money. It

was to get the story out, she testified. But when she found out Trump and Michael Cohen were interested in buying the story for $130,000, she told

the court it was the best thing that could have happened because then I'd be safe and the story wouldn't come out.

Then in a searing cross-examination, Trump's attorney, Susan Necheles, pushed Daniels. Am I correct that you hate President Trump? Yes, Daniels

replied. You want him to go to jail, Necheles asked. I want him to be held accountable, Daniels said. If he's found guilty, yes.

Daniels casual and relaxed demeanor changed as the defense's questions became more pointed, attacking her credibility and trying to establish

Daniels has always just been trying to make a profit. You've been making money by claiming to have had sex with President Trump for more than a

decade, Necheles asked. That story has made you a lot of money, right? Daniels responded.

It's also cost me a lot of money.

Court will not be in session on Wednesday, but Daniels will be back on the stand Thursday to continue that cross-examination. The big thing we're

watching for over the next 72 hours is whether Trump can continue to abide by the gag order that prohibits him from attacking any witnesses in this


Daniels clearly got under his skin at times, but the judge has threatened him with possible jail time if he violates the gag order again.

Paula Reid, CNN, New York.


GOLODRYGA: Thanks to Paula Reid for that update.

Donald Trump has multiple legal battles going on. Just a short time ago, a Georgia appeals court agreed to hear arguments over whether the district

attorney in Trump's election interference case should be disqualified.

Trump and other defendants say Fani Willis acted inappropriately, improperly when she assigned her boyfriend to work on the case.

Now, the judge in the case held several days of hearings into the matter earlier this year and ultimately decided that Willis could stay on. Well,

now the appeals court will take up this issue.

Let's get some more analysis of what this all means and additional analysis of what we can expect to see in Lower Manhattan tomorrow.

Joining us now is CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen.

Norm, a lot to get to. Let me just first get you to respond to this news just in a short time ago that an appeals court is agreeing to hear

arguments about the case in Georgia. Appears to be yet another win for the former president, at least in the short term, as far as his delay tactic


NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Bianna, there is no surprise that the judge's opinion finding that the D.A. may stay on the case. But her former

deputy, Nathan Wade, had to go and he did go.

There's no surprise that that is going to be on appellate review now. I thought the order was notable because so far there's been no stay of the

underlying proceedings and they are continuing. Nobody would call it a brisk pace on the Georgia 2020 election interference case, but it is moving


And now we'll need to see, does the case get stayed or do these appellate issues play out? I think Georgia law is clear that Judge McAfee, the trial

court judge, got it right. There's no basis to disqualify Willis here. But Mr. Wade's continuing presence on the case did create an appearance of a

conflict. The judge said he had to leave. He's gone. I don't expect the appellate courts are going to disqualify the D.A.


GOLODRYGA: Quickly before we get to the Hush Money case, let me get you to respond to news yesterday in Florida. And of course, this is the documents

case in against the president. The judge there, Judge Aileen Cannon, who's made some questionable decisions in the past with regards to this case, has

now delayed the trial indefinitely. It was set to begin, I believe, May 20th. What do you make of this move?

EISEN: Well, Judge Cannon has already been upbraided twice by the extremely conservative Court of Appeals that reviews her work, the 11th Circuit, for

interfering in the original investigation before the indictment was even filed.

This is another one in a series of decisions that are legally inexplicable. There's no reason this case could not be getting ready for a trial this

summer when we finish here in Manhattan with the 2016 election interference case.

And instead, Judge Cannon, who's inexperienced, she's a new judge, she's never worked with the key issue, which is guiding the pretrial preparation

here, SEPA, the statute that governs the use of classified documents in a criminal case. And she's dragging things out because of that inexperience.

And frankly, some of these decisions are bizarre enough that you have to wonder if she doesn't have a bias towards the president who appointed her,

Donald Trump. I think it all constitutes a conflict. But she disagrees. She's going no place. And neither is this trial likely to go anyplace in

2024. It makes the Bragg case all the more important.

GOLODRYGA: OK. And now to that Bragg case, which appears to be the only trial, the case that will come to trial before the election. We heard from

Stormy Daniels yesterday. I spoke with you and you said, yes, there had been some bumps in the road for the prosecution.

But net-net, it was a positive day for them. Tomorrow, we're now hearing that the defense is expected to go even harder against Stormy Daniels in

their cross and longer. What does that tell you?

EISEN: You could see in court, Bianna, when I went back in after speaking to you, that the defense, a very capable cross-examiner, Susan Necheles,

representing Donald Trump, was dragging things out, needlessly examining Stormy over a financial form that she filed in her failed litigation

against President Trump.

They wanted to get through the day to have a full day today to prepare and reset and undoubtedly to come after her hammer and tongs when we start

again tomorrow morning at 9:30.

I think they are going to attack her for being a liar. They're going to point to the times when her story has admittedly diverged. People do

remember things differently over time. There's many more examples. We'll probably hear about all of them tomorrow morning.

They're going to hit her motives that they say are corrupt, her goal of making money from this. There's more examples of that they can point to.

And her bias, one of the most striking moments was when they asked her, do you hate President Trump? Did you say you'd dance in the street if he was

convicted of crime?

But she pushed back on all of those fronts, Bianna. And I thought she was very effective. You can't see it so much from the transcript. But sitting

in the courtroom, watching her, hearing her tone, the strength that she displayed, her inner steel, that was much more of the real Stormy than the

one we met on direct.

And I observed the jury put down their writing instruments. They paid more attention during the cross. So, she is pushing back. And we'll find out

when there's a verdict in this case, whether the jury believed her or not, and whether Donald Trump's aggressive cross-examination by Susan Necheles

helped or actually hurt. It was, at points, I thought, a little too strong.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. At one point, the defense called for a retrial, and the judge quickly rebutted that that motion was denied.

CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen, thank you.

EISEN: Thanks, Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: And coming up for us, Mother Nature's fury. Powerful storms and tornadoes pummeled the state of Michigan. We'll tell you why this season

has been so active.



GOLODRYGA: We want to show you this tornado, which swept through the town of Portage, Michigan. You can see the powerful winds swirling around this

office building right now outside. It's one of two tornadoes that pummeled the town Tuesday, and the storm ripped a hole in the roof of this FedEx


Look at those images. The tornado watches began in Texas early Tuesday morning and then moved north. Now, much of the Eastern U.S. is also bracing

for another round of storms.

Meteorologist Derek Van Dam joins us now from Portage, Michigan, with the story.

We see the damage of that FedEx facility behind you. What more can we expect from this storm?

DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Well, it's just incredible that this location in Portage, Michigan, this is southwest Michigan, was struck by

two tornadoes not even an hour and a half separate from each other.

So that just shows you the fury of the storms that move through this area, and it has been just such an active, extreme weather season over the past

couple of weeks in particular, if the forecast holds today, which it likely will validate here in the next couple of minutes.

And one additional tornado today would bring this to 14 consecutive days of tornadoes touching down in the United States. That causes severe weather

and tornado fatigue for people who are in the line of these severe storms.

And this is what happened here in Portage, Michigan, the first tornado emergency issued in the state of Michigan just to the south and east in

Union County yesterday. That's really saying something to the significance of the storms that move through here. A mass cam from our satellite truck

shows this kind of elevated perspective of the FedEx facility that was badly damaged from this. You can see how the roof just kind of crumpled in.

The aerial video just shows that path of the tornado that likely struck this particular location.

By the way, the state of Michigan, on average, throughout the course of a year, has 12 tornadoes. We've already had eight so far this season, and

this season seems to only be going quicker and quicker with more and more tornadic activity.

In fact, we have some of the latest information coming to us here at CNN. We have a new tornado watch in the portions of southwest Illinois,

southwest Kentucky, and into eastern sections of Missouri.


But as we advance the graphics, we've been watching this one lone, we call this a discrete supercell thunderstorm that has been moving just west of

St. Louis.

And now there's a new tornado warning issued with this storm, and my producers and I have been analyzing some of the weather data available to

us, and we're seeing this very pronounced circulation pattern. We look at what's called velocity scans in the atmosphere that show wind moving

towards and away radar.

That's how meteorologists determine where tornadoes and that circulation actually can form. So we have the ability to pinpoint a likely tornado. And

what we're seeing now with this latest velocity and radar scan is that a tornado is likely forming with this particular supercell that is just

southwest of St. Louis.

Regardless, this is another day of severe weather that is impacting nearly 150 million Americans, and we've got our greatest threat stretching from

Nashville all the way to St. Louis. We could see winds here in excess of 150 miles per hour with some of these stronger tornadoes that do develop.

And by the way, Bianna, we could see softball-sized hail fall from the sky like we saw here in southwest Michigan yesterday.

GOLODRYGA: Unbelievable, just the damage, the destruction, as you said, a record number of tornadoes. These are not the types of records we want to

be setting.

Thank you so much for the work that you and your team are doing to keep those in harm's way aware of what to expect and to seek shelter. Thank you,

Derek Van Dam. We appreciate it.

VAN DAM: I appreciate it. Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Well, Ozempic was originally designed to fight diabetes and then became a popular weight loss drug. And now some women claim it may have

actually helped them become pregnant.

Ozempic and medicines like it help suppress appetites, and doctors are now following anecdotal reports from women who say they got pregnant after

years of trying after they lost weight on the drugs. Now, there are safety concerns, or are there safety concerns, for the mother and the fetus.

Our medical correspondent, Meg Tirrell, is looking into all of this.

So once again, sort of surprise development from a drug that was originally created to fight diabetes. Is there really an Ozempic baby boom happening?

Do we have the statistics to prove that, aside from the anecdotal stories?

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Right now, it is very anecdotal, but we do know that millions of people are taking these new medicines in

this class known as GLP-1s, and a number of people on these medicines have reported getting unexpectedly pregnant while taking them, often when

they've had problems with infertility before.

We've been talking with doctors and researchers about this, and they say it's not necessarily surprising to learn about this because it has been

known that weight loss can help with infertility by making cycles more regular, for example, in conditions like PCOS or for any other reason.

They say losing 5 to 10 percent or more of your body weight can normalize cycles and help people get pregnant. There is also a really important thing

to know about these medications, specifically ones that are based on the active ingredient Tirzepatide, that's Eli Lilly drugs, Mounjaro, and


They actually contain a warning in their label that they make oral birth control pills potentially less effective. That's thought to be because of

the way that these drugs work. They slow the food moving through the digestive system, and that can affect absorption of other medications taken

at the same time.

So, doctors say it's really important to be aware of that. We did talk with one mom who started taking Mounjaro for weight loss reasons. She ended up

losing 40 pounds over five months. Her name is Catera Bentley. You can see her there.

She had been struggling with infertility for two years. After taking this medicine for five months, she unexpectedly got pregnant. She was delighted,

but then also very worried about the impacts she might see to her baby.

GOLODRYGA: Well, I mean, it's just a fantastic story in the sense that she was able to get pregnant after trying for so long, but she also is right to

raise questions about the safety. Do we know if it's safe to continue to use these drugs while pregnant?

TIRRELL: Well, it's not known because, like for many medicines, pregnant women were not included in the clinical trials, and anybody trying to get

pregnant was also excluded from the clinical trials. There are increasing numbers of sort of real-world examples of accidents, for example, and the

companies are tracking this in pregnancy registries to try to understand what happens when somebody gets pregnant on one of these medicines.

So far, the early data are not extremely concerning in humans, but there are very early animal studies that suggest some cause for concern. So, the

recommendation is to stop taking these medicines two months before trying to conceive, or if you find out you're pregnant while on them, stop them

right away.

And we should say Catera had a healthy baby girl named Ivy who is extremely adorable, and they're both doing well.

GOLODRYGA: We're so happy to hear that, and welcome to the world, baby Ivy. Thanks so much, Meg Tirrell. We appreciate it.


Well, still ahead for us, her powerful new documentary gives voice to women who were raped and assaulted during the Hamas terror attacks on October 7th

and beyond. We'll speak to Sheryl Sandberg up next.


GOLODRYGA: Welcome back to One World. I'm Bianna Golodryga.

More now on our top story. Israel says its military operations in Rafah will continue until it eliminates Hamas. Rafah was hit with deadly strikes

overnight, and at least 30 people have been killed there since Monday.

About 50,000 people have fled Rafah in the past 48 hours, according to a U.N. agency. Israel dropped leaflets ordering residents to evacuate the

eastern part of the city.

Meanwhile, there are conflicting claims about activity at the Kerem Shalom crossing into Gaza. Israel says that it has opened the crossing, but the

Palestinians are denying that, saying no aid trucks have crossed. The other critical entry point, the Rafah crossing, is still closed.

The chief of the World Health Organization is warning that hospitals in southern Gaza have only three days left of fuel.

Well, it has been a story we have been covering for months. The use of sexual violence by Hamas on October 7th, and the horrors faced by women

held hostage, women, and men, we should note, by those terrorists in the months since.

That is the subject and passion project for Sheryl Sandberg, the former Facebook executive now out with a new documentary capturing how rape and

sexual abuse are tools in this war. Here's a preview.



AMIT SOUSSANA, HELD HOSTAGE BY HAMAS FOR 55 DAYS: There were 10 men around me. My instinct was just to fight, to do what I can. I was really scared

that they're going to rape me there and that they're going to drag me through Gaza streets and parade my body around. I feared that more than

being killed.

I was chained for three weeks in Gaza. I was kept in a really dark room without being able to move. His name was Muhammad. He untied me. I knew

that he's up to something. I knew that something bad is going to happen. I remember thinking, how can I avoid that? There's nothing I can do.


GOLODRYGA: The documentary, Screams Before Silence, is now on YouTube. And time now for our exchange with Sheryl Sandberg, the host of that

documentary, who joins me from Palo Alto, California.

She's also the former chief operating officer for Meta, the parent company of Facebook.

Sheryl, thank you so much for joining us to talk about your really powerful documentary. You know, it's interesting. It's hard to believe it's already

been seven months since that horrific day, October 7th. And it was interesting that you said you don't think the world has fully come to terms

with the systemic rapes and the sexual violence on that day, despite numerous reports and investigations now confirming just that.

I'm wondering, in the days and weeks now following the premiere of your film, if you sense that things are a bit different, just having an audience

visually see and hear from some of these victims.

Brave Amit Soussana, who we just heard from, you spoke with Nama Levy's mother. She continues to be held hostage in Gaza. What are you hearing?

SHERYL SANDBERG, HOST, SCREAMS BEFORE SILENCE DOCUMENTARY: Well, thank you for having me and giving the time and attention you have to this important


I mean, you're exactly right. As the stories were coming out in October, November, about what is clearly mass premeditated sexual violence, you

know, sorry, this is graphic stuff, but bodies found naked, legs spread, bloodied. It was very clear what happened and people weren't believing it.

And so I went to Israel and made this documentary so people could see with their own eyes. They cannot just read about Amit Soussana, but hear her

story from her first responders, people who saw not just the massacre, but the mass sexual violence for themselves.

We've been really pleased with the response. We are, with all the places it's being shown, we're getting close to a million views of the

documentary. The trailer has been passed around a lot. And for the people who watch, we think they do believe.

And I would just encourage anyone who's not sure, just watch with an open mind. Open mind, open heart. Just listen to what these people have to say

because they saw this with their own eyes.

GOLODRYGA: And it has been so difficult, as with any case related to sexual violence, for these witnesses, for these victims, the few that are alive to

tell their stories, to come forward.

Sheryl, we have been reporting on this almost since day one, just a few weeks after October 7th. It was five months until the U.N. representative

for violence in war zones finally went to Israel and conducted a two-week investigation there where she spoke with witnesses.

She spoke with a number of officials as well. And she finally released her report. And here's what she said definitively.


PRAMILA PATTEN, U.N. SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVE ON SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN CONFLICT: We found clear and convincing information that sexual violence, including

rape, sexualized torture, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, has been committed against captives. And we also have reasonable grounds to believe

that such violence may still be ongoing against those still held in captivity.


GOLODRYGA: May still be ongoing for those who are still held in captivity, for those hostages.

Sheryl, we hear that message from Pramila Patten, and yet we still hear people willing to deny, question, raise skepticism about these accounts.

Why do you think that is?

SANDBERG: It is the question, because we can't afford skepticism on this, right? It's only been 30 years. For a long swath of human history, women's

bodies were just part of the spoils of war. You got the land, you got the gold, you got the women.

But only 30 years ago, the feminist groups, the human rights groups, said no. After the DRC, Yugoslavia, Bosnia, rape is a war crime. Rape is a crime

against humanity. But right now, we are so polarized. Politics are clouding people's vision and making them blind to this.


Because I think what polarization is, is I can only have one narrative and one belief. And anything that gets in the way of that, rather than listen

and learn, I reject. So, if you believe October 7th was resistance, and I want to be super clear, I do not. I do not believe mass killing like that

could ever be resistance. So, I do not believe that.

But if you do believe that, then all of a sudden, you hear about mass genital mutilation of dead bodies, women tied to trees with their legs

spread, bloodied, naked. You listen to people in this documentary say, one of the released hostages says that 50 percent of the hostages she met, most

of whom are still there, are being sexually assaulted. And that doesn't fit your narrative.

So, you can either rethink your narrative and say, wait a second. Maybe the world isn't so black and white. Or you can just say it didn't happen. And

we are seeing too many people say it didn't happen. And that's why I'm just hoping people just watch. Because I don't think it's possible to listen to

these witnesses and not believe.

GOLODRYGA: And there's been a long history of weaponizing sexual violence. And I was really happy to see Ruth Halperin-Kaddari in this piece, who is

an expert, an Israeli preeminent expert on this very issue, who I've interviewed, who you included in this piece. And you specifically asked

about sexual violence being used as a weapon of war and why. I want to play for our audience that exchange.


SANDBERG: Why? Why would the Hamas terrorists put sexual violence as part of their remit for this attack?

RUTH HALPERIN-KADDARI, INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S RIGHTS ADVOCATE: Using sexual violence as a tool of war, of weaponizing women. Sadly, as old as the

history of humanity. Because when the body of the woman is violated, it symbolizes the body of the whole nation.


GOLODRYGA: And Sheryl, those words were so powerful and so important because you combine that with what the data shows, the investigations have

shown, that this was systemic. This wasn't just a one-off of a few cases here or there. But this was part of the war plan, it appears.

SANDBERG: Absolutely. And it meets the definition of a war crime or a crime against humanity because it was clearly systemic. It was clearly planned.

It was multiple locations, at least dozens of people.

And one of the things people have to remember in this situation, some people are saying, where are the survivors? Why aren't the women who got

raped speaking up? First of all, one did. Amit Soussana did. But second of all, they've died. They're dead. That's why we call this film Screams

Before Silence, because these victims were silenced.

But it's completely clear what happened in the film. I interviewed this guy, Rami is this ginormous guy. He's a private citizen, the biggest hero

I've ever met.

The sirens go off on October 7th. He gets in his car, grabs his own gun, and drives there. Faces terrorists, rescues hundreds of people. But in the

film, he also walks with me into a forest. And he sends these trees. And he said, in this forest, I saw women tied to these trees, naked, bloodied,

bleeding from their, you know, genital areas.

And he's crying, this huge guy. And he said, I wish I could have saved them. I asked Zaka, this guy, Simcha from Zaka, he's been processing,

preparing dead bodies for burial all over the world. I said, in your experience, how often are they naked? And he said, never. And he said, body

after body. The genitals were so mutilated or burned that you couldn't tell if it's a man or a woman.

This is systematic. This was planned. This was part of the attack. And to be fair, they say they're coming back. Hamas is not subtle. They say to

Israel, they're coming back. And the people who are backing them say very clearly, death to Israel and then death to America.

This is not just a threat to Israel. This is a threat to our way of life. This is a threat to every woman on the world. And as you said, Bianna, some

men, some men were sexually brutalized and assaulted too.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, which it was so poignant to hear and important to hear from President Biden in his address on anti-Semitism yesterday, saying that too

many people are forgetting the atrocities that happened on October 7th and that he, in fact, will never forget what happened that day.

Sheryl Sandberg, thank you so much for shining a light on this very important subject. The documentary is called Screams Before Silence. We

appreciate your time.

SANDBERG: I appreciate your caring about this because everyone needs to. Really appreciate you having me. Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Thanks, Sheryl. We'll be right back with more.



GOLODRYGA: Well, after CNN exclusive investigation, a group of U.S. lawmakers are now demanding answers about the country's chaotic exit from


Specifically, they're interested in the Abbey Gate attack. ISIS militants killed 13 U.S. service members and 170 Afghans at the airport in Kabul. The

lawmakers want to know why the Pentagon's report contradicts CNN video, revealing that there was much more gunfire than the U.S. military had


Our Nick Paton Walsh has covered the story extensively and filed this report.


NICK PATON WALSH, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY EDITOR: These eight Republican congressmen have written to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin

very clearly to ask him to address what they call the discrepancy between two Pentagon investigations upon which these congressmen have been briefed

and CNN's reporting from a couple of weeks ago, which included new video of the aftermath after the blast.

It showed that there was significantly more gunfire, 11 episodes over four minutes than the Pentagon have maintained for years. They've always said

there were three near simultaneous bursts that hit nobody and that U.S. and British troops did the firing.

Now, that's key because we've also been speaking to Afghan civilian survivors. Some say they were shot. Some say they witnessed people being

shot. That's been dismissed by Pentagon investigations as potentially the product of blast concussion of traumatic brain injury.

They've also dismissed the testimony, it seems at times, to U.S. military investigators of Marine and U.S. military survivors that they saw gunfire,

felt they were being shot at. Some even said they opened fire.

A lot, it appears, of work being done by investigators focused on a specific conclusion, and that is now being challenged by these eight

congressmen who say, show us what other video you have, explain those discrepancies to us, and also say, why didn't you interview any Afghans at

all in either of your two investigations, particularly a doctor that we have spoken to who was in charge at a major Kabul hospital in the aftermath

of the blast. He says over 70 of the dead they received there had gunshot wounds.

Now, he's been, I think it's fair to say, not taken that seriously by Pentagon investigators. So, this is also joined by a statement from the

families of seven of the 13 dead U.S. service members who say they feel that in the briefings they had from the Pentagon, they've indeed been

misled, and both the congressmen and the families say they urgently want to hear the truth about the matter.


The Pentagon say that it is their sacred obligation to do all they can to be sure that the families of those 13 dead servicemen, because of, I

paraphrase here, their service and sacrifice, get their sacred obligation to do all they can to be sure that the families of those 13 dead

servicemen, because of, I paraphrase here, their service and sacrifice, get the best information that they can about what indeed happened.

And we've also heard from a separate Pentagon spokesperson who says that they don't believe our findings necessarily alter their investigation, or

they have said yesterday that it would be interesting to see any new video that might inform their conclusions better.

But still, trenchant questions here from senior Republican congressmen asking the Pentagon to address complicated questions two years on, as so

many feel they haven't got to the truth of the matter.



GOLODRYGA: The ongoing divide in Britain's royal family appears to be on full display today. Members of the royal family are at Buckingham Palace

for King Charles' first garden party of the year. Notably absent, though, is Prince Harry, who is at St. Paul's Cathedral in London to help celebrate

the 10th anniversary of the Invictus Games. That's a sporting competition for wounded warriors that he founded.

Buckingham Palace is not commenting on Harry's trip home. The prince's spokesperson says King Charles' schedule did not allow time for him to

visit with Harry.

Well, now to a drinking stunt between a father and daughter that's gone viral. Former NFL offensive lineman Taylor Lewan wowed a crowd at a hockey

game with a chugging competition of sorts with his own daughter. But not everyone was cheering, as Jeanne Moos reports.


JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It turned out to be a dad- daughter chugging contest. Only dad seemed overjoyed that his kid was such a pro. Former NFL offensive lineman Taylor Lewan was introduced on the

jumbotron at a Stanley Cup hockey playoff in Nashville. He chugged a beer, then dumped it on his head.

That's when his daughter, Wynn, began imitating him with her water. Chugging and chugging. And the longer she chugged, the more excited her dad

got until she finally came up for air and he lifted her up in his arms.

Most folks thought it was awesome. That was the best daddy-daughter moment ever, though a few were put off. This is pathetic parenting.


Cringe fest. There's absolutely nothing cute about teaching your daughter to chug a drink. Tell that to Clark Griswold, who tried to bond with his

son in the desert over a beer and his son ended up chugging the whole can.

Taylor Lewan tweeted, the whole way home my daughter was talking about how legendary it was. The Nashville Predators hockey team noted, like father,

like daughter. And the NFL chimed in.

Taylor Lewan gets out-chugged by his daughter. Dad chugged for three seconds. His daughter chugged for 12 as one commenter raved, future life of

the party.

Jeanne Moss, CNN, New York.


GOLODRYGA: Only Jeanne Moss could bring us a story like that. Look, folks, at least it was water. She wasn't chugging beer. So, I don't think it's

that controversial.

All right. That does it for this hour of One World. I'm Bianna Golodryga. Thank you so much for watching. I'll be right back with Amanpour.