Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Gaza Edges Closer to Famine Amid Israeli Aid Blockade; How Voters Feel About the Possibility of a Third Trump Term; Soon: Hearing Over Trump's Use of Alien Enemies Act; Trump Talks Economy, Tariffs, and Third Term Speculation; White House No "Final" Decisions Made on New Film Tariffs; Jury Selection Underway in Sean "Diddy" Combs Trial. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired May 05, 2025 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:38]

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Zain Asher. You are watching the second hour of "ONE WORLD."

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu says an intensive military operation will be launched in Gaza as the nation begins a controversial new phase in its

war against Hamas.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. Prime Minister says the Palestinian population will be moved for its own protection.

In a social media post, a couple of hours ago, he said Israeli soldiers will not launch raids and then retreat, but would do the opposite.

ASHER: Israel's security cabinet approved the expansion hours after mobilizing tens of thousands of reservists. One official says the plan will

be launched after President Donald Trump's visit to the region to give space for a possible deal.

On the ground in Gaza, Palestinians are on the brink of famine, despite an international outcry and Israeli blockade has prevented aid from entering

the enclave for two months and counting.

Let's bring in Palestinian diplomat, academic and economist, Husam Zomlot. He's the ambassador to the Palestinian Mission to the United Kingdom. Thank

you so much for being with us. I just want to get your reaction.

I mean, there's so many different directions we can go on with this conversation, but I'd first want to get your reaction. This idea that the

Israelis are now going to expand operations in Gaza, primarily obviously to put pressure on Hamas, but this idea that innocent civilians will have to

be moved yet again.

Give us your reaction to that.

HUSAM ZOMLOT, AMBASSADOR, HEAD OF PALESTINIAN MISSION TO UNITED KINGDOM: We have warned the world from the beginning that this was the Israeli plan,

and by the way, they never hide it. They have announced it from day one. They are not after this group or that. They are after the Palestinian

people.

I would like to remind your audience that they are doing the same in the West Bank, displacing people, destroying cities, infrastructure, hospitals

in the West Bank, in Jenin, (INAUDIBLE).

So this is really an Israeli government that after the Palestinian people, they want to continue on the very plan of ethnic cleansing. And the

situation now in Gaza is not only apocalyptic. It is post-apocalyptic.

People are dying of hunger of thirst. And it's not at the brink of famine, it is already famine. I -- we just learned of the passing of a baby girl,

Janan Saqafi of malnutrition. She is number 57 who have died because of famine.

And what -- what is very significant here is across this happened in history of mankind, but this is the first time in modern human history, a

people -- a group of people go through this for this long with no intervention whatsoever by the international community.

A red line after a red line. Remember when the U.S. did a red line on Rafah, now Rafah is completely and utterly demolished, decimated a red line

on the humanitarian assistance.

There was a letter by the U.S. president during the Biden administration time threatening Israel. If they do not allow the un-handed free access of

humanitarian aid, food, water, medicine, what have you, the U.S. will impose an arms embargo in Israel. That deadline came. That deadline went

and no action.

So this is very serious. Israel has dismantled our international order. Israel has dismantled all we have been together after the horrors of the

Second World War. And what happened in -- we're not playing Gaza. So the ramification of this, the normalization of the use of food as a weapon of

war, the normalization of the use of medicine as a weapon of war is going to haunt all of us.

And we'll have serious magnification on the way international relations and wars will be conducted in the future worldwide. Therefore, we must

intervene and the world must intervene immediately.

GOLODRYGA: Mr. Ambassador, barring a last-minute deal that's reached between Israel and Hamas that would see a pause in the fighting and release

of all hostages, we had, I'm not sure if you heard the last hour, one of our guests, a former IDF spokesperson, reiterate what we've heard from many

on the Israeli side. And that is that Hamas is hoarding the aid that has gone in there for themselves, making it very difficult for the civilians to

have access to that aid or at least access to that aid at reasonable prices.

[12:05:10]

So what is your reaction to that? And what are some of the solutions, again barring a short-term deal at least in the interim now for who would

facilitate getting that aid into Gaza? Would it be the Americans perhaps?

ZOMLOT: Israel's cover-up for its war crimes is something that has been chronic and has been exposed. Remember the 15 -- the 15 rescue workers, aid

workers, I mean health workers who were assassinated by Israel last month.

They buried them -- they buried their cars and they forgot one device in the pocket of one of those health workers who they assassinated and then

the world knew what Israel did.

But in the meantime, Israel refused, denied any sort of deliberate targeting. And the same thing happens here. The responsibility of providing

humanitarian aid, of making sure the civilian population are provided for and protected us is solely in the hands of the occupant. And Israel is an

occupying power as well international law, international consensus and as per the ruling of the international court of justice that's the world's

highest court only last July that Israel's presence in the occupied territories unlaw -- unlawful. All of its settlements is unlawful.

And third purpose, including the U.S., must cease immediately to provide any political, legal or material help to Israeli illegal practices.

And therefore all this is propaganda and lying. Israel is deliberately using the -- and weaponizing food, water, medicine, the very basic human

needs as a method of -- as a method of war.

This is absolutely clear. It is documented. And if we do not manage to hold those war criminals to account, this will haunt all of us.

And I tell you, I really do feel the -- the danger we are facing as a human race right now. Because if this -- if people get away with this, if

criminals get away with this, many are learning these lessons, many believe now that -- that you could simply target children via famine.

You simply can target ambulances, destroy hospitals, level entire cities because you claim that there is a group who took people hostage, you're

doing that.

Imagine -- imagine if a group of people took some hostages in Chicago just for the sake of the -- of the argument, then the U.S. government will they

siege on Chicago and prevent food, water, electricity, energy and then bombard the hell out of Chicago? Carpet bomb families?

You know how many families have been wiped out of the record in the last year and a half, including -- including since Israel resume its genocide

that assault on Gaza more than 3,000 have lost their lives. You know from the U.N. and other agencies, most of these murder are women and children.

This isn't just about Israel, my friends. This is about the U.S. This is about the international community. And this is about how are we going to

leave behind us a future for our children.

GOLODRYGA: Mr. Ambassador, you laid out a lot there. You know, we can go back to October 7th. Hamas being designated a terror organization by the

United States and much of the world committing the worst crime that it had -- that Israel had upon its civilians since its creation, taking 250

hostages.

That aside, I guess we're now a year and a half into this war. Hamas has yet to lay down their arms. They have not released the hostages and they

have not relinquished control over the enclave.

So what is the -- that the Palestinian Authority can do now in terms of pressuring Hamas and others in the Arab League, including the Israel, as

you have just noted, to get as much humanitarian aid in now to those innocent civilians that desperately needed?

ZOMLOT: There is a lot that we did and there is a lot that we should do, not only ask the Palestinian government, but also the region and the rest

of the international community.

But from day -- day one, we called for an immediate ceasefire. From day one, we called for Israel to respect international rule and for the world

to enforce those very rules that the Israel should not target the civilians.

And we came up with a plan with Egypt that became an Arab consensus in the Arab Summit in Cairo only recently whereby there will be a Palestinian

committee to take care -- care of Gaza, provide for our people there. And that committee will be formed by the Palestinian government.

[12:10:07]

We provided all the sort of way out of this, including a reconstruction conference and preparations. We also, by the way, pushed and supported the

implementation of the ceasefire agreement. It was a U.S. mediated ceasefire agreement, but you watched -- and the world did watch Israel breaking that

agreement and resuming the attacks.

And therefore, this is a moment when we want to go back to a ceasefire, when we want to make sure that the people of Gaza stay on their land, that

the Israeli fallacy, that our people will leave their -- their land on mass. And you are hearing Israeli politicians talking about the mass

transfer, the mass expansion.

What they're doing in Gaza is very simple. It's very straight. It's classic colonialism and classic mass transfer ethnic cleansing plan. They are

telling our people in Gaza, you will be starved. You will have nowhere to go. The only place that is available for you is out of your homeland.

That's the plan.

So, we need to make sure we go back to our ceasefire arrangement. We need to make sure we bring the national energy towards rebuilding Gaza, uniting

Gaza with the West Bank under one Palestinian legitimate government.

And we need to make sure that we build the root goals of all this. But we have to remind you and your viewers that it is about the occupation, the

colonization, the besiegement. This is about time that the occupation leaves us alone.

Leave our land. We are capable as people and as institutions to build our state, to have our own future away from all this supremacy, all this racism

and targeting the Palestinian people have been subjected this for 100 years. This is about time we put this behind us and embrace and built on

tomorrow.

ASHER: All right. Husam Zomlot, thank you so much for joining us. Appreciate it.

GOLODRYGA: Well, over the weekend, an NBC News reporter asked President Trump if he has an obligation to uphold the U.S. Constitution.

ASHER: Yes. Trump's response was simply, I don't know. And it's worth noting that the president pledged to uphold the Constitution when he took

the oath of office. Here is that controversial moment from this weekend interview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KRISTEN WELKER, WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, NBC NEWS: Your Secretary of State says everyone who's here, citizens and non-citizens, deserve due

process. Do you agree, Mr. President?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I don't know. I'm not -- I'm not a lawyer. I don't know.

WELKER: Don't you need to uphold the Constitution of the United States as president?

TRUMP: I don't know. I have to respond by saying again, I have brilliant lawyers that work for me. And they are going to obviously follow what the

Supreme Court said.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ASHER: Let's get more on this from CNN's Stephen Collinson. I mean, there's so much to get into here, including the fact that he talked about not

necessarily being interested in running for a third term, but he also did drop the point that a lot of people want him to run for a third term.

One thing that I thought was quite interesting is the fact that he talked about JD Vance and Marco Rubio as possible contenders to be his, you know,

successor, if -- if you will.

I want to talk to you, Stephen, about his relationship with Marco Rubio, because obviously we've come a long way from, you know, the 2016 debate

stage when the two men were sort of at each other's throats.

But talk to us about how Trump sees Marco Rubio. He is Secretary of State. He's obviously given him the sort of interim NSA title, along with head of

USAID and there's obviously more titles, four titles in total.

But at the same time, a key part of his remit has actually been given to Steve Witkoff, who is obviously in charge of the Middle East and Russia.

Just explain to us Trump's relationship with Secretary Rubio.

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: I think that a lot of the -- what looks now like a reasonably good relationship, at least on the

surface, has to do with the fact that the Secretary of State has done almost everything he can to ingratiate himself with the president.

Every time he appears on camera, he talks about how he is serving at the pleasure of the president, merely implementing Trump's foreign policy. He

has gone out of his way to, you know, make clear that he doesn't have any ambitions of his own, at least in the next four years.

Though he's worked himself into Trump's inner circle that way, after being really a symbol of the old Republican Party that Donald Trump swept away,

Rubio was much closer to the neoconservative internationalist wings of the Republican Party.

It's traditional hawkish foreign policy than Trump was, who is a populist nationalist America first, as some would say, almost isolationist. So he's

-- he's worked himself into the circle.

The question is, is anybody in Donald Trump's inner circle ever permanently in favor? So Rubio has to be very careful not to get out ahead of the

president.

[12:15:06]

And I think it's pretty clear that as you mentioned, he has potential future presidential aspirations. He was the great hope of the Republican

Party, this young, articulate candidate in 2016 who was steamrolled by Trump.

If we do see him go up against JD Vance for the Republican nomination in 2028, it's going to be fascinating. I would read his comments, the

president's comments about Trump and Vance as potential successors as perhaps being a little bit of Machiavellian politicking, trying to set them

against each other rather than necessarily, you know, saying that one of them is his chosen heir.

But it is going to be very interesting to see how those two interact. I think there's a lot of people who think Rubio would love to get to the

midterm elections next year, still as Secretary of State, and then be in a position to launch his own campaign.

But, of course, JD Vance, who is much closer to the philosophical, MAGA wing of the Trump Party than Rubio, he would be in prime position, I think,

to be the heir, assuming the administration is successful as -- as the vice president.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. Both of them, once upon a time, offered starkly different views on President Trump and his policies. That has largely changed since

then, obviously, as they are now part of his cabinet.

As somebody who has remained a constant, though, at the president's side is Stephen Miller, and his name also being floated as a permanent national

security advisor in the near future.

Just talk about the implications that would have. He has been one of the more controversial and more hawkish advisors that the president has had,

specifically as it relates to immigration.

COLLINSON: Yes. Stephen Miller is the architect, as he was in the first term of Trump's ultra-harsh administration policies. He is, if there is

such a thing, one of the ideological standard bearers of Trumpism, in the time outside the White House, between the two terms.

He spent a lot of time developing these administration policies on mass deportations. A lot of people see him as an extremely hardline right

winger.

Where it is quite interesting is he doesn't have a strong record on foreign policy. I don't think that's necessarily a problem for Trump, because he

sees himself as betting foreign policy. And, you know, he wants someone to do what he wants them to do. And there's no question that Stephen Miller

would be that person, whether he would be effective in coordinating the great national offices of foreign policy, the Pentagon, the State

Department, the entire community. That's a pretty big question, I think, if he was to become the national security advisor.

He's already the preeminent domestic foreign policy -- domestic policy advisor. You know, he is a hugely powerful figure in the administration. He

will become even more powerful.

Remember that Signal chat that we all read on "The Atlantic" site whereby Pete Hegseth and Mike Waltz, the outgoing national security advisor, they

spoke about these attacks on Yemen. It was Stephen Miller, who was the crucial voice when there was some debate led by Vance about whether the

attacks would go ahead when he said, my understanding is the president wants this done.

And I think that really encapsulates the influence he has as Trump's enforcer inside his own administration.

ASHER: All right. CNN politics senior reporter Stephen Collinson, live for us there. Thank you so much.

And as I mentioned, one of the other topics that Donald Trump spoke about in that NBC interview was the possibility of serving a third term as

president.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. The constitution, we all know forbids Trump from running again, but that has not stopped him from using about it from time to time.

Now, this time when press, Trump said that he has no plans to run again. So, what do voters think about Trump and this talk of a third term as

president? CNN's --

ASHER: I can't read your writing, darling. I can't read it.

HARRY ENTEN, CNN CHIEF DATA ANALYST: It says just --

ASHER: Just another.

ENTEN: It says, just rainy Monday.

ASHER: Is it raining outside?

GOLODRYGA: And then I failed.

ENTEN: And -- or failed raindrop. I tried to do a raindrop and I failed.

ASHER: OK.

ENTEN: So I was acknowledging my own.

ASHER: You need to weapon your handwriting, darling.

ENTEN: I -- I know.

GOLODRYGA: We've talked about -- we've talked about that penmanship before, Harry.

ENTEN: It's bad. It's bad. And I was actually going to have to be in touch with my fourth grade teacher, Ms. (INAUDIBLE). I think she now goes by

Wagstaff (ph), if I recall correctly. So maybe we can get her on the program next time around.

GOLODRYGA: Ms. Wagstaff. Please, our bookers will reach out if you're available to comment on Harry's.

ENTEN: Anyway.

GOLODRYGA: Yes.

ENTEN: Yes. Yes.

GOLODRYGA: How are voters?

ASHER: Let's get back to work, guys.

ENTEN: How -- how are voters reacting to this? We're going to -- I'm going to ask you a question at the far end of this. OK.

[12:20:02]

But let me just say that this is one of the least popular ideas I have ever freaking seen. What are we talking about here?

Well, why don't we look overall with the general public? Should Trump run for a third term? Get this, 76 percent of registered voters say no. They do

not want him to run for a third term.

Get this, just 21 percent, just 21 percent say yes. That includes just 16 percent of independents.

When you get three quarters of the American public to agree on anything, you know if that is in the negative territory that that idea is no bueno.

It is no good. The American voters dislike it.

Now what is so interesting about this, of course, is in order to get to a general election, Trump first has to win a primary, right? So you might

think, hey, maybe Republicans are aboard with this idea of going for a third term.

Well, guess what? They ain't. They ain't on board with it.

All right. GOP on Trump running for a third term, 53 percent. The majority of Republicans say he should not. Despite the fact that 88 percent of

Republicans hold a favorable view of Donald Trump.

What we're literally looking at is just half the level of Republicans who hold a favorable view of Trump believe he, in fact, should run for a third

term.

Now, I want you to keep this 44 percent figure in mind. Why? Because remember, four years ago, there was this speculation after January 6, hey,

maybe Trump might run again. A lot of people dismissed it, but the Republican base didn't dismiss it.

Look back here. OK. GOP who say that Trump should run again. Back in May of 2021. Look at this, 66 percent of Republicans gave the thumbs up, gave the

Siskel and Ebert thumbs up to the idea of running again. Compared this time around for a third term, it's just significantly less. All right, at 44

percent.

And now the question I'm going to pose to you two, which is, do you guys remember New Coke? Because the idea of Trump running for a third term is

about as popular as New Coke was back in the mid-1980s.

GOLODRYGA: And I really did not like New Coke, I have to say. Coke Zero, Bueno.

ENTEN: Coke Zero is good. Coke Zero is good. What about you?

GOLODRYGA: New Coke? No, I was -- I had a -- I had a nanny who always drank tab and I just always sort of think back to -- to her and --

ASHER: I never tried New Coke. Did they sell it in London?

ENTEN: What?

GOLODRYGA: Yes.

ENTEN: That, I don't know.

GOLODRYGA: It has market here in the U.S.

ASHER: I don't know. I never tried it.

GOLODRYGA: You didn't miss anything.

ASHER: And also, I was -- I wasn't -- I came a little bit later on in the '80s.

GOLODRYGA: Oh.

ASHER: Without -- well, I'm not that young.

ENTEN: Oh, wow. Wow. You know, I'm not going to get in the middle of whatever just happens here with Zain and Bianna, you know, I'm a good guy.

I just -- I like to bring happiness and smile. So no fights over anything.

ASHER: I didn't mean it like that.

ENTEN: Uh-huh.

GOLODRYGA: You were very crafty and diplomatic. I came around later in the '80s.

ASHER: No, no, it wasn't -- it wasn't that late in the 80s, but it was, you know, wasn't --

GOLODRYGA: Later.

ASHER: Yes. It wasn't in the '70s.

ENTEN: You know -- you know, you -- you have a mess, Zain, that you're going to need to clean up on aisle five. So I'm going to leave you two back

for the rest of the program.

(CROSSTALK)

GOLODRYGA: Not at all. I embrace my age. Harry, by the way, two thumbs up on the haircut.

ENTEN: I like it.

ASHER: Oh, I -- I can't see that in my contact. I couldn't even -- oh, you're good, Harry. Good.

ENTEN: Thank you. I will tell you, the best time to get a haircut is approximately 10 A.M. on a Sunday. It turns out nobody wants to wake up at

10 A.M. on a Sunday to get a haircut. I was first in line. And then, of course, the woman who cut my hair made me feel guilty about not being in

New York for Mother's Day saying her son was probably going to come from Miami. It's Jewish guilt all the way around.

ASHER: All right, Harry.

GOLODRYGA: Have a New Coke on us, Harry Enten.

ENTEN: I will.

GOLODRYGA: Thanks so much. We'll have more --

ENTEN: Bye.

GOLODRYGA: -- after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:01]

ASHER: The head of the U.S. Bureau of Prison says he will, quote, pursue all avenues after President Donald Trump says he wants to put criminals

back into Alcatraz.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. The notorious prison hasn't been operational for more than six decades. Alcatraz sits on an island off San Francisco and once held

some of the most dangerous criminals in America, including Al Capone and George "Machine Gun" Kelly. It's now a major tourist destination.

Well, in just a few hours, a federal hearing is slated to get underway over Trump's attempts to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to deport a new group

of Venezuelan migrants to a prison in El Salvador.

ASHER: Yes. There are multiple courts around the country litigating Trump's use of the act. The Trump-appointed judge, in today's hearing, temporarily

blocked the depor -- deportation rather of detainees.

This comes after another Trump-appointed judge ruled on Friday that the use of the 18th Century Act to speed up some deportations was unlawful.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. CNN's Gloria Pazmino joins us from New York.

So time and time, we've repeatedly see judges push back, even Republican appointed judges, even Trump-appointed judges, push back against some of

these policies, calling them unconstitutional.

What more can we expect from today's hearing?

GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Zain and Bianna. In fact, that is, I think, at least for now, the key question going into this

hearing, whether or not we're going to see yet another judge, in this case, a Trump-appointed judge in Pennsylvania, push back against the use of this

wartime authority, the Alien Enemies Act.

Now, let's remember for a moment that these cases are, yes, about migrants who are trying to stop their deportations, but more broadly and more

importantly, is about the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act, this wartime authority that they have been relying on to deport hundreds of

Venezuelan men to El Salvador without due process.

The administration claims that these men are members of Tren de Aragua, the gang from Venezuela. But as we have been covering for several weeks, we

know that there were some men that were deported.

Essentially, by accident, the administration has admitted as such -- as much. Their families have said that they are not involved with the gang. In

fact, that they had immigration proceedings playing out here in the United States and that they were sent to El Salvador without due process.

Now, the question here is going to be whether or not this judge agrees that the use of this authority is unlawful.

The Supreme Court has stopped the deportations, but the administration has made it clear that they are going to fight that order. And in the meantime,

that there are hundreds of men in this Texas Detention Center who are awaiting deportation under this authority.

Now, this case here in -- in Pennsylvania, I should say, is focused on one man. He was living in Philadelphia where he was detained by ICE immigration

authorities. He was taken into custody and moved to this detention center in Texas to await deportation, despite a judge's order to prevent him from

being moved from the district.

So, today, his attorneys are asking the judge in Pennsylvania to issue a preliminary injunction to stop the government from carrying out these

deportations. They argue that there will likely be irreparable -- irreversible harm done to, not just this man who's facing deportation, but

the many others who are also slated to be removed under this act.

So we'll see if this judge, like others, agrees that the use of this wartime authority is legally questionable.

Zain, Bianna?

GOLODRYGA: All right.

ASHER: Thanks, Gloria. Gloria Pazmino live for us there. Thank you so much.

All right. Still to come, Donald Trump is taking his trade war to the cinema, and it's creating a drama in Hollywood. We'll explain with the help

of Variety's executive editor, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:30:28]

ASHER: Welcome back to "ONE WORLD." I'm Zain Asher.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga.

The White House says, no final decisions have been made about imposing new tariffs on films produced outside of the U.S. Now this comes after Donald

Trump said he would hit foreign-made movies with a 100 percent tariff.

ASHER: Yes. And a post on Truth Social, the U.S. President said Hollywood is being devastated by productions filmed outside of America.

GOLODRYGA: Time now for The Exchange. Brent Lang is the Executive Editor of Variety. He joins us now from New York.

And, Brent, as much as the world was surprised and the entertainment industry was surprised by this post last night from the President, it

appears that the White House is now saying this is still being looked at. This is not definite. We don't know the fine details of what exactly the

President meant other than the Commerce Secretary retweeting, you know, we're on it.

But assuming, as we discussed in the last hour, giving the President sort of the benefit of the doubt and addressing what has been a legitimate

concern for studios in this country, and that is the cost of film production in the United States, specifically in expensive states like New

York and California, and thus seeking to film elsewhere, Canada, Vancouver, I know, is-- is a popular destination.

I mean, how -- what would the reaction be if all of the sudden there were tariffs imposed on that specific issue?

BRENT LANG, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, VARIETY: I mean, if -- if these tariffs go through at these levels of the film industry, as it currently exists, will

cease to exist. It is a approach to a very real problem instead of using a scaffold, he's using a blow torch.

[12:35:09]

I mean, the -- the network of filmmaking is totally international. It depends on a string of incentives, of foreign presales. And if you

institute these kinds of tariffs, and it's unclear how they would even be instituted, you upend this entire business model.

ASHER: Yes. So how, just to pose the question right back at you. I mean, how would a hundred percent tariffs be implemented? I mean it, you know, I

assume that if -- if you're going to put tariffs on the cost of movie tickets at movie theaters, that's one way to go about it.

But so many people watch their movies on streaming services like Netflix. There are some movies that go straight to TV.

How -- how would the tariffs even be implemented in a way that consumers would end up paying them?

LANG: It's completely unclear. It's not even clear exactly what types of movies would be -- what the tariffs would apply to. Would that be a U.S.

production that shoots overseas for incentives? Or I mean some of those productions also shoot overseas because of the need for exotic locations,

something like "Harry Potter" or "James Bond."

So, do those tariffs apply to those types of film? And at your point, is the tariff instituted? Is it instituted on the incentives themselves? Is it

instituted at the point of sale? It's very unclear.

There's a lot of uncertainty right now about what this would actually look like if it goes into effect.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. We should know that Disney, for example, reported over three billion dollars in savings from international production just in last

year alone. And that doing, even rough analysis of the costs that this would pose on studios, if it were implemented the way the president stated

yesterday at 100 percent, that overall cost productions could increase from 20 to 30 percent.

And no surprise that we saw a sharp decline in the stock prices of the major studios across the board. I mean, Disney, Paramount, Warner Brothers,

Comcast, Netflix.

What can you expect now or what are you hearing from studio heads in terms of how they're planning to respond to the president directly?

LANG: Carefully is the answer. I mean, I think what they're trying to do is to get a little bit more of a sense of how serious this is, how the kind of

practicality is involved, but they're also very aware that this is a president who does not like to be criticized in public.

I don't think that a lot of the studio executives want to go out in front here and take him on, because there's a sense that he is not above using

the power of his position to be punitive.

So, I think what you're going to see is a -- is a bit of a wait and see. And hope that the reality is very different from what the president shared

on social media last night.

ASHER: If the president is concerned about, you know, saving American jobs and making sure that more movies are produced and shot in the U.S., what

would be the right way to go about it?

I mean, a lot of cities already have these tax incentives to bring production to their cities. I mean, is that something that you think would

be a much better and easier way to go about, you know, making sure that more movies are produced in the United States? Because as Bianna was

saying, a lot of movies are shoot abroad in order to save money.

LANG: You know, this is an example of a very real problem. Production is down 40 percent in the United States. And a lot of people are out of work.

And I don't, at all, want to minimize the real economic consequences of that type of decline in production.

The issue here is that this methodology is going to actually increase costs which might not mean that more films get shot here. It might actually mean

that fewer films get produced overall.

And I do understand why you don't want to get into a kind of incentive war where you're always trying to undercut other production hubs, because at

some point, it just doesn't make an economic sense.

Now the studios would say what we need is a federal incentive, not a state- by-state incentive. That doesn't seem to be something that the president is open to. It seems instead of a carrot, he would prefer to you to stay.

GOLODRYGA: You know, judging -- and I -- and I have no reporting to base this off of, but -- but judging from what those close to the president have

described how he tends to function and think during situations like this that seem to come out of the blue, is somebody said something to him and

raises this issue.

As you noted, this is a legitimate concern and legitimate issue where we've seen a decline in production here in the United States and thus an impact

on workers in the industry.

Going back to the previous question about what studio heads can and should be doing, I'm wondering if you think they should take a lesson from the

reporting that there was a collective action to privately meet with the president, the heads of Home Depot, Walmart, Target, a few weeks ago. And

that seemed to really get his attention when they warned that there would be empty store shelves.

[12:40:21]

I mean, do you think we can expect to see these studio heads collectively unite on this issue and perhaps not publicly but privately address the

president?

LANG: I'm sure that they are and partly because a lot of the tech moguls and a lot of technology companies actually produce a great deal of content

now, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, have already made it overtures to the White House in recent months to try to improve those relationships. I'm sure they

are now hoping to call in a few chips, if you will.

But, you know, the -- the issue here is that a lot of the problems that the media sector and Hollywood face go beyond just issues of -- of tax

incentives abroad. They have to do with -- with a real reorientation around their business model where the actual movie business is declining, the

cable news business is declining, and what's happening -- and then there's a shift to streaming.

And so far, the revenues that those old modes and distribution ones produced are not being matched by the new modes of distribution and it's

creating a real financial shortage down the road.

GOLODRYGA: OK. Well, as you see in that banner, the White House has not made a final decision on these new film tariffs. So, we're expecting to

maybe get more news on this front, some more detail and clarity in -- in the hours and days to come.

In the meantime, Brent Lang, I know you'll be covering this very closely. Editor of Variety, thank you for the time.

ASHER: Thank you.

LANG: Thank you for having me.

GOLODRYGA: Well, at this hour, lawyers are selecting the jurors in the Sean "Diddy" Combs trial. After the break, we'll look at what's at stake for the

music mogul and how long before he might find out his fate.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: Jury selection is underway in the criminal trial of music mogul, Sean "Diddy" Combs. He faces five federal charges, including sex

trafficking and racketeering, conspiracy, alleged crime spanning over two decades.

Combs has pleaded not guilty and denies all allegations. Now if he's found guilty, he could face life in prison. The trial is expected to last around

eight weeks.

[12:45:06]

ASHER: Meantime, jurors will also be shown a 2016 footage of Combs physically assaulting his ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura, the video, was

actually first reported by CNN. And after its release, Combs admitted to assault and he apologized publicly.

Joining us live now from New York is defense and trial attorney, Misty Marris. So, Misty, good to see you.

So, what we understand is that as many as about 150 jurors are going to be questioned and the prosecution and defense is essentially going to

determine whether or not they can serve as jurors for this trial.

Just -- just walk us through what sort of questions they're going to be asked here.

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE AND TRIAL ATTORNEY: Absolutely. So this is obviously a high-profile trial. You have Sean "Diddy" Combs, who's not just famous.

he's infamous. And there's a lot of negative publicity out there surrounding him in these allegations. There's a lot to combat. Remember,

there's 60 plus civil cases. They are not going to be a part of the criminal trial.

So in order to see the jury who's not going to come in with bias, you have to concede. They're going to know about it. They're going to know about

Diddy. They'll probably know something about the allegations.

But will they be able to go in with an open mind into the courtroom? So the first step is these -- this very, very long jury questionnaire where the

jurors are being asked in the questionnaire about their opinions and experiences with domestic violence, intimate partner violence, sexual

lifestyles that are -- that are not traditional, such as swinger lifestyle, the hip-hop industry. So there's a lot of different buckets being covered

there.

Then the jurors will be questioned individually by the judge. There's unlimited four-cause dismissals. That means if somebody has a bias, they

will be dismissed. And then each side has what's called peremptory strikes where they don't have to explain why they're eliminating a juror.

And last, and this is really important because this all happens behind the scenes. There is a social media deep dive on every one of those prospective

jurors. So you'll hear the attorneys asking questions regarding what they found on social media to determine whether or not biases can be left at the

-- at the courthouse, you know, before they go into that jury room, and whether they can base their determination on the evidence.

GOLODRYGA: And, Missy, and just -- as it relates to whether or not he can get a fair trial here, we know that that has been always a -- a top concern

for prosecute -- for defense attorneys here as they have been making the argument for their clients. He is a well-known artist around the country,

but especially given that he is from New York City, as we said, jurors are going to be shown that -- that really difficult to watch video of him

beating Cassie back in Los Angeles that CNN first reported.

How does he get a fair trial? What arguments will his attorneys be making? And how are prosecutors planning to respond?

MARRIS: So we've had a lot of foreshadowing as to the defense arguments, and they're going to relate to the four victims. Remember, we talked about

how there were so many civil cases out there, but only four victims are the basis for the charges. So these four alleged victims are going to testify.

What we know the defense is going to say to the jury is that, two, one being Cassie Ventura, who is in that video, and another had long-term

relationships with Combs.

So, the argument is going to be, while that video is absolutely horrific, distasteful, terrible, it doesn't fit in to the allegations of sex

trafficking and racketeering as the federal government has pled, basically saying that he's overcharged. It's a tumultuous relationship and a domestic

dispute.

As far as the Freak Offs, they're the center of this case. The argument is going to be that any conduct of those Freak Offs was consensual. And so

that's the challenge the defense is going to have to overcome that.

And why they're digging into some of these more intimate areas during jury selection to see if -- if the individuals are coming in and can be open-

minded and not have preconceived notions regarding those areas.

ASHER: And, Misty, just in terms of -- excuse me. Just in terms of the video, a lot of these jurors actually being shown that video. I mean, even

for both of us, that video is extremely painful to watch.

I mean, how -- how on earth does that not influence you if you're a juror?

MARRIS: Oh, it is absolutely devastating and going to be a very difficult thing for the defense to overcome because it's going to necessitate

conceding that -- how terrible the conduct was.

So, the argument is going to be this really technical legal argument. Even though that's really bad and horrific, it's simply not sex trafficking or

RICO.

[12:50:01]

Now, keep in mind how prosecutors are going to use it. What they're going to say is, this is indicative of the force, fraud, and coercion that was

used by Combs in order to get individuals to comply. And remember, that's a large part of the case.

It's complying with the conduct of the Freak Offs which falls into sex trafficking and also the criminal enterprise that are alleged in the RICO

charge. So, that's how the -- the video is going to factor in.

And the defense is going to have a tough time. They're going to be cross- examining Cassie. That video is going to be center stage. And they're going to have to toe the line between establishing that that was just a

tumultuous relationship and nothing more without putting the jurors off completely.

Because I agree with you both, it is incredibly difficult to watch. And certainly, it's going to influence some of the jurors.

ASHER: All right. Misty Marris live for us there. Thank you so much.

We'll have much more news after this short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: Well, legendary American investor and philanthropist, Warren Buffett, has revealed his retirement plans. After more than 60 years of

leadership at Berkshire Hathaway, the 94-year-old officially made the announcement at Saturday's annual Berkshire beating, naming his successor,

Greg Abel, who will take over CEO next year.

ASHER: Yes. Warren Buffett built an empire stressing ideas around value and patience, delivering a staggering 5.5 million percent return to investors

during his long tenure. Abel currently serves as the chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Energy.

And yet another internet pioneer is fading away. I was actually quite sad about this. Skype is going to be officially shut down today.

Owner, Microsoft, ended the internet-based phone and video service in favor of the company's Teams platform. Skype began in Estonia in 2003, allowing

for free international phone calls.

GOLODRYGA: I remember those days when Microsoft then acquired Skype 15 years ago for an astonishing eight and a half billion dollars, making it

the company's largest ever acquisition at that time.

ASHER: And finally, Britain is celebrating the heroes of World War II. Thousands are commemorating the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe.

The official surrender of Nazi Germany to Allied forces took place on May 8, 1945, ending a war that had claimed tens of millions of lives.

[12:55:06]

Earlier, under cloudy skies, the British monarch and other members of the royal family turned out along with the crowds.

GOLODRYGA: For the first four days of tribute across the United Kingdom, the Red Arrows there thundering over Buckingham Palace, part of the

military flypast roaring through London.

ASHER: All right. That does it for this hour of "ONE WORLD." I'm Zain Asher.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. I'll be right back with "AMANPOUR" after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:00]

END