Return to Transcripts main page
One World with Zain Asher
Soon: VP Vance Gives White House Press Briefing; Police Investigates Mosque Attack as a Hate Crime in California; Firefighters Battle California Brush Fire; Deadly Flooding in China; Google Warns of Quantum Computing Cybersecurity Crisis; Trump's Makeover of Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Aired 1-2p ET
Aired May 19, 2026 - 13:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:00:00]
BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, live from New York, I'm Bianna Golodryga.
ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Zain Asher. You're watching the second hour of One World.
Any moment now, the U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance will take his turn in the White House briefing room. We'll bring you that when it happens.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, it comes after Secretary of State Marco Rubio made his debut at the podium earlier this month, filling in for the press secretary
who is on maternity leave. Vance will face questions from reporters on issues including the Iran War. In a hearing in the House a short time ago,
the U.S. military's top commander in the Middle East got into a heated exchange with a Democratic representative over the successes of the war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. SETH MOULTON (D-MA): What's the plan now? What's the plan now to actually win this war? Because it feels like we're losing. We don't have a
nuclear deal. We don't have the Strait open. The president has called for unconditional surrender. Is that part of the plan?
ADM. BRAD COOPER, COMMANDER, U.S. CENTRAL COMMAND: Congressman, we achieved all our military objectives. We're presently in a ceasefire. We're
executing a blockade, and we're prepared for a broad range of contingencies.
MOULTON: Well, it doesn't seem to be going well, and I would like to know how many more Americans we have to ask to die for this mistake. Do you
know?
COOPER: I think it's an entirely inappropriate statement from you, sir, with all due respect.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: CNN's Kristen Holmes at the White House with more. So, Kristen, what else did we hear from the CENTCOM commander, Bradley Cooper?
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: We heard from the CENTCOM commander. We also heard from President Trump, who kind of ran off
on the Iran War. There were a number of questions thrown to him. He was going to show off the ballroom. He wanted to bring reporters out there, and
then everything seemed to have shifted into a conversation about Iran.
Now, yesterday, he took one or two questions about it, but he really got into it this time, including how far he was from making a decision to
strike Iran. Take a listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: I got a call yesterday, sir, could you wait? We think we're close to a deal, and that's OK. Now, I've heard it before
with these people, and they change their mind. I made deals with them. No nuclear. I was an hour away from making the decision to go today. And we
would probably not be talking about a beautiful ballroom today, we'd be talking about that. And no, we -- I had made the decision.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HOLMES: So, he says he had made the decision. Then he said he was an hour away from making the decision. But what's notable is that he was also asked
about a timeline. Because remember, we've been down this path before.
This idea that another country or other country stepped in. He was going to strike. He was going to take action. And then they asked him not to because
a deal was imminent. But of course, no deal ever came. So, in this case, he was asked, how long is he willing to wait? He said, I'm saying two or three
days, maybe Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, maybe early next week. That's how long he'd be willing to wait. It is clear, though, that President Trump was
looking for any kind of off-ramp here, looking for diplomacy instead of going back into military action.
And I do think one other part of this that was fascinating was he was asked specifically about the fact that this war is incredibly unpopular. And he
said, whether it's popular or not, I have to do it. He said he was shown polls that show just how unpopular this war in Iran is, but that he doesn't
really believe it because he thinks it's better than Iran having a nuclear weapon, that that needs to be conveyed to the American people. Of course,
we've also seen those polls that this is incredibly unpopular.
And now, of course, there is this latest proposal on deck that says that Tehran has the right to enrich uranium. This is Iran's proposal. They want
to lift sanctions, release frozen funds. They want to end the U.S. naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and the war, including in Lebanon. And
they really haven't made any real concessions, at least that's what we're hearing from U.S. officials.
But despite that, despite the fact that Iran hasn't moved the needle, we see President Trump once again saying that he will take a step back and
hope that these negotiations will come to fruition, come to some sort of deal. We will obviously be watching closely, particularly now that he's
given this Friday, Saturday, Sunday, early next week deadline.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, and the president initially saying this war would last between four to five weeks. We're far beyond that deadline at this point.
[13:05:00]
The president also reiterating that he was convinced that if Iran did get hold of a nuclear weapon that they would, in fact, use it. Kristen Holmes,
thank you so much.
ASHER: All right. Let's talk American politics with Toluse Olorunnipa, a staff writer at The Atlantic. Toluse, always good to see you, my friend.
So, you know, one of the points that Kristen Holmes just mentioned there is that we've seen this sort of playbook from Trump time and time again. This
idea was -- you know, this idea that, you know, I was going to strike. I was going to strike, but then I got a call telling me to hold off. And so,
you know what? I'm going to give them a little bit more time.
And obviously, the president does find himself between a rock and a hard place when it comes to Iran. There are no sort of clear ways to get out of
this. Nuclear off ramps. How does he get out of this? I mean, it's costing him a lot, especially not just in terms of, you know, economically with
what American taxpayers are paying at the pump, but politically as well.
TOLUSE OLORUNNIPA, STAFF WRITER, THE ATLANTIC: It's not clear yet how he's going to get out of this, but the cost is very high and it's rising daily.
The political cost is growing as the president realizes that his poll numbers are going down week by week. A number of people who supported him
in 2020 and 2024 are now abandoning him and abandoning Republicans and Democrats are having a lot of enthusiasm on their side as these primary
elections play out.
And the president is trying to find an off ramp. That's why, as you said, he has continued to threaten, you know, destruction of Iran, you know,
threatening an entire civilization being killed and then back down from those threats, in part because he does not want to restart the kind of
kinetic activity that led to this war becoming so unpopular, led to the Strait of Hormuz being closed, led to the spike in gas prices and other
inflation that we've seen here in the U.S. and around the world.
And so, the president does not have very many good options at this point. And it's part of the reasons why you see him bouncing back and forth
between major threats and then backing down and trying to figure out how to get Americans to think about other things.
But as long as the Strait of Hormuz is closed, as long as the president cannot leave the war that he, as you said, take, you know, four to five
weeks and we're several months into this now, he can't leave with a victory at this point. And so, he's sort of stuck. And it's why a number of
presidents have avoided going to war in the Middle East, because they can become quagmires. They can become forever wars. And that's part of the
reason the president is struggling so much right now, both in his poll numbers and with his handling of the economy, because there are no easy
answers. There's no easy off ramp. And right now, it seems like he's going back and forth between less than ideal options.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. And a big test of his hold over the Republican Party will come down to these primaries. A big primary that we're focusing on is in
Kentucky with Congressman Massie up against a candidate that is endorsed by President Trump. President Trump has spoken out aggressively against Thomas
Massie.
And just moments ago, the president endorsed Ken Paxton for Senate in Texas over incumbent John Cornyn. Just talk about that decision process for the
president and how unusual it is, given that he's waited so long to make an endorsement in that important that important race in Texas.
OLORUNNIPA: Yes. This is unusual in a number of different ways. First, it's rare to see a Republican president endorsing against two Republican
incumbent lawmakers in Congress at the same time. Typically, Republican presidents tend to side with the incumbents, the people that are already in
office, the people that have been supporting, in many ways, much of the presidents.
But President Trump is different from most presidents. He's someone who values loyalty over just about anything else. And he believes that when it
comes to Congressman Massie, he believes that he has been disloyal, in part, because he voted and pushed for the Epstein files to be released and
voted against the president on a number of other issues.
And when it comes to Senator Cornyn in Texas, the incumbent senator who is a Republican and who has voted with Trump on a large number of votes, he
still was not able to get President Trump's support in this primary race against Ken Paxton because it wasn't loyal enough. He didn't show full-
throated support for everything the president has said and done, the way Ken Paxton has.
And so, even though Ken Paxton has a number of challenges and a number of reasons why most establishment Republicans are hoping that he will not win
this primary, he now has the endorsement of the president, which has been a very powerful tool for Republicans hoping to get elected. It may not be as
powerful in a general election because Texas is now in play for Democrats, and they feel like this is the year when they can turn Texas blue.
But when it comes to this primary, Ken Paxton now has the wind at his back because he has been on the Republican side.
[13:10:00]
And it seems that the president is trying to make an example out of any Republican who shows any kind of daylight between themselves and the
president, even if they support the president 99 percent of the time. If they don't support everything he does and everything he says, then they
could find themselves on the wrong end of an endorsement, and it could be the end of their political career.
So, we'll be watching both the race in Kentucky and Texas very closely to see whether that powerful Trump endorsement continues to retain its power
or whether, with all of the other troubles the president is facing, that endorsement starts to fade when it comes to the president's hold on the
Republican Party.
ASHER: All right. Toluse, thank you. Thank you for being with us. We are still standing by for J.D. Vance to do that press briefing. It's supposed
to start at 1:00. He is, as we mentioned, filling in for Karoline Leavitt, the press secretary, but she is on maternity leave. And so, we've seen
Marco Rubio, secretary of state for them, and now, it's apparently the vice president's turn.
GOLODRYGA: Yes, rotation of cabinet members here. Meantime, we're going to turn to the Ebola virus outbreak in Central Africa. U.S. Secretary of State
Marco Rubio is speaking about the outbreak for the first time, saying, of course we are worried. He says the U.S. has mobilized $13 million in
assistance and aims to open 50 clinics.
ASHER: Yes, earlier, the World Health Organization raised the alarm over how fast this virus is spreading. It's been linked to more than 130 deaths
in the DRC and in Uganda as well. There are currently no approved treatments or vaccines for this particular strain of Ebola. But officials
say that precautionary measures can be taken to contain this outbreak.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS, DIRECTOR-GENERAL, WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION: In the absence of a vaccine, there are many other measures countries, of
course, can take to stop the spread of this virus and save lives, even without medical countermeasures, including risk communication and community
engagement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: The WHO has yet to declare a pandemic, but it says the spike in cases could indicate a large outbreak is developing. CNN's Larry Madowo
reports.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LARRY MADOWO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This remote corner of the Democratic Republic of Congo, now the epicenter of a deadly outbreak. More
than 100 deaths so far, authorities suspect, from Ebola. The U.S. CDC is scrambling to evacuate, quote, "A small number of Americans who are
directly affected."
When we heard about Ebola, we were terrified, this man says. Even though the disease has affected us before, here it is again.
As authorities rush to stop the spread of the virus, there is currently no approved treatment or vaccine for this strain. The relatively rare
Bundibugyo strain kills an estimated 25 to 40 percent of those who catch it, according to Medicine San Frontier. Like other Ebola strains, it's
highly infectious, transmitted through direct contact with bodily fluids of infected people. It's also frequently spread at the funerals of its
victims.
This clinic in the affected region is already treating one suspected case and is preparing for more, a doctor there telling CNN supplies of vital PPE
are already starting to run low.
DR. PATIENT MAZIRANE, MEDICAL DIRECTOR, UNIVERSELLE CLINIC (through translator): This is a major battle, which requires enormous resources in
order to save all those who can still be saved from this illness.
MADOWO (voice-over): The World Health Organization has declared this outbreak a public health emergency of international concern, but stopped
short of calling it a pandemic. Experts warn cutbacks in funding by the Trump administration may limit the response.
DR. AHMED OGWELL, CEO AND PRESIDENT, VILLAGEREACH: With reduced assistance into the health sector, it means that we have less resources. And
therefore, it's a very difficult time when it comes to responding to an outbreak like this.
MADOWO (voice-over): There are fears this new outbreak could be much larger in scale than authorities are currently aware of. The first
suspected case was reported around a month ago.
Larry Madowo, CNN, Nairobi.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: All right. And coming up for us, deadly flooding grips parts of China. We'll have the latest on the devastation just ahead.
ASHER: Plus, thousands are forced to evacuate as bushfires threaten neighborhoods near Los Angeles. We are live in Southern California for you
ahead as well.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:15:00]
GOLODRYGA: The security guard killed in the deadly shooting rampage at San Diego's largest mosque has been identified.
ASHER: Yes, Amin Abdullah, a father of eight children, was one of three people killed Monday. Police are crediting Abdullah's heroic actions for
saving lives.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SCOTT WAHL, SAN DIEGO POLICE CHIEF: We do believe the security guard was able to help at least minimize the situation to the front area of the
mosque. Until we know more, I don't want to speculate. But at this point, I think it's fair to say his actions were heroic. And undoubtedly, he saved
lives today.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GOLODRYGA: And our thoughts are with his family, one father of eight. Unbelievable. Meantime, two suspects, aged 17 and 18, are also dead. Police
say they were found in a car near the scene with what appeared to be self- inflicted gunshot wounds. Investigators are treating the shooting as a hate crime.
ASHER: Now, the charter school next to the Islamic Center was full of children at the time of the attack. No students or teachers were harmed.
Karina Vargas from our affiliate KGTV spoke to parents at the scene.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KARINA VARGAS, KGTV (voice-over): The fear and uncertainty played out for hours outside Kavod Charter School, where classes were in session at the
time shots were fired at the Islamic Center of San Diego.
CHARITY HUMPHRIES, PARENT: My kid said, I don't want to be -- I don't want to -- I have to be quiet. I don't want to risk being loud.
VARGAS (voice-over): Charity Humphries has a 12-year-old son that goes to Kavod Charter School. She rushed there as soon as she could, worried about
what was going on and whether her kid was OK.
HUMPHRIES: My kid got on their phone and texted me that they had heard someone screaming. And so, now that they were in my kids words, am I
cooked? I hear someone screaming.
VARGAS (voice-over): San Diego police were called just before 1140 Monday morning for reports of an active shooter at the Islamic Center. Since Kavod
Charter School is located right next door, they were placed on lockdown out of caution.
HUMPHRIES: We got a message that our kids were sheltering in place. And then we got, what, about 10 minutes later that said, oh, they're safe.
VARGAS (voice-over): Parents were eventually able to reunite with their children after the lockdown was lifted. Police said they are investigating
the shooting as a hate crime. Parents tell me the Islamic Center has been threatened in the past.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They paid for an armed guard at the gates there. So, that's been a great -- again, it feels good to know that that guy is there
all the time.
HUMPHRIES: This is not the first time that they've had people threaten them just because they happen to be a different religion. Like their kids
should be able to go to school and be safe. And my kids should be able to go to school and be safe.
VARGAS (voice-over): Parents tell me they're grateful their children are safe, but say they are still processing how close this violence came to
their school community.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: Josh Campbell is covering this story for us and joins us now from Los Angeles. And Josh, thanks to the heroism of that security guard,
one doesn't even want to imagine what could have happened. And knowing that there were children at that school and what these parents must have been
going through and what these kids have endured, likely scarring them for many years to come.
[13:20:00]
All of this as investigators are trying to piece together what motives perhaps these suspects had. What more are you learning on that front?
JOSH CAMPBELL, CNN SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, we've so often sadly covered gun violence in this country, including these attempted, you
know, mass attacks from coast to coast. And there's always a question about motive. And sometimes that's very difficult to find in the early stages
where police are trying to determine what could have possibly, you know, motivated someone to try to act with violence on whatever grievance they
had.
Here, it appears very early on in the investigation that the motive is becoming quite clear. And that was racial hatred. And that's according to
law enforcement sources speaking to CNN. They say that one of the suspects here, a 17-year-old, at his home, they found what's being described as a
suicide note that contained writings about racial pride also on one of the firearms that was also used in the shooting, the same similar type of
language.
Of course, authorities want to try to get to the bottom of determining, well, you know, what may have caused them to actually do this. I can tell
you, it is very exceedingly unusual in this country to see two people involved in the same type of targeted attack. We've seen lone gunmen in
many different instances. But to see two is very rare, because what that tells us is it's not just one person that has grievances, that has this,
you know, delusional thought that they want to conduct violence, but they have to convince someone else to go along with it. In this case, that was
an 18-year-old alongside the 17-year-old. So, a lot of questions that authorities are trying to work through.
To that end, although the suspects are deceased, there won't be a prosecution, obviously, but we're told that state prosecutors here in
California have joined the case, as we see so often in these incidents. They want to determine that whether no one else was involved, whether there
was someone who may have known what was about to happen. And another big question, how did this teen, these two teens, get access to a firearm? All
that is something that prosecutors will be looking into to determine if anyone else -- in their orbit faces legal jeopardy.
ASHER: And to that end, I think the suspect's mother, one of the suspect's mothers, is going to be really crucial to this investigation, because she
reported that her son was missing. And she also talked about the fact that there were certain weapons that had been taken as well. She talked about
the fact that there were suicidal, perhaps, ideation going on with her son as well. Just explain to us how key she is going to be to figuring out,
getting to the bottom of this.
CAMPBELL: Yes. You know, I mentioned the firearm. That would be a big question. She had reported that her firearms were missing. So, authorities
would want to determine, you know, were they actually, you know, safely locked up? You know, if you know that someone is suicidal in your family
and you -- you know, they have access to your firearms, do you face some type of legal consequence? That is something that they will be focusing on.
But separating that for a moment, according to police, I mean, she did everything that they asked people to do in this situation. Again, she had a
son that she believes was suicidal. So, obviously we're pointing out that, you know, the vast majority of people who are suicidal don't go on to
actually conduct violence.
Nevertheless, she picked up the phone and called police and said, look, I'm very concerned. They show up at her house. They immediately start a threat
assessment here in the United States, as in many other countries, they have what are called license plate readers that police have around various
different cities.
And that is if they're trying to track a suspect vehicle, these cameras can actually locate the license plate, send a real-time update to police
saying, you know, here's the location of the target vehicle that you're looking for. In this case, it appears that happened. But authorities were
trying to catch up with these suspects. They say about two hours after the mother, you know, called police, then indeed the attack happens at the
Islamic center. Police obviously, you know, distraught now that they couldn't have done more to actually find them, you know, quicker.
But this is a tough case. Again, we have the mother who appeared to be doing exactly what she should have done in calling police. There also be a
big question about how safely her weapons were stored.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. This is the largest mosque in the San Diego area there. And it goes without saying that there, there should be no fear surrounding
any religious institution in terms of crimes like this occurring. People should be able to go to schools. People go to mosque, church, temples
without fear of being killed. Josh Campbell, yet another example of a rise in hate crimes in this country. Thank you so much.
CAMPBELL: Of course.
ASHER: Thank you, Josh. All right. Hundreds of firefighters in Southern California are racing to contain a brushfire that that's just outside of
Los Angeles right now. More than 33,000 people were forced to evacuate in Simi Valley Monday, though some of those orders were lifted last night.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Warm temperatures, low humidity and high winds have been fueling the wildfire. But authorities say the winds thankfully should die
down after today. At last check, more than five hundred or thirteen hundred acres have already been destroyed.
ASHER: CNN's Nick Watt joins us live now from Simi Valley, California. Nick, just talk to us about how quickly this fire is spreading, Nick.
NICK WATT, CNN U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, wind. It's all about wind, and my hair is beginning to get blown around. The wind dropped
overnight. The humidity rose, the temperatures dropped, and that gave firefighters a good few hours to really get on top of this.
[13:25:00]
They were attacking it from the air, dropping water retardant, trying to keep that fire contained. They also had hundreds of ground crews out
digging lines, trying to contain, getting ready for this wind that's going to pick up again today.
Right now, 17,000 people are still evacuated. The schools are still closed because of the air quality. And listen, this is a typical, sadly, typical
Southern California scene these days. Right here, you have this house right at the edge of a subdivision, right up against the scrub land. And the
flames, I just watched a video from a ring camera over there. The flames whipped through and took this house like that. Luckily, firefighters were
around, so they managed to save the other houses here.
But this is a constant problem. You've got about 100,000 people living in Simi Valley. You've got this brush. We had some winter rain. Vegetation
grows. Then we had a few weeks of no rain, so it dries. And then these winds.
If you remember those fires in California -- in L.A. last year, those winds were nearing 100 miles an hour. These winds haven't topped really 40. So,
that's why this is a lot less severe. And also, I noticed yesterday, people around here are told to cut the vegetation, the brush between their house
and the backwoods. A lot of people have. And you can see where the fire has come up, burned, and then there's no fuel. So, the house is spared. So,
people have listened.
Today, there will be some firefighting. We're keeping an eye on it. We're keeping an eye on this wind. The wind is key. The wind not forecast to be
as strong as it was yesterday. That is good. And also, after today, forecast to drop down.
But listen, we used to have a fire season here in Southern California, which was sort of fall, end of summer, fall. Now, it's pretty much year-
round. This is May, and we've already got a big fire. So, these firefighters, though, they have plenty of practice dealing with this
because they've had to deal with it so many times over the past few years. So, they are on it. Fingers crossed for today. But all eyes on that wind.
Back to you.
ASHER: Nick Watt, thank you so much for that. Appreciate it.
GOLODRYGA: CNN Meteorologist Derek Van Dam shares an outlook on the winds fueling the fast-moving wildfire.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
DEREK VAN DAM, CNN METEOROLOGIST: There is some good news being reported out of the Sandy Fire in Simi Valley in Southern California. That's in
Ventura County. Overnight, the weather cooperated with the firefighters on the ground, allowing them to make significant progress. Although the fire
is still burning, there was little fire growth overnight. That's what we like to hear.
There are still evacuation orders and warnings in place. And get this, there's over 750 firefighters battling the blazes. And look at the charred
landscape here. Mountainous terrain. Very challenging to get ahead of the fire. Of course, fire spreads so quickly within this type of mountainous
terrain. There have been large air tankers that have dropped fire retardants on the front lines. But look at how close these flames are to
this residential community.
You can see on the visible satellite loop over the past 24 hours, the smoke and also the direction of the wind. Notice it's coming offshore. That is
known as the Santa Ana in Southern California. It's a particular setup. High pressure builds across the Great Basin, funnels the winds up and over
the mountain ranges. They speed up and dry out as they work their way down in altitude towards the coastline. And it can be very strong and very
gusty, especially within those canyons across the mountains.
But this is interesting because there's been a shift in the wind over the past day or so. And it will continue so that Santa Ana wind will change to
more of an onshore wind as the temperature differential throughout the day kind of allows for that wind shift to take place. But what's challenging
for the firefighters on the ground is that change in speed and change in direction makes it very difficult to identify the forward progress of the
fire. So, something to consider.
The relative humidity here, a major factor in wildfire growth, has been running anywhere from 10 to 20 percent. Overnight, though, it does look
like it will increase, maybe providing that important, important inversion layer overhead so the firefighters can gain more ground. Back to you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ASHER: Derek Van Dam reporting there. All right. Widespread flooding across southern and central China has killed more than 20 people.
GOLODRYGA: Here you can see a car bobbing in the water as it's swept away by the floods in Guangzhou province. The severe weather has closed schools
and businesses and knocked out power in affected areas.
ASHER: Google is warning that a major cybersecurity crisis could happen sooner than expected. Cyber experts have coined the term Q-Day to describe
the moment when quantum computers acquire the ability to hack some encryption systems.
[13:30:00]
GOLODRYGA: Yes, those digital safeguards, help protect everything from bank accounts to personal medical records from unwanted eyes. CNN Tech
Reporter Clare Duffy, we started this.
ASHER: Who just jumped the gun there. Sorry about that.
GOLODRYGA: Yes. Who gave you a preview, explains what's at risk.
ASHER: We had the preview already.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CLARE DUFFY, CNN TECH REPORTER: That's right. Experts are warning that Q- Day, this point at which quantum computers could break the encryption that protects much of our information on the Internet, could be coming sooner
than expected, potentially within the next five to 10 years. You can think of this sort of like the next Y2K, the next milestone that experts are
concerned about when it comes to cybersecurity.
But this Q-Day has the potential to be much more disruptive. And that is because quantum computers are not just better traditional computers. They
fundamentally operate differently on the principles of quantum physics. That means that they can process information much more quickly. They have
been in development, but experts now say that development is accelerating, perhaps faster than they previously realized.
And this is expected to lead to some good things like breakthroughs in science and finance, but it could cause a problem for the internet's
security, which is essentially protected by complex math equations that classical computers would take years and years to break. But quantum
computers could break much more quickly. And if we are not prepared for this, this could put at risk our sensitive communications, business
information, financial information that is currently protected on the Internet.
Now, the good news is that companies and governments are working to get ready for this milestone. You've got Google and the cybersecurity company
Cloudflare that now say they are targeting 2029 to secure their systems, which with what's known as post-quantum cryptography. The White House is
recommending that businesses adopt post-quantum cryptography by 2035.
Still, there is data to suggest that 90 percent of businesses are not yet prepared for this. So, much more work to do to prepare for this Q-Day
milestone. Back to you.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GOLODRYGA: All right. Coming up, a place of reflection turning into yet another source of controversy in Washington, D.C. Details ahead on the
changes coming to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[13:35:00]
ASHER: All right. Welcome back to One World. I'm Zain Asher.
GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. We are still waiting for U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance to come to the podium for the White House press
briefing. He is stepping in for White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, who is currently on maternity leave. That press briefing should
begin in a few minutes, and we will bring that to you live when it happens.
ASHER: On Britain's south coast, an unassuming office has become a lifeline in the Middle East conflict. The U.K.'s Maritime Trade Operation
Center collects cargo from the United Kingdom, and distributes real-time security information for shipping.
GOLODRYGA: Right now, it's where vessels under attack in the Strait of Hormuz often call for help. CNN went to find out how it works.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice over): This unassuming office is playing a crucial role in international warfare. When a vessel runs into trouble in
the Iran-controlled Strait of Hormuz, it's more than likely that they will call this office.
COMMANDER JO BLACK, HEAD OF OPERATIONS, U.K. MARITIME TRADE OPERATIONS CENTRE: It can get very stressful. The vessel may be actively under
attack. You may hear alarms and sirens in the background on an occasion. We have even heard gunfire.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): This is the U.K. Maritime Trade Operations Centre, based in the coastal city of Portsmouth, affiliated with
the Royal Navy. It's staffed by just 18 people who rotate across 12-hour shifts. Since the start of the Iran war, the number of calls they receive
has skyrocketed.
BLACK: At the start of March, we were very much seeing military activity. There were missiles, there were drone attacks, there were fast inshore
attack craft as well. More recently, it seems to be taking a change towards constabulary action, with vessels being challenged as they approached the
Straits of Hormuz, interrogated us to verify their claims.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): But how exactly does it work?
LLOYD PRIEST, LEAM LEAD, U.K. MARITIME TRADE OPERATIONS CENTRE: So, the call comes in -- onto the phone over there, the emergency phone, it's fully
recorded, and then -- and then, we will deal with the incident from there.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The team will talk to the vessel in danger and seek to alert other ships around it. They will speak to the shipping companies
affected, local coast guards, and military forces. And Commander Jo Black said the future for the Strait is difficult to predict, with the
contentious peace talks ongoing.
BLACK: The mainstream industry is not yet sufficiently comfortable that it is safe to send their seafarers back through the straits. Again, that is
changing on a daily basis.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ASHER: All right. Let's go straight to the White House now, where J.D. Vance, the U.S. vice president, is hosting a press briefing. Let's listen
in.
J.D. VANCE, U.S. VICE PRESIDENT: -- who, out of their generosity, and because they have to, of course, they pay their taxes, expecting that it's
going to go to pay our troops and ensure that low-income children have access to food and ensure that people get medical benefits, even if they're
not able to afford a doctor.
I think that's a great thing about our country is that we have this generosity of spirit, where we take care of one another, but fraud takes
that away from us, because it steals money from the taxpayer when they pay their taxes. And it also steals money from innocent people who are meant to
benefit from these programs, but can't when the money runs dry because it's gone to fraudsters instead of the people who benefit from it or should
benefit from it. So, we're going to keep that work up.
The president of the United States has been very clear that he wants us to focus on fraud. He wants us to prosecute the fraudsters, and he wants us to
save the American people as much money as we possibly can. So, we're going to keep at it. We're very proud of that work and, importantly, very proud
of the team who have done an incredible job.
And then, finally, just to give an update on the Iran negotiation, the Iran situation, I just talked to the president very briefly before I came out
here. It's actually a very simple proposition here. There are two options, two pathways we can go down when it comes to the Iran situation.
So, step back for a little bit. What the president of the United States has said is, number one, Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. And I think it's
important for the American people and all of you to appreciate that when we say that, it's not just that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. It's what
would happen if the Iranians did get a nuclear weapon. We know that a lot of nations all across the Gulf would then want their own nuclear weapon,
and then a lot of nations all across the world.
And what has been a very effective bright spot of American foreign policy, really, for the last 20 or so years, would disappear overnight. If you have
every country in the world scrambling to try to get a nuclear weapon, it would make us all much less safe. And Iran would really be the first domino
in what would set off a nuclear arms race all over the world, that's very, very bad for the safety of our country.
As the father of three young kids, I don't want them to inherit a world where 20 additional regimes, half of them very dangerous and very
sympathetic to terrorists, have nuclear weapons. We want to keep the number of countries that have nuclear weapons small. And that's why Iran cannot
have a nuclear weapon, on top of all the other things that we might be worried about, that they themselves could use it, that they could use it in
leverage and economic control or economic negotiations. We just don't want them to have a nuclear weapon.
Now, what we did here is that we effectively degraded their conventional military capability. That has been done. That has been successfully done.
You could always do a little bit more.
[13:40:00]
But where we are now is the president has asked us, has told us, to aggressively negotiate with the Iranians. Why did I go to Islamabad,
Pakistan? Why did I spend, I think, probably 22 hours on a plane going there, 24 hours coming back, and then 21 hours on the ground negotiating
with the Iranians is because we wanted to show a sign of good faith. The vice president of the United States is willing to cut a deal so long as the
Iranians are willing to meet us, again, on that core issue of never having a nuclear weapon.
We think that we've made a lot of progress. We think the Iranians want to make a deal. The president of the United States has asked us to negotiate
in good faith, and that's exactly what we've done. So, we're in a pretty good spot here.
But there's an option B, and the option B is that we could restart the military campaign to continue to prosecute the case, to continue to try to
achieve America's objectives, and we could talk a little bit about what that looks like, but that's not what the president wants, and I don't think
it's what the Iranians want either. We have an opportunity here, I think, to reset the relationship that has existed between Iran and the United
States for 47 years. That's what the president has asked us to do, and that's what we're going to keep on working at.
But it takes two to tango. We are not going to have a deal that allows the Iranians to have a nuclear weapon so as the president just told me, we're
locked and loaded. We don't want to go down that pathway, but the president is willing and able to go down that pathway if we have to.
So, with that, I will say thank you all. It's cool to be here. I'm going to give a shout-out, of course, to the person I am replacing today, Karoline
Leavitt, who hopefully is at home enjoying some time with her beautiful kids. I told Karoline I would stand in for her today for the White House
press briefing on the condition that when Usha has our baby in July that she would be Vice President for a couple weeks. So, thank you, guys.
And I actually want to start first with Nick from Breitbart. Nick, it's good to see you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Good to see you, Mr. Vice President. Thank you. Today, we saw the president endorse Ken Paxton over John Cornyn in the Texas
Senate race. Do you think that sends a message going forward for the next cycle to senators considering running for reelection or any MAGA-aligned
potential candidates that are considering challenging them?
VANCE: Well, I'd say a couple things, Nick. First of all, I think the president is very gratified by the response that he's heard from the base
and from a lot of voters, I think, who are passionate about Ken Paxton. We think Ken Paxton is going to be a great senator for the people of Texas,
but most importantly a great United States senator who can work on solving the problems that all of us confront as a country together.
I've known John Cornyn for a long time, but unfortunately, you know, when it really counted, Ken Paxton was there for the country, was there for the
President, and that's why he ultimately earned the president's endorsement. He thinks he's going to be a better senator, thinks he's going to make a
better candidate.
And so, I do think it sends a message, but really not just the endorsement, but one of the things the president has done very effectively going back 10
years in his leadership of the Republican Party and the country as president of the United States is he said, you know, I want people who
fight for the good. I want people who can't be bought by corporate lobbyists, who can't be bought by Wall Street, who can't be bought by
special interests, who are going to go to Washington and fight for the people who actually elected them to those positions.
And I think one of the things we've seen in the Republican Party, while I can't say that all of our representatives are perfect or all of our
senators are perfect, we have seen a much better crop of talent come into Washington since Donald Trump has been the leader of the party and the
leader of the movement. I do think we're going to continue to see that happening, but I think the message that people should take from this is
fundamentally you have got to serve the people who sent you, and if you don't do that, you're going to find yourself out of step with voters or out
of step with the president of the United States, and that's not a good place to be politically.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.
VANCE: Yes. Go ahead.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you very much. Just following up on what you just said, you said that the White House is negotiating with Iran in good
faith. I think Americans tend to believe that, but what is it about the Iranian side that you personally have seen where you believe that they are
negotiating with us in good faith?
VANCE: Well, first of all, I'd say it's a very complicated country, and it's a country that I wouldn't pretend that I understand, even after as
deep as I've been involved in this process from the very beginning. It's a great and proud civilization, amazing people, obviously have a great
Iranian-American community here in the United States of America, smart people, very hardworking, and you see some of that in the negotiating team
on the other side. You also see some very hardline positions in the negotiating team on the other side.
And so, I think you see that conflict, the fact that maybe the Iranians aren't themselves quite clear in what direction they want to go to. They
also are just a fractured country, so you have the leadership of the country, there's the supreme leader, and then there are a lot of officials
below the supreme leader that has some influence in the negotiation. It's not sometimes totally clear what the negotiating position of the team is,
and I don't know if that's sometimes communication, if that's bad faith.
[13:45:00]
I don't -- I wouldn't pretend to venture a guess there, but I will say with confidence it's sometimes hard to figure out exactly what it is that the
Iranians want to accomplish out of the negotiation. So, what we've done is try to be as clear as possible, what are our red lines, what are the things
that we're willing to be accommodating on, and what are the things that we absolutely must have. And as the president has said ad nauseum.
And I think I've said it a lot too, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. We want to see not just the commitment to not have a nuclear weapon, but the
commitment to work with us on a process to ensure that not just now, not just when Donald Trump is president, but years down the road that the
Iranians are not rebuilding that nuclear capability, and that's what we're trying to accomplish in the negotiation. Sorry, you had a follow-up.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Just for Americans at home, because this has been going on for several weeks now, I think what people just want to know
is, do you personally believe that the Iranians will come to a deal? Because we keep seeing this over and over again where they go back and
forth.
VANCE: So, do I personally believe it? The honest answer is how could I possibly know, right? And you negotiate with people and sometimes you feel
like you're making progress and sometimes you feel like you're not making progress.
What I think, what I think is that the Iranians want to make a deal. What I think is that the Iranians recognize that a nuclear weapon is the red line
for the United States of America, that they've internalized that, but we're not going to know until we're actually putting pen to paper on signing a
deal. We've had a lot of drafts, a lot of, you know, a lot of pieces of paper going back and forth, but I will not say with confidence that we're
going to reach a deal until we're actually signing a negotiated settlement here. And I think that it's ultimately up to the Iranians whether they're
willing to meet us, because I think we're certainly doing a good job and we're certainly negotiating in good faith. We're going to have to see what
ultimately happens with them. I can't say with confidence because I don't know what's in the mind of the other side. John.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Vice President, thank you. I want to ask you about that $1.8 billion fund set up, weaponization fund as it's being called. Why
should taxpayers be paying to settle a $10 billion lawsuit that was brought by the president of the United States? And should people that attacked the
Capitol building and assaulted police officers, should they be eligible? Should they receive money? Should they receive money from this fund?
VANCE: Well, let me say a couple of things about that. First, John, I think in some ways the media has misrepresented what this is actually
about. This is about compensating Americans for the lawfare that we saw under the last administration. And by the way, anybody can apply for it.
Republicans can apply for it. Democrats can apply for it.
As you know, the president of the United States has pardoned a number of Democrats who he felt were actually subject to this lawfare. I mean, if
Hunter Biden wants to apply for this particular fund, he is welcome to. It's going to go through a normal process where we vet everything, where we
try to identify whether people's claims are actually legitimate.
But here's the question. You say, why should taxpayers fund this? Whenever the United States government incurs legal expenses, it pays out those legal
expenses. When it's settling a lawsuit, it pays out money to settle that lawsuit. And the question is, is a dollar of this money going to the Trump
administration? No. Is a dollar of this money going to Donald Trump personally? No. Is a dollar of this money going to Donald Trump's family?
No. The people that would get the money are people, some of whom have been prosecuted completely disproportionate to any crime they've ever committed.
Like, let's just take a couple of examples. Tina Peters is this woman who is about to get out of prison, thanks in large part to the president's good
work in Colorado. This is a woman who, at worst, if you believe everything that the prosecutors said about her, committed misdemeanor trespassing, and
somebody threw the book at her, this innocent grandmother was going to spend 10 years in prison, completely disproportionate to any misdemeanor
trespassing that I've ever seen. Was that fair? No. Is it reasonable for her to get some compensation for the fact that she was treated unfairly? I
think the answer is yes.
And I think that what we're going to see, hopefully, is the entire country, led by this Department of Justice, turning the page on the lawfare. What I
would like to propose, and I think the Democrats, you know, hopefully they're willing to meet us halfway here, I won't hold my breath. But what I
would propose is something very simple, that if you are willing to turn the page on Joe Biden's lawfare, why don't we prosecute people? Very simple
principle. Why don't we prosecute people who violate the law? Let's not prosecute people because they said the wrong thing, or because they had the
wrong political candidate, or because they had the wrong viewpoint.
And I think part of that, part of turning the page on that, is to actually ensure the real victims of that lawfare receive some compensation. That's
what this fund is going to be targeted at, and again, there's going to be a process to ensure that that money is only given to people who have
actually, I hate to say earned it, but the people who actually were really mistreated by the previous administration and Department of Justice.
Go ahead, go ahead.
[13:50:00]
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand that everybody is eligible to apply for this fund. I mean, you're eligible, but I assume you're not going to apply,
and you don't think you should get money out of this fund.
VANCE: Of course.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So, isn't it just as easy to say that people that attacked police officers should not get taxpayer money from this?
VANCE: Well, look, John, we're not trying to give money to anybody who attacked a police officer. We're trying to give money, not give money.
We're trying to compensate people where the book was thrown at them. They were mistreated by the legal system. Sometimes, you know, we are, we do
have John in this, in this country, innocent until proven guilty.
We do have people who were accused of attacking law enforcement officers. That doesn't mean that we're going to completely ignore some of the claims
that they're going to make. We're going to evaluate these things on a case- by-case basis. And if we think that somebody, whatever they were accused of, if we think that somebody was unfairly prosecuted and deserves just
compensation, then that's what this fund is going to exist to provide.
It's just going to correct a wrong. And I think that's a good thing. And I'd encourage everybody, Democrat, Republican, independent, let's turn the
page on this thing that we did under the last administration, where we tried to throw people in prison because they had the wrong politics. Let's
throw people in prison who broke the law. I think this fund is a good part of getting justice for the people who were wrongly treated back there. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, sir. Just to follow up on that quickly, does that mean that people that were violent, that were convicted were
mistreated? Are you saying that?
VANCE: Well, you're asking me to comment on hypotheticals and on any number of dozens of cases. Here's the thing. We're going to look at
everything case by case. As you know, every single case has its own details. Every single case has, you know, there are things about it that
maybe don't meet the eye. We're just going to look at every case, case by case. That's all I'm saying.
I'm not committing to giving anybody money or committing to giving no one money. What I'm committing to is a legal process to review these claims and
to make sure that people who are mistreated by their government get a little bit of compensation because of it. Go ahead. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you.
VANCE: So, I realize that the pointer finger is not as precise as I thought it was. The guy in -- sorry, I have this cheat sheet, but the
problem with being 41 years old is you are on blinder than I was a few years ago. So, we'll say blue blazer, blue tie. Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. I'd like to ask a quick follow up on Iran. But first, I'd like to ask you about that. So, that's an
old source, largely from China killed about 400 and 3,000 Americans over the past seven years. According to CDC data, that's one in every one, one
in every eight hundred and fifty Americans who died. White House counterterrorism director Sebastian Gorka said last week that China's
export amounted to the targeted killing of Americans and war by other means.
Do you agree with that assessment? And what is the Trump administration doing to punish and deter China, especially since the Supreme Court struck
down the fentanyl tariffs?
VANCE: So, go and ask the second question, because I'll try to take each question and then I'll try to answer them and then we'll go on. And if you
ask two questions, I can only guarantee that I answer one. In fact, I'm a politician. Maybe I won't even answer the one that you asked, but I will
try at least to answer one question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I'd love to hear the fentanyl response to it. If not today, sometime on Iran. Is Russia taking possession of the enriched
uranium in Iran, a plausible end to the war? And if not, why not?
VANCE: So, first on the Russia taking possession of the enriched uranium, look, these things are being discussed through negotiation. That is not
currently our plan. That has never been our plan. I've seen some reporting on that. I don't know where it comes from, but the president's going to
continue to negotiate a deal. So, that is not currently the plan of the United States government. The Iranians have not raised it.
My sense is that's not something the Iranians would be particularly excited about. And I know the president isn't particularly excited about it either,
but who knows? I'm not going to make pre-commitments in a negotiation on any particular topic.
On the question of fentanyl, a lot of people have died from fentanyl. Absolutely. A lot of it has come from mainland China. We're certainly aware
of that, but here's what I'll say. First of all, we've made incredible strides under Donald Trump's leadership to cut down on fentanyl deaths. If
you look at the number of people who died in 2026, it's going to be lower than the number who died in 2025, which is way lower than the number who
died in 2024.
This is one of the things that I think all Americans, we should be celebrating. And I'm certainly proud of the president's leadership for
making this possible. We ran, if you remember, in November of 2024 on a very simple idea, that a lot of fentanyl came from East Asia, it was
smuggled into Central and South America, and then the cartels would bring it into our country and a lot of our people would get poisoned and killed
because of it. We said, if you got control of the Southern border, we would see a substantial reduction in the number of people who died from fentanyl
overdoses in the United States of America. And that is exactly what's happened.
Now, yes, the president has raised this with President Xi any number of times. I know it came up during the meeting that they had in China just
last week, but it's come up in any number of phone calls.
[13:55:00]
And our sense is that President Xi has been willing to work with us on this. And obviously, we want to continue to ensure that the Chinese work
with us as much as possible, because we don't want our people to be poisoned. So, we'll keep working on that issue with the Chinese. There's
been, I think, a big amount of progress that's been made, but of course, we can make a lot more progress and we're certainly going to be committed to
doing exactly that.
Yes. White jacket, sorry.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Natalie with the Washington Post.
VANCE: Natalie, thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Does the government need to create a new mandatory review process for new A.I.
models, given the concerns about Mythos? And secondly, in a few days, Pope Leo is going to release his encyclical on artificial intelligence. What
influence, if any, do you see the Pope's guidance on A.I. having to broader society?
VANCE: Well, I mean, I think when the Pope issues an encyclical on artificial intelligence, it's going to have some influence. I, of course,
don't know how much influence, I don't know exactly what it's going to say, but I think when the leader of the world's largest Christian denomination
speaks on an issue like that, it's certainly going to have some influence and I'm sure it'll contain a lot of insights, some of which I'll probably
agree with, some of which I may not, but I think that it's going to be a very, very important document.
And I think that, you know, one of the things I always find fascinating about Pope Leo is that he chose the name Leo XIV, which of course is
recollecting Leo XIII. Leo XIII was the Pope during a period of incredible industrial transformation in the entire world. Of course, that industrial
transformation, according to a lot of people, led to the rise of fascism and communism in Europe.
I think it was interesting that Leo XIV chose that name to maybe apply Christian social teaching in a new era with a new technological innovation
in the same way that the Industrial Revolution was the technological innovation of its time. So, I think it'll be fascinating. I'm looking
forward to reading it. My guess is it's going to have a lot of influence. on the question of what our policy is going to be.
Look, what we're trying to do in the Trump administration is very simple. The president wants us to be pro-innovation. He wants us to win the A.I.
race against all other countries in the world. He recognizes that A.I. is going to be an important tool, not just for our economy, but for our
military. And so, he wants to ensure that we are winning that particular race.
We also want to make sure that we're protecting people. We're protecting people's data. We're protecting people's privacy. I think with this Mythos
release, one of the things that we're focused on, of course, is whether not necessarily the developers of Mythos, but whether some other bad actor
could use Mythos to target various cyber security vulnerabilities.
So, it's something that right now we're working in a collaborative way with the technology companies, and we're just trying to make sure that the
American people are as safe as possible. I'm not going to get ahead of the executive order or any other actions that are going to come out, but we're
trying to balance those two things. We want to be pro-innovation. We recognize -- I mean, artificial intelligence could be great. It could help
us find cures to diseases that currently people are dying from or suffering from. It also does have some downsides, and we're trying to balance that
safety against innovation.
And we think that we've got the right balance here in the Trump administration, but it's something we're going to have to keep on working
on because that's just the nature of these technologies is they certainly change.
Let's go -- is that Reagan all the way in the back, Daily Caller? There we go. OK.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Awesome.
VANCE: I figured out finally how the seating chart works.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want to ask you about the anti-fraud task force. You previously mentioned that Ilhan Omar seemed to have committed
immigration fraud. Do you anticipate an indictment against her, an indictment related to that situation?
VANCE: Yes. So, Reagan, I don't want to prejudge an investigation. I mean, you read the things about Ilhan Omar and about who she married and whether
she didn't marry this person or that person. It certainly seems like something fishy is there, but everybody's entitled to equal justice under
the laws. So, we're going to investigate it. We're going to take a look at it. If we think that there's a crime, we're going to prosecute that crime.
And that's something the Department of Justice is looking at right now. Yes, yes. Go ahead.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Based on what you've seen during your work on this anti-fraud task force, do you believe anything should change about our
immigration or refugee policies to stop fraud in the United States?
VANCE: Well, yes. I mean, look, one thing I'd say is that the biggest immigration fraud that existed under the Biden administration, it's not
just that they let a flood of people across the southern border. That was obviously a very major problem and something I'm proud of the president for
stopping. But it's also that they allowed the asylum and refugee claimant process to become totally fraudulent.
And so, here's what would happen, right? You would take a person who in normal cases would just be a traditional economic immigrant, whether you
let them into the country or not, they're trying to come because they want a better job. OK, they would come into the country and say that they were
fleeing persecution and they would say that they were an asylum claimant.
And then effectively what the Biden administration would do is say, OK, you're an asylee. Go into the interior of the country. Here's a work
permit. Maybe come back in 10 or 12 years for your hearing --
[14:00:00]
END
