Return to Transcripts main page
Hala Gorani Tonight
Harvey Weinstein Charged With Rape Bond Set At $10M; Attorney: Weinstein "Never Engaged In Non-Consensual Sex"; Trump Open To Summit A Day After Calling It Off; North Korea Claims To Destroy Nuclear Test Site; U.S. New Sites Block EU Access; Washington, Pyongyang Still Appear Open To Summit; U.K. Foreign Secretary Targeted By Prank Caller; Amazon Claims Device Misheard Words; Lava Channels From Eruption Now Flowing To Pacific. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired May 25, 2018 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:00:33]
HALA GORANI, CNN HOST: Hello, everyone. Live from CNN London, I'm Hala Gorani. Tonight, cuffed and charged with rape, disgraced movie producer,
Harvey Weinstein turns himself into police today accused of multiple sexual crimes against women. We are live in New York.
Also, ahead, a day after canceling the North Korea summit, Donald Trump now says it could still happen.
Plus, an investigation is underway at downing street after the U.K. foreign secretary spent almost 20 minutes on the phone with a prank caller. We
have the reporting for you.
For decades, Harvey Weinstein was one of the most powerful men in the movie business capable of launching or destroying careers. Just a few hours ago,
the now-disgraced movie producer appeared in a New York court, charged with rape and other sex crimes against two women.
These criminal charges are the first against him after allegations of sexual misconduct for more than 80 women last fall. Weinstein left the
hearing, his bond set at $10 million. His bail at $1 million. He's required to wear a monitoring device and had to surrender his passport.
And more charges are expected, but just after the hearing, Weinstein's attorney claimed the state is going to have a hard time proving its case.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN BRAFMAN, HARVEY WEINSTEIN'S ATTORNEY: He has vehemently denied any of the allegations, which suggest that he engaged in non-consensual
sexual activity. I anticipate that the women who have made these allegations, when subjected to cross-examination, in the event we even get
that far, that the charges will not be believed by 12 people, assuming we get 12 fair people, who are not consumed by the movement that seems to have
overtaken this case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: Well, this is the attorney for Harvey Weinstein. And when the widespread allegations against Weinstein became public last year, it
sparked a global reckoning about sex abuse and harassment. The #metoomovement was born.
Correspondent, Brynn Gingras, joins me now from New York with more. So, where does this go from here? I mean, essentially Harvey Weinstein was
freed on $1 million bail. He has to wear an ankle bracelet or a monitoring device. What happens now?
BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Hala, really, this is only the beginning for Harvey Weinstein because investigations are still
ongoing in London. We have one also in Los Angeles, and then we also know there's a federal probe happening here in New York and last week, we
learned that there is a grand jury that's been convened.
And they've been hearing testimony from at least four women accusers, as well as evidence. And so, there are more charges that could be coming down
the pipeline for Harvey Weinstein. So, this is really just the beginning of his legal battle.
But, yes, you outlined perfectly the conditions of his bail. He is out on bail. We do believe he did go to a home in Connecticut. But of course,
with that ankle monitoring bracelets, authorities will have -- will able to keep track of him 24/7.
GORANI: And what -- specifically with this case, what are the next steps now for him?
GINGRAS: Well, for this case specifically, he has to appear in court next month. But we are going to learn next week from his attorney, who you
already heard there, Ben Brafman, if he's going to testify to that grand jury. Again, those proceedings have been ongoing for weeks.
And it's very possible we'll get more charges. So, it will be interesting to see. Of course, those are closed -- those will be closed to the public.
But it will be interesting to see if Weinstein goes forward to those jurors in those proceedings.
GORANI: And Brynn, stand by. Rose McGowan, who is, of course, one of the initial Weinstein accusers, who says she was one of his victims, had this
to say in reaction to the developments today. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think he thought this day would come?
ROSE MCGOWAN, ACTRESS: No. No, he did not.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Because the system was created to protect men like him?
MCGOWAN: The system was created by men like him and his accomplices to protect him. It's tragic that it takes over a hundred women, and that
probably means like a thousand, let's be real. I mean, this man had hunting grounds all over the world and he had accomplices and a complicity
machine. You know, he was the cult leader of Hollywood. There will always be sociopaths and predators like Harvey Weinstein, but I find his
complicity machine a lot more guilty.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[15:05:12] GORANI: That's Rose McGowan. Brynn, I was curious, because you did mention that there were other cases potentially brewing. Was there
anyone in the courtroom today there to support Weinstein? Did he have any family members, any friends, anyone there with him or was he all alone
facing these charges?
GINGRAS: No, he was pretty much all alone. It's also important to note that there are actually no victims in the courtroom that we know of either.
But, yes, he was all alone. People described him inside the courtroom as being a little bit dazed, out of it, as he faced that judge.
I do want to point out, since you played that Rose McGowan (inaudible), Ben Brafman, his attorney, when he came out here and spoke to the media, he
made a very striking comments about these accusations.
Basically, saying that he defends his clients on facts, on criminal charges, and not just accusations. That his client, Harvey Weinstein,
didn't invent the casting couch in Hollywood, almost defending him, that he's not the only person who has done things like this, possibly even
setting up a defense, which we might see if and when this goes to trial -- Hala.
GORANI: Brynn Gingras, thanks very much, outside the courtroom, the courthouse there in New York, where Harvey Weinstein faced a judge and
posted $1 million bail there. He is free on bail for now.
So, what is next for Harvey Weinstein in dealing with sex misconduct charges that can be very difficult to prove in court?
Joining me now, also from New York, is our legal analyst, Joey Jackson. He's a criminal defense attorney. What did you make of what the lawyer
said? He basically said, you know, we're going to have to prove this. We're going to have to convince the prosecution.
We'll have to convince 12 jurors if they are fair jurors, essentially blaming, it sounded like, the "Me Too Movement" for, you know, maybe
brainwashing people into thinking some men did bad things when in fact they didn't. What did you make of that?
JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, you know, Hala, a couple of things. First of all, I should say, that I'm a product of that Manhattan District
Attorney's Office, the one that's prosecuting him now, Sy Vans is in charge. Morgan (inaudible) was in charge when I was there although Ben
Brafman was a significant presence.
He was part of our training when I was an assistant district attorney when he was a defense attorney. So very well respected, very highly regarded
and come out swinging, right? That's what he did. That's what he taught everyone else to do.
And here's the reality. You have a distinction that he's trying to make between bad behavior on the one hand, which apparently is rampant in
Hollywood, and what he is suggesting that as the attorney, as criminal behavior on the other.
Remember that he said that it was no time that his client engaged in conduct that was not otherwise consensual. And so, I think that will be
the refrain here. In addition to that, he also, Ben Brafman, his defense attorney, is saying that I'm challenging the sufficiency of any evidence he
has as it relates to the complaint.
I'm making a motion to dismiss. And I think he's going to predicate that motion upon factual allegations that can't be substantiated to this point,
as well as perhaps, Hala, some statute of limitations issues.
Remember that one allegation goes back to 2004, so there's a question as to whether that's viable now. So, the attorney is in full swing mode, full
defense mode, and I think we'll see a lot of that in the days, weeks, and months to come.
GORANI: Because in court, and this is always something that people who say there are victims of rape and sex abuse in court, it is -- I mean, it is
difficult to prove rape, right, in a courtroom, in a court of law?
JACKSON: You know what, Hala, it could be, and it also depends upon when the rape happened in conjunction with when the crime was actually leveled
against you. Often times, if it's more recent, they do rape kits, there's analysis, there's DNA, there's some type of connection to connect the
person accused to the actual accuser.
In this case, because of one happening in 2013, I doubt that will be the case. Another one in 2004, I doubt that will be the case. And you heard
Ben Brafman say, he will cross-examine them.
In our system that means you challenge the sufficiency of the witness's recollection, you challenge what their course of events they suggest are.
And I think he'll go after them, you know, pretty aggressively.
But there are expert witnesses, who will testify in these cases, which are hard to prove, that there are reasons why women don't come forward right
away. There are reasons of humiliation, reasons of shame, there are reasons of embarrassment, there's reasons they blame themselves.
And I have tried sex cases where, in fact, those experts come and they're very persuasive and explain to the jury what women feel when they are
violated.
GORANI: And it just feels like now with the "Me Too Movement" perhaps some of these concepts are better understood by the wider public as to why
people don't necessarily come forward right away.
I want to show our viewers the charges that Harvey Weinstein is facing. We have some graphics made up here, detailing those for our viewers. The
charges explained rape in the first degree.
[15:10:05] There are also a couple of other charges that we can put up there related to alleged sexual abuse, criminal sexual act in the first
degree as well as a third charge, which we're going to put up there as well for our viewers.
And then rape in the third-degree. So, what do you make of these charges? What -- how differently would a defense attorney or a prosecutor, in fact,
tackle this case, based on these charges that we've told our viewers about?
JACKSON: Well, you know what, Hala? The first thing to make mention of is that those are very significant charges. They are "B" felonies. In
English, what that means is a person convicted can face 25 years in jail, at least as to the first-degree accounts, Rape in the first degree,
forcible compulsion in the first-degree.
The other one, there's no mandatory jail time, but you know, you're not worried about that when you're worried about the others. So, obviously,
with Ben Brafman setting up, the defense attorney, the defense of, if things did occur and you credit any victims' claims that it was consensual,
that he didn't take advantage of them.
That's lot to overcome, though, because we're in a different cliate. And I'm going to be looking for as matters move forward, we are not there yet,
we are not at trial. We haven't even had a grand jury indictment, but I'm interested in knowing how many other accusers if any the judge will allow
to testify.
That can be compelling evidence. We've had occasion to speak about Bill Cosby in the past. And remember in his trial, five prior accusers
testified. That weighs heavily on a jury because they're looking and they're saying, hey, this maybe your M.O. so I'm going to be looking for in
the event the case moves forward, Hala, how many other victims the judge will permit to testify.
GORANI: That's going to be very interesting. Joey Jackson, thanks, as always, for your analysis on this.
JACKSON: Of course.
GORANI: Now to international diplomacy and the North Korean situation. A day ago, he gave North Korea the cold shoulder, but today Donald Trump is
warming up once again to the idea of a historic summit with Kim Jong-un.
The American president is now leaving the possibility open after he abruptly canceled talks scheduled for June 12th, accusing Pyongyang, of
quote, "open hostility." North Korea responded with a perhaps surprising conciliatory statement, saying it is ready to meet Mr. Trump at any time.
He welcomed that gesture as warm and productive and acknowledged to reporters that, quote, "Everybody plays games."
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: We're going to see what happens. We're talking to them now. It was a very nice statement
that they put out. We'll see what happens. We'll see what happens. It could even be the 12th. We are talking to them now. They very much want
to do it. We'd like to do it. We're going to see what happens.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: Mr. Trump has made it a top foreign policy priority to convince North Korea to fully denuclearize. Unclear if North Korea would be up for
that. It doesn't sound like it from their statements in the past.
The entire region, of course, is concerned. In fact, Japan's ambassador to the U.K. says the summit itself is not that important as long as the goal
of denuclearization is achieved.
Koji Tsurouka joins me now in the studio. Thank you, Ambassador, for being with us. Do you think the summit is going to happen in the end on June
12th? We are getting whiplash everyday --
KOJI TSUROUKA, JAPANESE AMBASSADOR TO THE U.K.: I couldn't say, you know, it was just, we just heard the president saying, well, we'll just have to
see what happens.
GORANI: Because every day it seems like we are getting a different message and a development that contradicts the one from the day before. So, it's
hard to keep up. When you are Japan and you are so directly concerned with what's going on and you look to the messages from America, do you find it
confusing sometimes?
TSUROUKA: Not necessarily. The summit itself, we were hoping, and we still have hope that if it indeed it happens, it will -- it should be able
to deliver what the world has been seeking all this time and there's been a series of U.N. Security Council resolutions that have been adopted and they
are all aiming at having a complete verifiable, irreversible denuclearization of North Korea.
So, if this target and goal can be brought close by having a meeting, of course, I am sure that the meeting will be very productive.
GORANI: Japan wants to continue pressure on North Korea to change its policies, to ultimately denuclearize. What does that exactly mean? What
is Japan's role here in this process?
TSUROUKA: We are, of course, neighbors to both North and South Korea, but we have had many contacts in the past, bilaterally with the North Koreans,
which include the issue of abduction of the Japanese nationals.
Five have returned with Prime Minister Kouzumi (ph) visited Pyongyang, but we still have many more remaining unaccounted. And this is another issue
that we are continuing to try to resolve.
[15:15:05] And we have said that we will be happy to engage with the North Koreans provided that there will be complete denuclearization of North
Korea, as well as all of the abolishing ballistic missiles of all range.
GORANI: But it doesn't sound like Kim Jong-un is up for that. I mean, when the idea was floated of the Libya model by John Bolton, the national
security adviser, which, of course, in 2003-2004 was a model that led to Libya surrendering basically all of its nuclear capability.
That clearly angered North Korea. They don't see denuclearization in the same light as America does or as you are describing. It doesn't sound like
everyone is on the same page.
TSUROUKA: That is not necessarily very surprising. For example, you're not interviewing a North Korean.
GORANI: I know but what you're saying is your end goal is not the end goal of the North Koreans. So where do you -- at some point a compromise needs
to be made or there is no deal.
TSUROUKA: Well, you have to ask the North Koreans what their end goal is. Yes, I think you're quite right, Hala, they do not say in public that they
are ready to accept the terms that the U.N. Security Council has adopted unanimously.
And the same time, they said they are willing to meet with President Trump and President Trump responded positively. And this is the start of this
talk about summit and then there have been two visits by the secretary of state, first as the director of CIA, then after being confirmed as the
secretary of state, Mr. Pompeo has been to Pyongyang twice. And this is no light matter.
GORANI: Yes. Are you -- of course, some of these missiles tests -- some of these missiles actually landed very close to Japan, just a few dozen
miles off your coast. I mean, do you feel like there is an existential threat against your country by North Korea?
TSUROUKA: We absolutely believe that this is a real threat to our security, and not just for Japan, but for the region and for the whole
world at last, and this is why the U.N. is taking these very strong sanctions until such time as they will be totally denuclearized and then
able to cooperate in peace.
GORANI: Would anything less than total denuclearization satisfy you?
TSUROUKA: We are not prepared to accept North Korean being recognized as a nuclear weapons state.
GORANI: But a nuclear program that is not weaponized? I mean, things like that or is it total denuclearization? In which case, the reason I ask is
if that's the end goal, it seems like it would be a very long and potentially fruitless process as the North Koreans don't seem to be willing
to go that far.
TSUROUKA: Which we have been engaged for the last 20 years and we've been trying to help them reach that goal, but so far, we haven't been
successful. But that doesn't mean we have no goal at all. And that's why this summit may, if happens, be a productive summit.
GORANI: And lastly, do you think -- because we're talking about 20 years, and we've been covering it for 20 years, these talks and this process.
There were the six-party talks that didn't really achieve the desired result. Do you think that the U.S. -- the current U.S. President Donald
Trump is effective in his strategy with North Korea?
TSUROUKA: I'm sure that Mr. Trump, the president, has made his views very clear. There's been numerous meetings with the Japanese prime minister,
Shinzo Abe, bilaterally, and they've discussed these issue in great depths. So, I think Mr. Trump is more aware of the North Korean issue than any
other president that preceded him.
GORANI: That's interesting. So, you think more so than Barack Obama? That he's more are, more on top of what needs to be done?
TSUROUKA: I think (inaudible) wouldn't have missed any point in many of the meetings that they had bilaterally among the two of them. And there's
been a number of them starting with his visit to the Trump Tower in New York. This is the issue that my prime minister and my people are very
concerned about.
GORANI: Ambassador Koji Tsurouka, thank you very much for joining us in this studio. We appreciate it.
Mr. Trump called off the summit just as North Korea was making a dramatic goodwill gesture and invited journalists, including CNN's Will Ripley to
watch what it calls the destruction of a nuclear test site. Will filed this report on his extraordinary journey inside North Korea, a trip, as
always, that was tightly controlled. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
WILL RIPLEY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm here at North Korea's nuclear test site at Pyunggeri, a place foreign journalists have never been
allowed before. We are here, the North Korean government says to witness the destruction of the site. They say it will never be able to be used
again.
(voice-over): With each powerful explosion, the earth shakes. We travel around 15 hours to get here. First, by bus, through the coastal city of
Wonsan. Compartment seven here we are. Then, some 12 hours by train.
(on camera): It is one of those moments where you blink and realize I'm having dinner on a train going through North Korea.
(voice-over): A luxury ride, by North Korean standards.
(on camera): They just came through and they closed all of the blinds and told us that for the entire train ride, we can't film anything out the
windows.
(voice-over): We pulled into Pyunggeri Station. Then begin the nearly two-hour drive to the test site. Once again, no filming along the way.
(on camera): We passed through a number of what look like small farming villages. There was no sign of life. Completely empty except for the
handful of soldiers at the guard posts along the way.
(voice-over): We get a briefing from the deputy director of North Korea's Nuclear Weapons Institute. He won't tell us his name. Then we are allowed
to inspect the tunnels. North Korea says they could have easily conducted more nuclear tests here. They say two tunnels have never been used.
(on camera): So, they say by rigging with explosives and blowing it up, that is a meaningful step towards denuclearization.
(voice-over): No nuclear weapons experts in our small group, only journalists.
(on camera): It's actually quite beautiful here. The North Koreans say that the eco system hasn't been damaged by all these nuclear tests for more
than decade. They say no radiation has seeped out. Journalists aren't allowed to carry radiation detectors ourselves. They were taken away at
the airport, so we have to take their word for it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): The dismantling of the nuclear test grounds conducted with high level of transparency has clearly attested
once again to the proactive and peace-loving efforts of the government of the DPRK.
RIPLEY: You really do get the sense that you are witnessing history here, which is why we are documenting every single building on this site because
by the end of the day, it will all be gone.
(voice-over): We hiked to an observation post, built just for us and watch Pyunggeri go up in smoke. Will Ripley, CNN, Pyunggeri Nuclear Test Site,
North Korea.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: Incredible access. A remarkable report there from deep inside North Korea on CNN.
Still to come, two men who are on the run after setting off an explosive device in Canada, still not found. We have details next.
And DGPR, the four letters spamming your inbox. The E.U.'s new privacy laws come into play today. How are you impacted by them, next?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:25:23]
GORANI: There is still an active manhunt underway in Canada, after an explosion injured 15 people in a restaurant in Ontario, and it was brazen.
Two suspects walked into an Indian restaurant at around 10:30 last night and they detonated an improvised device before fleeing in a car.
Two parties were happening in the restaurant at the time of the explosion. There they are, by the way. This is security footage of the two men.
Local police say there's no indication that this is a hate crime, but they haven't ruled anything out, very strange, though. Two men walked in and
just throw explosives in an Indian restaurant. No idea why, here they are at this point.
Polls are open still as Irish voters decide whether to ease some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe. The current Constitution in the mostly
Catholic country prohibits abortion in almost all cases.
If the yes campaign wins, parliament is expected to pass legislation allowing abortions in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. A no vote keeps
current restrictions in place. And there are reporting restrictions, so this is as far as we can go in terms of the story, but results will be
known tomorrow. And polls close in about an hour and a half.
They are the e-mails that have been driving you, me, and everyone in between crazy as the European Union's general data protection regulation
rolls out across the continent, some of the world's biggest companies could already be breaking the rules.
Those are the e-mails that asking you to review companies privacy policies that have been landing in your inbox for the last few days. Samuel Burke
has our story.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SAMUEL BURKE, CNN MONEY TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Austrian lawyer, Max Schrems (ph) has been fighting Facebook in court over data privacy for
nearly a decade. And today he wasted little time, his NGO suing Facebook for allegedly violating the E.U.'s new data protection law called GDPR the
day it came into force.
MAX SCHREMS, LAWYER: They were looking for big companies that really willfully violate the law that kind of try to ignore it and get away with
it.
BURKE: Schrem's who helped write the regulation says he is taking legal action because big tech isn't complying with the law.
SCHREMS: This idea, if we don't want this, we think it's stupid, so we don't want to comply with it and there's obvious business interests. There
are certain things you simply can do with data anymore that give a profit.
BURKE: The new law was supposed to stop companies from hoovering up your sensitive data like political opinions, religious beliefs, ethnicity, and
sexuality for advertising purposes without your consent. According to legal experts CNN spoke with, Facebook is skirting this requirement.
MICHAEL VOOLE, TECHNOLOGY POLICY EXPERT, UCL: On your Facebook profile, you can put in things like sexuality, religion, or political beliefs. And
if you put that on you don't have any choice but for Facebook to use it to personalize contents, (inaudible) advertising and so on. There is an
accept button. There's not an "I don't accept" button. Exactly, you got it.
BURKE: The deal says even if you completely remove sensitive traits from your profile, Facebook can still glean information such as your sexual
orientation by analyzing your behavior on the platform and on other websites, too.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Facebook can infer things from the great amount of data has about you across the web and also across your mobile devices and apps
that also sent over to Facebook.
BURKE (on camera): As you understand the law, does it prevent Facebook from making these inferences that they make about us?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, that law forbids Facebook from making these inferences without explicit consent.
BURKE: Failure to comply could be costly. For a big company like Facebook, European data regulators can impose a fine of up to 4 percent of
its global annual revenue. Based on 2017 figures, that means Facebook could face a penalty topping $1.6 billion each time it runs afoul of the
new law.
(voice-over): In a statement to CNN, Facebook's chief privacy officer says the company has, quote, "introduced better tools for people to access,
download, and delete their information.
The company also says it's building a new tool that will allow users to stop Facebook from storing information about them it collects from other
websites and apps.
MARK ZUCKERBERG, CEO, FACEBOOK: We do expect to be fully compliant on May 25th.
BURKE: Lawyer, Max Schrems believes the new rules are tough enough to prevent the kind of data scraping that companies like Cambridge Analytica
have engaged in.
SCHREMS: If we enforce it properly, we can get a balance in this in the end, you as a customer have the possibility of using Facebook without
worrying 24/7 about your data.
BURKE: However, the courts come down on the tech giants, Europe's new data regulations are already redrawing the line between profit and privacy.
Samuel Burke, CNN, London.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[15:30:15] GORANI: While other companies are not playing by EU rules. At least not yet. Some media sites, for instance, and some publishing groups
are blocking EU access, meaning that the continent no longer has access to news pages like the LA Times. That's what you get when you're in the EU
and you try to access the Los Angeles Times. The Chicago Tribune or the New York Daily News. The publishers say they're looking for a way to open
up once again to Europeans, basically complying to European requirements under GDPR.
Still to come tonight, it was on, now it was off, now it's up in the air. We'll look at the efforts to get the U.S./North Korea summit back on track.
And then, not exactly what North Korea wants to see. The U.S. and South Korea are flexing their military might, conducting drills right in
Pyongyang's backyard. We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GORANI: One thing we know for certain today about the U.S.-North Korean summit is a definite maybe. Both Washington and Pyongyang are keeping
hopes alive that the historic meeting between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un may happen after all. Yesterday, the U.S. president abruptly called of the
talks scheduled for June 12th in Singapore, accusing North Korea of open hostility. The U.S. and South Korea just conducted annual military drills
that never failed to anger the North. CNN's Paula Hancocks got exclusive access to film the exercises and filed this report from an airbase in South
Korea.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Loading missiles onto an F-16 fighter jet, ready for a mission against an imaginary threat and imaginary enemy.
HANCOCKS: Yes, this is Max Thunder, an annual joint air force drill between the U.S. and South Korea, the same military drill that North Korea
slammed 10 days ago as the turning point in warming relations the South and the U.S.
CNN was able to film the exercise exclusively, which had been embargoed until the drill ended Friday.
COL. DAVID SHOEMAKER, COMMANDER, 8TH FIGHTER WING: While the situation in the background has changed over the years as we've flown Max Thunder. The
exercise itself is still there for the same reason, and that is what tactical level and operability learning to fight together as alliance.
HANCOCKS: Pyongyang cancel high level talks with South Korea because of this drill, calling it, quote, "An intentional military provocation." The
first of many recent bumps in the road to a historic summit between the U.S. and North Korean leaders that U.S. President Donald Trump has just
canceled. But the mood is still far less tense than this time last year.
[15:35:14] The situation on the Korean peninsula right now really could not be more different to how it was last year when this Max Thunder drills were
last held.
But for those involve in these military exercises, the pilots, the U.S. Air Force, they say that the politics is irrelevant. The most important thing
despite that is to make sure that they are trained and ready for anything.
Pyongyang's anger at these drills took Seoul and Washington by surprise. A South Korean delegation who met with Kim Jong-un said that Kim said he
understood why joint drills had to take place.
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said in Washington this week he believe relations would be back on track once Max Thunder was over according to
aides. But a lot has changed since then. It's unclear if this drill was really the reason Pyongyang cooled its enthusiasm for talks with Mr. Trump
or a convenient excuse.
But what is clear is that these types of drills infuriate Pyongyang, year- in, year-out.
Paula Hancocks, CNN, the Kunsan Air Base, South Korea.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
GORANI: Donald Trump has built an entire reputation on deal-making. He calls himself the ultimate negotiator, who can get things done when no one
else can. Could his unorthodox style actually pay off in the diplomatic effort with North Korea? Let's bring in CNN's global affairs
correspondent, Elise Labott, and CNN global affairs analyst, Joseph Yun.
Joseph Yun, let me start with you. I mean, this is whiplash diplomacy. One day it's on, the next day is off, the third day it's maybe. Is this a
strategy or is this a lack of strategy? How do you read this kind of up and down trajectory?
JOSEPH YUN, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, I would lean towards the latter, myself. I think it's been clear from the beginning that really
there wasn't enough contact. What we are seeing is two narratives colliding. On the one hand, there is really the personal investment of
President Trump, as well as, I would say Kim Jong-un to make history. On the other hand, you know, it is very clear that the positions of Washington
and Pyongyang are so far apart that those under them, those working for them are having a hard time seeing whether this summit could succeed so
they are concluding that no summit is better than bad summit, but there are -- there is the personal ambition of President Trump to make history, to
make something in a major league foreign policy area. So that's why we're seeing the rollercoaster ride.
GORANI: And, Elise, is it revivable, the summit, for June 12th in Singapore?
ELISE LABOTT, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: I mean, look, I don't think any U.S. officials that we've spoken to, myself or my colleagues at
CNN, the only person that thinks that having it on June 12th, which is just weeks away, is a good idea, except President Trump.
I mean, there are some officials that think that it was a good idea for President Trump to delay it because either, a, he wasn't going to get much
out of this summit or, b, he has a little bit more of kind of an upper hand now. But if the reasons for him pulling out where the fact that he doesn't
have much clarity on what Kim Jong-un is willing to put on the table, I think he still doesn't have that kind of clarity.
There haven't been -- we tend to forget, Hala, that these usually negotiators kind of do this from the bottom up and negotiate or
communicate. There's been no draft floating around. I still think they're kind of both flying blind as to what the other is really -- what the bottom
line is. So I think there is a desire to have a summit at some point. You know, President Trump certainly wants to keep hope alive that it'll be June
12th. But I think by anyone's standards, having it on June 12th doesn't set the president up for the kind of success that he says he wants.
GORANI: Joseph Yun, you've worked on the North Korea question in government, and Elise is describing usually the diplomatic initiatives,
which you're so familiar with and for those of us who have covered these stories as well. You'll usually have advanced teams, you'll have mid-level
talks, they'll try to iron out some sort of announcement before the summit even takes place, and then work toward that. It appears there's been none
of that in this particular case. How do you think that impacts things going forward?
YUN: I think that's a really big negative. That there has been no prep work done for this summit, at least prep work on substantive level. We've
seen two trips by Secretary Pompeo, one when he was director of CIA, and then one later. And those, I think allowed for some exchange, but really,
no clarity on really serious issues like how long should denuclearization take? What is the definition of denuclearization?
[15:40:09] GORANI: And that's important. That's the most important thing. I just spoke to the Japanese ambassador to the U.K., and I asked him that
very question, Elise and Joseph. When you ask for total denuclearization of North Korea and it really, we know from what the North Koreans have said
that this not something that they would consider, going as far as total denuclearization -- having define the end goal yet, we -- get there, Elise.
LABOTT: And also, you know, what would - how long - As Joe said, how long would it take, do the North Koreans have to do it all in -- over a period
of time before they get any kind of benefits to the so-called agreement? Or is it going to be an action for action as the North Koreans have wanted
some for so many years, they want to take like little small steps like the lowest common denominator and then get all these frontloading, all of these
economic and security benefits and what U.S. officials say is -- and you heard Secretary Pompeo said the other day, no. It's not going to be over
an extended period of time where North Korea can get the benefits without having to do kind of like Iran did and the deal that President Trump said
was a bad deal and that he pulled out.
Unfortunately, President Trump seems to be setting him up, at least in word himself up, at least by what he says for the same kind of deal then he
pulled out with Iran by saying, oh, you know, I'd like them in one -- at one go, but maybe it'll have to be overtime. So I don't even think the
U.S. is really clear about what kind of agreement they want to have with the North Koreans and what that kind of denuclearization looks like - like
looks like for them. We all kind of float the word around denuclearization but it's kind of one of those buzzwords that could mean so many things to
so many different countries.
GORANI: And Donald Trump had this to say, by the way, about America's standing in the world with regards to its foreign policy. Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You are now leaders in the most powerful and righteous force on the face of the planet, the United
States military. And we are respected again, I can tell you. We are respected again.
And our country has regained the respect that we used to have long ago, abroad, America is back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GORANI: Joseph Yun, this is a light motif of his. I wonder abroad and internationally, what Donald Trump is saying, how has received outside of
the United States?
YUN: Well, there is some element of threat, you know. And I think we cannot take that lightly. I mean, you know, President Trump is absolutely
right. The arsenal, the military projection that we have in the United States is far greater than anyone else. So there is no doubt when North
Koreans hear it or the Chinese hear it, there is an edge to it that, you know, that we cannot dismiss so easily.
LABOTT: But if I could, Hala, I think that's true. But at the same time, I think the U.S. military has always been respected. The United States has
always been respected as the greatest force in the world. I think the new dynamic is the unpredictability of President Trump. And while, you know,
maybe there was a loss of respect for some of the kind of inaction or dithering that one might say was under President Obama. Now, this is kind
of unpredictability that maybe countries aren't respecting but they're certainly taking a lot more notice and having to pay a lot closer attention
because otherwise, as you said it'll be whiplash for them.
GORANI: Thanks, Elise Labott and Joseph Yun and thanks so much to both of you for joining us this evening.
Still to come tonight, Amazon's Alexa is listening in. It's recording what you're saying and then it sends the recording to a co-worker. This is not
a bad dream. It happens. And Amazon is feeling the heat for it.
And who calls? Not a prime minister. The prank call that fooled this man, the U.K. foreign secretary. We'll play some of it for you, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:45:33] GORANI: In London, the U.K. foreign office is not amused after two Russian pranksters duped the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson. And
then was pretending to be the new Armenian prime minister. And he managed to have an 18-minute conversation with Johnson. The call covered relations
with Russia, the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter in the U.K. and how to deal with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin. The chat
ended when one of the pranksters advised Johnson to try a new kind of poison. They've since released the recording. Listen to some of it.
BORIS JOHNSON, U.K. FOREIGN SECRETARY (via telephone): It would be great to welcome you to the U.K. Whatever that would be convenient for you
though. I imagine you have a lot on your plate at the moment.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. Thank you for your invitation and in one month I will shape new government. As you know, I have a meeting with President
Putin in Sochi next week.
JOHNSON: Next week, I know it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I need to be prepared. I hope he will not poison me with Novichok.
JOHNSON: Well it's very important, I think, prime minister, that we don't have a new Cold War.
GORANI: It was -- I hope it will not poison me with Novichok is what the prankster was saying and you could feel that was already awkward tension
there from the -- from Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, not necessarily knowing how to respond there to that. It was a prankster. And
the foreign secretary and the foreign office is not happy about that prank call. It lasted 18 minutes. Imagine that.
Amazon is facing questions over its voice-assisted Alexa which powers its Echo speakers after a woman in Portland says that her speaker recorded a
conversation with her husband, then sent to the audio file to a contact. And I don't know how dangerous that is. Anna Stewart has details.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANNA STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's a cautionary tale of technology telling too much. A woman in Oregon says Amazon's Alexa recorded and then
e-mails a random person with a private conversation that took place in her house.
Danielle, Amazon Alexa User: I felt invaded, like total privacy invasion, like immediately I'm like, I'll never plug in that device again. I can't
trust it.
STEWART: Amazon Echo owner Danielle says she was chatting with her husband about hardwood floors when the device sent an audio file to a man who works
for her husband. She only found out about the recording when she received an alarming phone call.
DANIELLE: The person on the other line said, unplug your Alexa devices right now. We go run and unplugged them all and he proceeded to tell us
that he had audio files recordings from what was going on in our house.
STEWART: Amazon told CNN affiliate Kiro 7, the device misinterpreted commands like send message and the contacts name as part of the background
conversation, and caught it in extremely rare occurrence. It's unknown if the couple didn't hear Alexa's voice replies or see the speaker light out
when it was activated or if the device response at all. Either way, it's a case of mixed signals that has a lot of consumers thinking twice about just
who or what they bring into the house.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
[15:50:57] GORANI: So Seth Fiegerman has been following this from New York. So I don't have an Alexa. Exactly, how did this happen? The
machine, the speaker misunderstood from the couple who command to sell this -- sorry. Send this audio file?
SETH FIEGERMAN, CNN SENIOR TECH REPORTER: Well, the way Alexa works generally is it picks up voice cues in order to provide you with the
information that you want. In this case, Amazon is saying that it overheard parts of a conversation and mishear words like Alexa to turn it
on, send a message to start cueing up a message. And even the name of a contact to send that message to. It's a reminder that these products are
always listening to you. But the intention after providing you a certain convenience and yet, they're not perfect and might mishear things and
ultimately cause you a great inconvenience.
GORANI: But it seems like telling Alexa to turn itself on to then, you know, produce a clip of a conversation and send it to a contacts, so that
should be a very complex set of command. The fact that all of these commands were misunderstood in a single operation by the speaker, I don't
understand how that can happen.
FIEGERMAN: I think a lot of people are puzzling over themselves right now. I do think it's fair to say it's a fluke. We've got to hear of another
example of that in the years since this product has been introduced. Amazon calls is an extremely unlikely occurrence. But it does raise
concerns that these things can't perfectly hear what you're saying. You forget that they're there. They blend into the background and ultimately
you might accidentally trigger and inconvenient and scary occurrence.
GORANI: Well, they're lucky that it was only a conversation about hardwood floors right?
FIEGERMAN: Agreed.
GORANI: Not something else. Seth, thanks very much for joining us. Seth Fiegerman.
More to come including rivers of fire beneath the ocean in Hawaii as the eruptions continue. We are live in Hawaii, next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GORANI: Well, the Kilauea volcano in Hawaii has continued to spew lava. You can see here the active fissures bubbling up at the surface of the big
island. Now, streams of lava are entering the Pacific Ocean near a power plant. So it could be an issue. But so far though thankfully that plant
is not endangered. Scott McLean who is right next to some of that lava flow joins me now live.
What's going on where you are, Scott?
SCOTT MCLEAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Hala. So people on this section of the big island, they seemed to be playing this volcanic game of Whac-A-
Mole, just when you think that things are dying down in one area, they suddenly spring up. And another case and point this giant fissure that you
see behind me, it's the one that we've been watching for a couple of days now and it has shrunk substantially. That said, there is another one that
sprung to seemingly take its place and it is pumping lava into a place that really does not needed. A neighborhood called Leilani Estates, a
subdivision not far from here that has been terrorized by lava since Kilauea first woke up. And there are also fears that we are just getting
actually in the last couple of hours, an official warnings from authorities that another lava flow could cross a major highway in this area which would
cut off our routes, the place where I'm standing right now. We'd have to find an alternate route. It also means that people in that area, on the
North side of that highway are starting to pack up and it is proving just how unpredictable Kilauea can be.
[15:55:01] GORANI: And so, what is -- I mean, it appears as though this volcano is not lighting up that this is going to be a reality for that part
of Hawaii for the foreseeable future.
MCLEAN: It seems that way. The experts will tell you that they don't know or at least they don't seem to know exactly at this point how long this
will last. They can use sort of other eruptions in the past as a historical, you know, marker. But at the end of the day, this volcano is
going to erupt for as long as it does and they can't exactly pin down when this will be over, when people will be able to go home.
GORANI: And what about residents? I can only imagine that at this point, they must be quite fed up.
MCLEAN: Yes. I think -- you talked to a lot of people who may be thought that they were OK a couple of weeks ago, thought that things were going to
be just fine and now all of a sudden, they are sort of packing up as a precaution, especially now with this word that things have crossed -- or
maybe crossing the highway.
Quickly, Hala, I also spoke to a gentleman who had two homes, that he has fully expected would get swallowed up by the lava, but a man Darryl Clinton
actually protected them. He is the guy who got hit by a lava bomb. I caught up with the homeowner of those homes that he was protecting
yesterday. Here's what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STEVE HILL, HAWAII RESIDENT: We approached this, I think the way you're supposed to. We spoke to out Hawaiian friends in Kalapana. And, you know,
you clean house for them. You prepare and then you -- you're not in charge. And I think that Darryl and Lisa, Mark no doubt about us and we
left with a humble hope that we would be able to be back and I think nature's wanted to help, wanted to facilitate in any way that they could,
you know. It's hard when your friend gets hurt.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MCLEAN: So, Hala, just to hammer home how extraordinary this is, the man you heard there, he fully expected that when he left, he took all of his
furniture with them. He thought that his two homes on that property would be gone. The only reason that they are there today is because of that man
named Darryl Clinton, the only person, so far, to have been injured by Kilauea.
GORANI: incredible. Scott McLean, thanks very much for joining us, live from Hawaii.
Check out Facebook page, facebook.com/halagoranicnn for more. I'm Hala Gorani. Thanks for watching tonight. If it's your weekend, have a great
weekend. If not, have a great Saturday and Sunday. And do stay with CNN, "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is coming up next after a quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
