Return to Transcripts main page
What We Know with Max Foster
Sources: U.K. Halts Some Intel Sharing With U.S. Over Boat Strikes; House Vote To Reopen U.S. Government Expected Wednesday; U.S. Air Traffic Cuts Expected To Increase Today; At Least 12 Killed In Blast Outside Court In Islamabad; BBC Facing Crisis After Its Two Most Senior Staff Resign; Lawmaker: Maxwell Getting Special Treatment In Prison; More U.S. Families Living Paycheck To Paycheck. Aired 3-4p ET
Aired November 11, 2025 - 15:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[15:00:24]
MAX FOSTER, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: A dramatic break between London and Washington.
This is WHAT WE KNOW.
The U.K. is halting some intel sharing with the U.S. over attacks on alleged drug boats. The strikes have killed more than 70 people in recent
months. Trump officials insist their actions are illegal, but sources tell CNN British officials believe these actions violate international law. And
it's not just Britain, sources say. Canada doesn't want its intelligence used for these deadly attacks, either.
Natasha Bertrand broke this story. She joins us now live from Brussels in Belgium.
And you know, even if it's just a small break. This is a major rift or could potentially be between these two countries' closest allies,
effectively.
NATASHA BERTRAND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Max, I think that the U.K. is really trying to send a very strong message to the U.S. as
well. The sources that we spoke to really emphasized that this is a significant and fundamental moral and legal difference that the U.K. is
having with the U.S. right now. Effectively, the U.K. used to have no problem providing this kind of intelligence with the U.S. because
previously the U.S. would simply use that intelligence to help locate and interdict these drug vessels and arrest everyone on board. The U.K. was
fine with that because they have a vested interest, of course, in stopping the flow of drugs in this region. They control territories in the
Caribbean, but when the U.S. started actually blowing up these boats, that's when the U.K. took a step back and determined that this is not in
line with international law. And they view these strikes as fundamentally illegal.
So, you really start to see kind of a growing, skepticism not only among international allies. As you mentioned, Canada also does not want its
intelligence being used for these lethal military strikes, but also internally in the pentagon. Weve seen growing dissent within the Pentagon
from military lawyers who have told CNN repeatedly that they do not believe these strikes are legal, either. And so when you see one of the U.S.'s
closest allies, the U.S.'s closest ally, some would say, and with an intelligence sharing partnership, that is so deep and goes back so long,
pulling back in this way, it really starts to raise additional questions about how alone the U.S. actually is in this military campaign.
Look, this is not going to deter the U.S. from striking these vessels. They're going to continue. They have their own intelligence. They've been -
- they have their resources from the CIA, from the NSA, National Security Agency, who are collecting intelligence every day to try to link these
vessels to narco traffickers. But the problem is, of course, the U.S. is on shakier legal ground, especially in the international community, which
views these drug traffickers fundamentally as civilians with due process rights. The U.S. argues, no, we're at war with them. They're enemy
combatants.
But increasingly, you know, legal experts as well as international allies, they're extremely skeptical of that argument.
FOSTER: What are your U.S. sources saying? Because the Trump administration, of course, does value loyalty very highly. And they may
take this personally away from all of the legalities.
BERTRAND: Yeah, this is obviously not the best moment in U.S.-U.K. relations, especially given the BBC spat that's going on with President
Trump right now. Keir Starmer obviously has tried to foster a very close working relationship with President Trump. So, you know, this is something
that the U.S. is bound to look at and treat as potentially a disloyal act.
But at the same time, they are very much singularly focused on going after these cartels. And they do not believe that they even need their partners
and allies to help them do this. Our understanding is that they are going full steam ahead on this. They are not necessarily angry at the British,
but they are also determined to make their argument that they view this as fundamentally legal and that the president is authorized to act in self-
defense of the nation and carry out these strikes on these drug traffickers.
FOSTER: Okay, Natasha, great reporting. Thank you for bringing us that.
The U.S. House could vote as soon as Wednesday on a bill to end a government shutdown that's dragged on for more than six weeks now. And if
it passes, President Donald Trump has indicated hell sign it after a small group of Senate Democrats broke ranks and voted for the proposal, many in
the party are directing their anger at Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. The bill doesn't include the extension of health care subsidies,
which was at the top of the Democrats wish list.
While defending Schumer, the House minority leader admits it's unfortunate that his colleagues in the Senate made a deal.
[15:05:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. HAKEEM JEFFRIES (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: Listen, it's unfortunate that you had eight or so Democrats, seven Democrats who made the decision to
vote in a different way than the overwhelming majority of the Senate Democratic caucus. And what you'll see from the overwhelming majority of
House Democrats when the bill comes over to us. But they're going to have to explain themselves. This fight continues. And over the last several
weeks, we have successfully elevated this health care issue such that the American people are demanding action.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Straight out to Capitol Hill, CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju.
I mean, the question that normal regular Americans are asking is, will this get through the house so they can get paid again? I mean, what does this
actually mean? What will happen in the vote on Wednesday?
MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, we do expect it at the moment to get through the House, although it is expected to be a
squeaker and this is a unruly House GOP majority, that the speaker has had a difficult time controlling during his tenure in a narrow House majority
at that, he can only afford to lose two Republican votes on any party line vote, and there are still some still uncertain whether all Republicans will
fall in line.
We do expect at least one Republican to vote no, and then will any Democrats break ranks to support this bill as well? Perhaps there could be
a couple, which is why there is some confidence that at the end of the day, this will pass. But pass very narrowly.
Now, the House Democrats are planning to fight this very hard because it does not include an extension of Affordable Care Act subsidies that are
expiring at years end. Those subsidies help Americans pay for their health insurance. It affects about roughly 20 million people, but since they are
expiring at years end, people are feeling their premiums increased now during an open enrollment period here in the United States, Democrats have
made this central to the government shutdown fight, so it must be tied to a government funding bill.
But at the end of the day, the deal that was cut in the United States Senate left that issue to the side. They were going to deal with this
separately as a separate bill in December, but there's no guarantee that that bill will pass the senate and there's no commitment by the speaker of
the House to put any such bill on the floor of the House, which is why there's so much anger in the Democratic ranks.
And I caught up with several of those Democrats in the senate who opposed this bill in the aftermath of yesterday's vote. And they made clear their
displeasure.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. ANDY KIM (D-NJ): Well, look what just happened in the Senate chamber was an absolute disgrace. I just -- I can't stress it enough. I'm just so
pissed off and just what's going to happen to so many people.
RAJU: Is a shutdown worth it?
KIM: Yeah. I think so. I hate it, but yeah, it was worth it. Definitely. We got people to pay attention to the fact that this is a traumatic in many
cases, life or death situation for people all over this country.
RAJU: Was a shutdown worth it?
SEN. JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D-CO): I think it was because I think the perception we made it clear that this not just the health care issue, but
the whole issue. I think it was remarkable when the president tried to use SNAP as the punishment to force us to capitulate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RAJU: And ultimately it was passed by the narrowest of margins in the United States Senate. It passed 60 to 40, and he requires 60 votes to
overcome any attempt to filibuster legislation, essentially block legislation. So that was the bare minimum of votes they needed an eight
Democrats joined with 52 Republicans to vote for this plan.
A lot of the ire is being directed by Democrats at those eight Democratic senators who said, look, at the end of the day, this was the best deal we
could get. They did not expect Donald Trump to negotiate a health care deal with them. Trump had been making clear he did not support an extension of
those health care subsidies. And they said there's so much pain. The American public was feeling from this longest government shutdown in
American history, now 42 days and counting, that it was time to come to an end.
Which means that if, if and when this bill passes on Wednesday, it goes to the president's desk. Afterwards, he will sign that into law. Soon
thereafter, the federal workers, hundreds of thousands of whom who have been furloughed and are not receiving paychecks, can go back to work, start
to get paychecks, federal food aid can -- begin to flow. And that travel chaos we've seen throughout the United States will subside eventually. And
then will essentially put off, put off until January 30th, Max, because that's the next deadline to fund the government.
FOSTER: Well, that'll be a relief, won't it?
I just wondering what your thoughts are, Manu, on the Democrats and the fallout for the Democrats, because for a while they seemed very united. Now
they seem very divided again at a time when obviously the U.S. needs a very strong opposition.
RAJU: Yeah. Look, the big question is right now about Chuck Schumer. He's the Senate Democratic leader. He's the one who actually opposed this bill
in the United States Senate. But a lot of Democrats who are frustrated with him say he should have done more to stop these Democratic defectors from
breaking ranks and voting yes.
[15:10:00]
And he's faced some criticism. Even back in March, he took a different position. Back then. He actually voted to fund the federal government,
initially said he was going to fight it, use his leverage in the Senate to fight it. They do have leverage because it does require 60 votes to advance
any legislation in the 53-47 Senate. So Democratic votes are essential.
Back then, he voted for the funding the government in March that caused so much backlash for him. Among the left flank of his party. This time, he
sided with his left flank and he is still getting criticism. It all points to the leadership vacuum that a lot of Democrats feel they have at this key
moment, where they're trying to figure out how to fight back against Trump but haven't quite figured out a strategy on how to do that.
FOSTER: Manu Raju, thank you so much. It'll be an interesting day tomorrow.
Now, while the shutdown deal may be progressing, flight cancellations and delays keep ticking up will only get worse as well until the bill gets
signed into law. The Trump administration is reducing air traffic by 6 percent today. That figure will grow to 10 percent if an agreement isn't
finalized by Friday. Experts say it could take months for air traffic to fully recover from the impact of the shutdown, but the U.S. transportation
secretary says regular flight schedules could resume before the Thanksgiving holiday if a deal is struck soon.
The person who actually know these answers is CNN aviation correspondent Pete Muntean, who's with us from Reagan National Airport near Washington.
So, what does it mean? If there's a deal, how long will it take for things to get back to normal, Pete?
PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: You know, it could take years or potentially even decades before we air traffic control at short staffing
again. In the short term, there's some big questions here about whether or not the damage to morale has already been done for air traffic controllers.
Here's the good news right now. When we saw about 40 facilities nationwide yesterday with short air traffic control staffing, which caused the delays
and cancellations to cascade today, that number is way, way lower. We've only seen about three facilities with short staffing nationwide today,
including the tower here at Reagan National Airport, according to the Federal Aviation Administration. And that has caused the flight
cancellations that we have seen in huge numbers to subside somewhat. The trend line is going down.
Sunday, 2,900 flight cancellations nationwide. That was the single worst day for flight cancellations since the start of this government shutdown 42
days ago. Went down a little bit yesterday to about 2,500 nationwide. Today, we've seen less than half that, about 1,200 delays, and they've been
pretty steady around there.
I'm watching FlightAware pretty much all day, 850 or so of those flight cancellations have been because of airlines having to preemptively cancel
flights to comply with this mandate that you spoke of from the Trump administration for airlines to essentially slash their schedules to siphon
off some of the pressure on air traffic controllers who continue to go unpaid during this government shutdown.
Today, that mandate jumped to a 6 percent cut in airline flight schedules. It started at 6:00 a.m. this morning, goes to 8 percent on Thursday, then
10 percent on Friday.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has warned he may have to boost that number up to 20 percent if things continue here. The good news is there is
light at the end of the tunnel for the government shutdown, although there seems to be a shift in rhetoric here from the transportation secretary, who
says that he will be the one to decide when airlines can go back to their full schedules, not necessarily the end of a government shutdown.
Listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN DUFFY, TRANSPORTATION SECRETARY: I think it's been effective, but we are watching this on a daily basis. Where is where is the data? Because
we're trying to manage risk in the system to make sure people fly and fly safely. We're going to start to alleviate the restrictions that we're at 6
percent now, we'll alleviate that only when the data says we should.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MUNTEAN: Only when the data says that they should, not necessarily the end of the government shutdown. That is the thing to underscore here.
Air traffic controllers continue to work without pay. They got their last zero dollar paycheck just yesterday. Their second of this government
shutdown. They will get a big lump sum when this government shutdown is officially over.
But there is a lot of question here about whether or not the damage has been done to air traffic controllers, many of whom I'm talking to are
pretty riled by this post by President Trump on Truth Social yesterday, which said that air traffic controllers must get back to work. He offered
controllers a $10,000 bonus if they showed up every day they were scheduled during this government shutdown. But he essentially invited them, if they
have not been showing up to up and quit, that is a hard pill to swallow for the Federal Aviation Administration, which is facing a shortage of 1,000 or
2,000 controllers, maybe even worse by some estimates.
So, the short-term damage may be done here. In the long term, we will see as it pans out, Max.
FOSTER: Okay, Pete, really appreciate it. Thank you.
Pakistan reeling from the worst suicide bombing in close to two decades, a faction of the militant Pakistani Taliban behind some of the deadliest
terrorist attacks in the country has claimed responsibility for an attack on the capital city of Islamabad. At least 12 people were killed in the
blast that happened in the parking lot of the city's busy judicial complex.
[15:15:01]
Pakistan's president released a statement condemning the attack near the city's high court. Pakistan has faced a surge of violence since the Afghan
Taliban swept Kabul in 2021.
The outgoing boss of Britain's BBC is trying to rally his staff as a corporation faces its biggest crisis in decades. Director general Tim Davie
says he's proud of the publicly funded organization, despite mistakes that it's made. Davie and head of news Deborah Turness both quit on Sunday amid
accusations of bias at the corporation, including how it edited a Trump speech in a documentary.
President Trump is now threatening to sue the BBC for no less than $1 billion.
Our chief media analyst, Brian Stelter, joins me now.
Brian, thanks for joining us.
I did speak to Mark Stevens yesterday, who you'll know. He's a very respected media lawyer in this country. And he actually told me there's
absolutely no case for this billion dollars, very little case at all, partly because the statute of limitations has run out.
But the question then is how the BBC responds to this letter from Trump, because there's also a question for them to answer as well.
BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA ANALYST: Yes, legal experts in the U.S. have said the same thing as Mark Stevens, that if Trump were to try to file in
the U.S., this would also be a weak case here, and that the BBC would have a strong argument in court. By the way, truth is always the best defense in
a defamation case in the U.S., and we know -- we all remember what actually happened on January 6th, despite Trump's attempts to proclaim complete and
total innocence.
And I think for Trump and his camp, that's what this is about. It's a way to notch a win against the media, and it's a way to rewrite the history of
January 6th. For the BBC, this is something much bigger, more profound, maybe -- maybe even existential in nature. Real threats to the corporation
going forward, as its license fee structure is being reviewed in the next couple of years. That charter is coming due at the end of 2027.
So, the BBC has a lot to consider as it weighs this very urgent deadline, Friday, 5:00 p.m. Eastern. That's when Trump's lawyers want to have a
response. It doesn't mean the BBC actually has to respond by then, but it does create a sense of a ticking clock for the BBC.
And I would describe it this way, Max, it's the same conundrum other major media companies have faced in recent months. Do you fight against a
president who is trying to dominate you and gain control over the media, or do you fold? Do you fight or do you fold?
"The New York Times", "Wall Street Journal", they've been fighting. Paramount and Disney at one point, Disney folded. And remember what
happened when they suspended Jimmy Kimmel. There was a huge consumer backlash, and now, Kimmel is back on the air.
You have to wonder if the BBC will go through the same kind of backlash, if it appears to capitulate or it appears to give in to Trump in some way.
FOSTER: But it's interesting because, you know, if you a lot of people within the BBC are saying there's a right wing conspiracy against the BBC
here, not just the right wing either. Other interest groups have a problem with the coverage that they've been giving various issues over the years.
And, you know, it's become an internal debate as they've tried to get a variety of views onto the board, for example, that this -- you know, the
right in particular is getting a stronger voice here.
So that's a story that you've had in America. It's now transferring here to the U.K.
STELTER: Yes, it absolutely is. Look at what President Trump did in his first months back in office. He defunded public media in the U.S.,
stripping PBS and NPR funding, and he tried to shut down voice of America. Now we see the British public service broadcaster under tremendous
pressure. And the truth is the Trump of it all. It's a hot, short term story, but it will probably fade away.
I remember when Disney bought Kimmel back on the air. There was some hooting and hollering. Trump kind of threatened to Disney again, but he
hasn't brought it up since. He moved on to his next target.
For the BBC, the broader threat is what you described this sense of an ongoing political campaign against the BBC. Yes, some inside the company
believe inside the organization, believe there's a conspiracy theory. They've been calling it a coup.
It's hard to actually dot and bring those dots to connect completely, but it is clear that there are many on the right that see this as an
opportunity to undermine the BBC. And I think that comes through in some of the right-wing press coverage this week.
FOSTER: Okay, Brian, appreciate it. Thank you.
Now, the British journalist Sami Hamdi, who's been held by U.S. immigration authorities for more than two weeks, is to be released. Hamdi was detained
by immigration officials last month as he traveled through San Francisco airport. He'll now be allowed to return to the U.K. Authorities have told
him he had overstayed his U.S. visa, but Muslim advocacy groups say his visa was revoked during his trip without cause.
Far right Israeli minister Itamar Ben-Gvir calls it the most important bill in Israel's history. Today, lawmakers advanced a measure that mandates the
death penalty for certain murders. It's aimed squarely at Palestinians, saying terrorists convicted of killing Israeli citizens will be sentenced
to death.
Jeremy Diamond has more.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Two controversial bills pushed by Israels right wing have now passed a preliminary hurdle inside Israel's
parliament, known as the Knesset.
[15:20:01]
One of these pieces of legislation concerns expanding the death penalty in Israel. The other aims to potentially shut down foreign media outlets that
are operating in Israel.
Now, on that first piece of legislation, this is one that's been pushed by Israels right wing for years now, and it would expand the death penalty to
be applied to convicted terrorists. And individuals found guilty of nationalistically motivated murder. Making clear that it is only aimed at
those with nationalist intentions aimed at harming the state of Israel, meaning it would apply only to Palestinian convicted terrorists and not
Jewish convicted terrorists in Israel.
This piece of legislation was pushed in large part by the national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has claimed that this would create a, quote,
substantial deterrence against terrorism. Interestingly, this piece of legislation was previously opposed by the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin
Netanyahu. But now, with the release of all living hostages held inside of the Gaza strip, the prime minister now supports this piece of legislation.
This bill would also amend Israels military courts law, meaning it would expand the authority of these military courts that rule over the lives of
Palestinians in the occupied west bank to allow those courts to impose the death penalty by simple majority, rather than by unanimous vote.
And this system of law has already been heavily criticized in the past by human rights groups and by the United Nations because of the fact that
while Palestinians are subject to military law in the West Bank, Israeli civilians such as those who live in settlements in the West Bank, are
subject to civilian law.
Now, this second piece of legislation, which also passed what's known as the first reading in Israels parliament, would aim to give the Israeli
government the power to shut down foreign media outlets without a court order, effectively making permanent an authority that the Israeli
government used during the war. Last year to shut down al Jazeera's ability to broadcast inside of Israel.
At the time, that was used because it was a time of war, a time of national emergency. But this piece of legislation would now aim to make that
authority permanent for the Israeli government for its own reasons, to choose to ban any foreign media outlet without relying on any court.
Reporters without borders has already condemned the proposal, calling it the, quote, first nail in the coffin of broadcast medias editorial
independence in Israel. But the latest signal, of course, of backsliding, of press freedoms in Israel.
Jeremy Diamond, CNN, Tel Aviv.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER: Coming up, custom meals delivered, the company of a service dog after hours of exercise privileges. A whistleblower is reporting special
treatment in prison for convicted sex offender linked to Jeffrey Epstein.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:26:00]
FOSTER: The top-ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee claims Ghislaine Maxwell is getting preferential treatment in prison. Jamie Raskin
says he learned the information from a whistleblower. Maxwell was convicted of being involved in a sex trafficking ring with Jeffrey Epstein.
As M.J. Lee reports now, Maxwell may be looking to get her sentence reduced, too.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
M.J. LEE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Convicted child sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell is hoping to reverse her fortunes with help from
President Donald Trump.
REPORTER: Would you consider a pardon or a commutation for Ghislaine Maxwell if --
TRUMP: It's something I haven't thought about. It's really something. It's something -- I'm allowed to do it.
LEE (voice-over): Trump, when asked, has repeatedly not ruled out the possibility of leniency for the late Jeffrey Epstein's notorious right-hand
woman. According to a whistleblower who is making new allegations, Maxwell is currently working on filing an application for a commutation.
REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): She's basically being treated like an honored guest at a Trump Hotel rather than a federal prisoner.
LEE (voice-over): Congressman Jamie Raskin, the House Judiciary Committee's top Democrat, says the whistleblower also claims that Maxwell is receiving
preferential treatment at the prison camp in Bryan, Texas where she's currently serving out her 20-year sentence.
The favorable concierge-style treatment is set to include private meetings with visitors, including snacks and refreshments for her guests, Maxwell's
guests being allowed to bring in computers during their visits, and the camp's warden personally helping to send emails on Maxwell's behalf.
Maxwell's lawyer and the Justice Department did not comment.
TODD BLANCHE, U.S. DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: Did you ever observe President Trump receive a massage?
GHISLAINE MAXWELL, CONVICTED CHILD SEX OFFENDER: Never.
LEE (voice-over): These new revelations coming less than four months after Trump's deputy attorney general and former personal lawyer Todd Blanche met
in person with Maxwell at her previous prison in Florida.
MAXWELL: I never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way. In the times that I was with him, he was a gentleman in all
respects.
LEE (voice-over): During the course of days of interviews Maxwell telling Blanche that she had never seen Trump behave inappropriately. Trump, who
was friends with Epstein decades ago, has not been accused of any wrongdoing related to Epstein.
DAVID OSCAR MARKUS, ATTORNEY FOR GHISLAINE MAXWELL: Ghislaine answered every single question asked of her over the last day and a half. Ms.
Maxwell would welcome any relief.
LEE (voice-over): Just days after Blanche's unusual July meeting with Maxwell the convicted felon was transferred out of a low security federal
prison in Tallahassee to a minimum security facility in Texas. The move drew the ire of critics -- Democrats and Epstein survivors alike.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We were horrified to learn that she had been transferred to a prison camp.
ANOUSKA DE GEORGIOU, EPSTEIN ABUSE SURVIVOR: It's one of my worst nightmares that she not only be transferred but the possibility that's very
much going around that she might be pardoned.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
FOSTER: Still to come, is this legal? Details ahead on why the Trump administration faces mounting skepticism over its attacks on suspected drug
boats.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:32:29]
FOSTER: This just in to CNN. Venezuela says it's launching a massive military mobilization in response to the build-up of U.S. warships in the
Caribbean Sea. The country's defense minister said land, air, naval and reserve forces will carry out exercise -- exercises through Wednesday in
response to the, quote, imperialist threat posed by the U.S. The Trump administration has targeted boats in the region it claims to have been used
for drug trafficking, growing skepticism this evening over the legality of that U.S. military campaign in the Pacific and the Caribbean.
In an exclusive CNN report, these concerns have prompted the U.K. to suspend some intelligence sharing with the U.S.
In recent months, these controversial strikes have killed more than 70 people, whilst the Trump administration insists their actions are legal.
Sources tell U.S. -- tell us, rather, British officials believe the attacks violate international law.
What we don't know is how serious is the break between the United States and the United Kingdom? Will it make any difference?
Joining me now is Lewis Lukens. He was the acting U.S. ambassador to the U.K. in the first year of the Trump administration.
Thank you so much for joining us.
I mean you know, there doesn't come any closer intelligence sharing partnership, does there, than the U.S. and the U.K. So, any cut off in
intel is going to have an impact, surely.
LEWIS LUKENS, FORMER ACTING U.S. AMBASSADOR TO U.K.: Well, you're right, it's an incredibly historic and deep intelligence sharing relationship.
It's gone on for almost 100 years now. And the fact that the Brits feel compelled to cut off some intelligence sharing is deeply harmful to U.S.
interests.
And I don't blame the Brits for that. I blame the Americans for that. But the fact that the U.K. has felt it necessary because of the questionable
legality of these strikes, to stop sharing intelligence is incredibly harmful. They have a deep and long intelligence network in the Caribbean
that works, has always worked very closely with the United States on anti- drug trafficking efforts, and to have that ruptured is really counterproductive for the United States.
FOSTER: As you say, they were very close relationships between U.K., the U.K. and Caribbean Islands because of the history of those two groupings of
islands.
How much difference will it actually make to the U.S. though? Cutting off what intel the U.K. does get from there?
LUKENS: Well, I mean, historically the U.K. has provided lots of, very important intelligence to the United States that has helped the United
States counter drug trafficking and other threats from the region.
[15:35:04]
And I think the fact that the United States is taking very much a go it alone approach, in the Caribbean, is perhaps meets the president's
objectives of being seen to take immediate action. But over the long term, I think, threatens certainly it clearly threatens this historic and deep
and tight intelligence sharing relationship. And, you know, my worry would be that at the end of the Trump administration, those ruptures are hard to
repair in the United States, is less -- is left with less visibility in the region, and less of an idea of what's actually going on in the Caribbean
than it has than it has previously.
FOSTER: Is it a precedent? Do you think the U.K., you know, other intelligence sharing partners like Australia, for example? May start
questioning specific intelligence that they share, which might get them into legal trouble down the road?
LUKENS: So, there's two things. There is that for sure that they are worried about getting into legal trouble down the road if the intelligence
is used for what is commonly considered illegal actions, there's also a lack of trust I think building based on leaks of intelligence and, you
know, the intelligence sharing and the intelligence communities in the Five Eyes that you referenced is built -- it's an organization built on trust.
And you have to believe that when you share intelligence that your partners are going to keep that intelligence in the appropriate channels. And I
think we've seen in this administration a bit of a tendency to publicize or to leak information that comes through this intelligence sharing. And that
also makes our allies very wary about sharing with us.
FOSTER: Obviously, we just had the news that Venezuela is launching a massive military mobilization in response to all of this. Not the first
time it's said similar things. Right. But I mean, for people who aren't in the minutiae of this story, how concerned should they be about war?
LUKENS: Well, look, I think President Trump clearly wants to get rid of President Maduro. He believes that a different leadership in Venezuela will
benefit the United States, including through lower oil prices, but also, through maybe a decrease in drug trafficking. And I think the president is
weighing his options on how to do that.
I don't think that the president anticipates a full-scale invasion or military operation inside Venezuela. I would imagine he's looking at more
targeted options. But I think Venezuela is clearly preparing for any eventuality, and including by mobilizing troops at home.
FOSTER: Okay. Lewis Lukens, really appreciate your thoughts on these huge issues. Thank you.
Now it's the final moments of trade on Wall Street. Stocks are heading for record highs again. The Dow is up more than 1 percent. This is our business
breakout.
Tesla sales in China have fallen to their lowest level in three years. China is Tesla's second largest market after the U.S. sales fell by more
than 35 percent last month compared to a year earlier. The company's performance in Europe has also struggled in recent months.
Three original Bob Ross paintings are going up for auction today in Los Angeles. The sale is being organized by American public television and will
raise money for local PBS stations in the wake of federal funding cuts. As part of the largest release of his work ever offered to the public.
President Donald Trump is floating the idea of 50-year mortgages as a way of making American homes more affordable. One White House official hailed
the idea as game changer, but some analysts say it would ultimately raise the cost of home ownership.
New data suggests more Americans are struggling to make ends meet, including those on higher wages. This as inflation continues to hurt
American households.
Matt Egan joins us now with more on that.
Just take us through the data and what it means to regular people, Matt.
MATT EGAN, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: Well, Max, living paycheck to paycheck is an obvious sign of financial stress. And unfortunately, this is something
that more and more Americans are experiencing.
So, Bank of America, they looked at their internal data on tens of millions of customers here in the U.S. And based on that analysis, they estimate
that about 24 percent of households are living paycheck to paycheck this year. Now, this is a slight increase from last year, and this continues a
years-long trend where this metric is moving in the wrong direction.
So, what exactly does it mean to live paycheck to paycheck? Well, Bank of America defined it as households that are spending over 95 percent of their
income on the necessities, right? So housing, gasoline, groceries, utilities and childcare.
And I would just note that these three things have gone up significantly in price over the last year. And obviously, if you're spending 95 percent of
your income on the necessities, it doesn't leave much, if anything, left over for the nice to haves like going out to dinner or taking a trip, let
alone saving for a rainy day.
[15:40:05]
Now the good news, relatively speaking, is this increase in households that are living paycheck to paycheck. It has slowed this year, so it's still
going up, but it's not going up as fast. And that's because the middle income and higher income households, there's not really much of a change
there. The bad news, though, is that there's been a significant increase in lower income households that are living paycheck to paycheck.
Two years ago, it was 27 percent of households living paycheck to paycheck. Now look at this. It's 29 percent. And that's because wage growth among
lower income Americans has slowed. Unfortunately, often their paychecks are not going up as fast as prices are.
I'll give you an example. So this looks at wage growth by generation. And the blue bar is shows lower income households. And you can see that among
millennials, lower income households their wage growth was up by -- it was less than 2 percent. So that's below the 3 percent overall inflation rate.
For high income, it's 6 percent. So that is a huge gap and really speaks to the K-shaped economy here in the U.S.
Among Gen X, you're seeing a similar situation where high income wages are up by 4 percent. So that's beating inflation but no increase at all among
lower income households. Now as you can imagine, there's some disparity geographically. Bank of America found that this is a particular problem
with consumers living paycheck to paycheck in the mid-Atlantic and along the East Coast, Florida, South Carolina, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia,
Maryland, also out west in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and a number of different states.
Look, bottom line, this number here, 24 percent, I think it really speaks to the economic anxiety, the affordability problems that exist right now.
President Trump, he was asked about this affordability issue in a Fox News interview just yesterday. And he was sort of dismissive, right? He
suggested that this affordability concern is just a con job conjured up by Democrats. He said the U.S. economy has never been stronger. And he said
the polls are fake.
But look, this report, it's not based on a poll. It's based on Bank of America's internal data. And, Max, this does suggest that this financial
pressure is all too real.
Back to you.
FOSTER: Okay, Matt. Appreciate it. Thank you so much.
Now they are tennis rivals. Also friends off the court. Still to come, CNN's Amanda Davies speaks to Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:45:43]
FOSTER: Two names have dominated men's tennis in recent years, Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz, of course. In fact, the pair have split all the
grand slam titles over the past two seasons, pretty much.
CNN WORLD SPORT's Amanda Davies spoke to the duo ahead of the ATP Finals in Turin.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
AMANDA DAVIES, CNN SPORTS ANCHOR: Do you like the word rivalry?
CARLOS ALCARAZ, SIX-TIME GRAND SLAM CHAMPION: I think that the -- the word rivalry is -- takes on the professional part, just, you know, in the -- in
the tennis -- in the tennis side. We're trying to find the weaknesses, you know, from each other on court. But then when the -- we shake hands and --
and we are off the court. We're -- we're totally different. We sometimes forgot about the rivalry we were getting, you know, on tour, and we became
persons, you know.
DAVIES: And so this week, I mean, we have to talk about this trophy. How much for you, Carlos, is this week about winning the finals and how much
about is it about ending the year with your hands on this trophy? The world number one.
ALCARAZ: It comes -- it comes greater for me, because obviously, I got to do a really good result here if I want to end number one. So, for me, the
goals are quite, quite the same right now.
DAVIES: Because Yannik, you've kind of been playing down talk of the year end number one part of it.
JANNIK SINNER, PROFESSIONAL TENNIS PLAYER CHAMPION: Yeah, I mean, you know, for me, you know, it has been, you know a different kind of year. You know,
having some very unusual situations and there's for sure this, you know, extra motivation, extra pressure. You know, it's also a privilege to be in
the position. It's, you know, something great to finish the year with a win or with a incredibly big trophy.
But again, you know, you also don't have to forget how the season went and then everything. You know, we both have done, you know, again for now two
years. And it has been again a great year.
DAVIES: How do you sum up your year in hair?
(LAUGHTER)
ALCARAZ: Just two changes or three changes actually. My teammates -- my team are scared about the next year. So, I mean, this year has been a
really good with the changes. If something worked, what I -- what I say, change.
DAVIES: Yannik, how do you sum up his year in hair?
SINNER: Amazing. Amazing. Unexpected, but also --
(LAUGHTER)
DAVIES: Have you -- have you got any inspiration maybe that you're taking?
SINNER: Honestly, I'm good with this messy hair. But again, you know, whatever. It's great. You know, it suits you very well. I like it like
this, you know, with the black and white. It's also good because were in Turin. You know, you can cheer for Juventus. It's perfect.
(LAUGHTER)
DAVIES: I can't --
ALCARAZ: I didn't -- I didn't think about it, actually. Didn't.
DAVIES: Oh, it's been a real pleasure to speak to you. Thank you. And good luck both.
ALCARAZ: Thank you.
SINNER: Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Still to come, British MPs and animal welfare groups demand a review into the welfare of 15 penguins at the London aquarium. I'll explain
why after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[15:51:26]
FOSTER: There are growing calls for London's Sealife Aquarium to improve the living conditions for 15 gentoo penguins. Seventy-five members of
parliament have joined animal welfare groups in demanding a review into penguins' welfare. They say the penguins are confined in a windowless
basement enclosure with no daylight, fresh air or outdoor access.
The group, Born Free, is calling on Sealife London Aquarium to relocate the penguins and stop its breeding programs. Spokesperson for the owner of
London's Sealife Aquarium said in a statement, "We have an incredible team of conservationists, animal welfare specialists and aquarists who are with
the penguins every day, making sure they're healthy and thriving." Going on to add, "This is a complex issue. There's a lot to consider and we take
every decision seriously, always guided by what's best for the animals."
That has not put people off from this campaign.
So what we want to know is how should penguins be kept if they are to be kept in zoos?
Joining me now is Rory Wilson, a professor of aquatic biology and sustainable aquaculture at Swansea University.
In other words, he's also the world expert on penguins because I know you've been studying them for your whole academic career.
Thank you so much for joining us today.
I mean, if we bring up the pictures of the penguins that we've got, you know, to the untrained eye they look pretty happy. I mean, they are in a
basement, aren't they? There is no natural light. There isn't a huge amount of space. And, well, people can see for themselves what it actually looks
like.
Do you think they're happy?
RORY WILSON, PROFESSOR OF AQUATIC BIOLOGY AT SWANSEA UNIVERSITY: I have to be perfectly honest. I haven't seen the penguins in that exhibit, so it's
difficult to say, but penguins need, above all, they need other penguins to be happy, but they also need enough water, and they need enough land and
enough natural conditions to be happy.
I guess the most complex issue with the -- with the birds in London zoo is that they're gentoo penguins. And the picture I have seen shows them sort
of on ice or something that looks like ice, and if they're southern gentoo penguins, then they're the, the sort of ice objects, they're -- they're
birds that need to spend a lot of time on ice. And they live in a place with very little bacterial load and very little fungal spores.
And, and so actually the idea that you could take these birds and just plonk them outside in the U.K. and say they'd be happy, might give them
severe problems.
FOSTER: Yeah. Just to clarify, its London Aquarium as opposed to London Zoo, although I think they've got penguins there as well. But they are
outside.
What about the three main issues that the MPs have been talking about? That is the space, the fresh air and the lack of natural light. How important
are those three things to these penguins?
WILSON: Yeah. Just to just to clarify, London Zoo doesn't have gentoo penguins, but this exhibit, this aquarium does have gentoo penguins. The
London Zoo has a -- has another species that lives in in warmer climates.
The business of fresh air is actually if you take a penguin from the proper Antarctic, you actually can't put it in normal fresh air without subjecting
it to fungal spores. And so, the air that goes into exhibits that typically have things like emperors and, and chinstrap and gentoo penguins from that
part of the world have to have highly filtered air. So, so you can't actually take them and put them in fresh air unless you're in antarctica.
With respect to the space and the daylight -- well, I don't know what light regime they have. Good zoos. If they've got birds in in housings like that
have altered the light regime to reflect the light regime, they would have, in the wild, so obviously darker in their winter, and lighter in their
summer.
[15:55:13]
And then with regard to the space, to be honest -- I mean, I think the husbandry requirements for penguins, they say they need the water to be
four foot deep or something, you know, for penguins, that's -- that is ridiculous. I mean, gentoo penguins dive to 400, 500, 600 feet. So, four
feet is not going to cut it. And I think the exhibit we're talking about is seven feet. And that doesn't cut it either. But there's not a penguin
exhibit in the world that actually does cut it. I think Detroit Zoo has 25 feet.
And then you need enough space for them to swim properly. That means poor poise and enough, I guess, water activity for them to be excited by being
in the water and also to bounce around on land and do the same thing they did.
FOSTER: Rory, so right at the end of the show. But we could talk about them all night and certainly look at them all night. Thank you for joining us.
I'm Max Foster. That's WHAT WE KNOW. Stay with CNN.
END
TO ORDER VIDEOTAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS OF CNN INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMMING, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS
