Return to Transcripts main page


Emmanuel Macron Wins French Elections; James Clapper and Sally Yates to Testify at Russia Hearing Monday; House Health Care Bill Meeting Stiff Opposition in Senate; Trump-Murdoch Friendship Raises Questions of Conflicts; North Korea Detains Another American; Sexual Harassment in the Virtual World; Bourdain Eats His Way Through San Sebastian. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired May 7, 2017 - 20:00   ET


[20:00:00] ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: After the announcement that the centrist candidate Emmanuel Macron scored an overwhelming victory at the polls and will be the next president of France. In the iconic courtyard of the Louvre, Macron accepted victory before thousands of his supporters. The president-elect is just 39 years old, a political newcomer. He has never held elected office.

The United States president, President Trump, tweeting after the results were announced, "Congratulations to Emmanuel Macron on his big win today as the next president of France. I look very much forward to working with him."

Accepting defeat, Marine Le Pen from the political far right. This election marks the closest to the presidency her populist party has ever gotten in France.

Let's go to Paris and senior international correspondent Jim Bittermann.

And Jim, is this a sign Europe is starting to push back on populism?

JIM BITTERMANN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I think so. I think you could say that, Ana. At least the kind of things that we have written about and talked about over the last few months, about the rise of populism, may not prove out to be as true as we thought because now we've had the second election here. We had the Netherlands where a populist candidate did not do so well and we have the election here of Emmanuel Macron tonight who defeated Le Pen, who was widely regarded as a populist candidate.

So I think, you know, it does show some pushback on that. The whole idea of sweeping populism in different parts of the world may not hold true as a lot of pundits have thought -- Ana.

CABRERA: Now this new president has another new president to form a relationship with in Washington. The French-American relationship is a strong one. Where do Mr. Macron and President Trump have some common ground?

BITTERMANN: Well, they've got common ground, they have contrasts as well. I mean you've got in President Trump, the oldest president that the United States has had ever, and you've got in Macron the youngest president that France has ever had. So there's a real generational differences here. But on a number of different planes they are -- they do have some similarities. Both are very much pro-business. Macron is a former banker and I think in terms of trade that Macron is going to be very much in favor of more open trade with the United States.

So I think that's going to be a positive. He's also going to be on the same wave length as Mr. Trump is in terms of supporting NATO. I think that France already does pay a big share of its contribution to NATO and probably will pay more in the future, and also he stands against Iran as President Trump does. So I think there are some similarities there, and I think President Trump will find an ally that's pretty reliable.

CABRERA: All right. Jim Bittermann in Paris tonight. Thank you.

I want to bring in my panel now. CNN political analyst and "Washington Post" columnist Josh Rogin and CNN intelligence and security analyst and former CIA operative Bob Baer.

Josh, ideologically Trump was closer to Le Pen. Now that Macron is the winner, what do you think this means for the U.S. relationship with France?

JOSH ROGIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It means they have a lot of work to do. President Trump was just ideologically aligned with Le Pen. He did everything but openly endorse her. Even making comments in the final weeks that a terrorist attack in France might help her candidacy. He showed a clear preference and many people in this White House did as well. So now they have to start from scratch.

They both realized they need each other. It is too important a relationship to mess up, but they don't see the world in the same way and they're going to find places that they can work together and find out how to talk about the things that they disagree on. It's not going to be easy.

CABRERA: We did see the olive branch in that tweet from President Trump tonight.

But, Bob, this election had a familiar ring. And the final act of the days leading up, a hack against a candidate. The Senate here at home is investigating Russia's meddling in the 2016 American election and now we hear FBI director James Comey warning this week that Russia has tried it in other countries. Listen.


SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: WHAT kind of threat do you believe Russia presents to our democratic process given what you know about Russia's behavior of late?

JAMES COMEY, FBI DIRECTOR: Well, certainly that in my view the greatest threat of any nation on earth given their intention and their capability. GRAHAM: Have they done this in other countries where they actually

tampered with the vote?

COMEY: My understanding is they have attempted in other countries.

GRAHAM: And there's no reason they won't attempt it here if we don't stop them over time?

COMEY: I think that's fair.


CABRERA: So, Bob, any reason to believe Russia may have been involved in the hacking in France?

ROBERT BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY ANALYST: Well, you simply look at who benefits from the hacking. The Russians supported -- the KGB supported Le Pen, the National Front. It supports these rightist parties all over Europe. It hopes to break up the European Union. You know, the French have not come out with a full forensic finding on this, who was behind it, but right now if we have to speculate, and I reemphasize it's speculation, would be the Russians.

[20:05:04] They're the ones that would have benefitted. And they have certainly done this in Georgia, in Lithuania, the Ukraine, and on and on and on. The Russians, they have a lot of responsibility for this. As we know, they got into the American elections as well. They are hostile to Europe and Macron's election does not do them any good. Macron will not forget it.


CABRERA: Josh, we have heard Republicans ask time and again where is the smoking gun on this Russia investigation here at home. Tomorrow the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, and former acting attorney general Sally Yates will testify as part of the Senate investigation. Are we likely to get that smoking gun from them?

ROGIN: No. I mean I agree with everything Bob said. You know, what's important to note here is that the hacking is just one small piece of the Russian influence campaign all over Europe and including in the United States. It includes state-funded propaganda and everything else. So, you know, even if we can't prove the hacking we know that the Russians are up to this and that it will continue.

You know, what we're facing tomorrow is sort of a showdown where former acting attorney general Sally Yates who was fired, let's remember, by the Trump administration in its first days for not signing on to the executive order on immigration, will lay out her side of the story about what happened in those first weeks regarding former National Security adviser Mike Flynn.

Let's remember, Mike Flynn talked with the Russian ambassador, reportedly about sanctions, undermining U.S. policies during the transition. Then the White House didn't do anything about it for about three weeks, and then they said that, oh, you know, we were on top of it, but it doesn't seem like that's the case. That's what Sally Yates has a bunch of details about. That's what she is going to lay out tomorrow before congressional testimony.

CABRERA: How do you see that impacting the president potentially if she does, indeed, contradict the White House's version of you how this went down?

ROGIN: Well, I'm sure -- for the first thing it doesn't really tell us anything new about Michael Flynn. What know what his timeline is. We know what he is accused of. He faces a lot of legal problems. That's not going to get significantly worse or better. What she is doing is just calling into question the White House's credibility, especially the credibility of White House press secretary Sean Spicer who characterized her warning to them in very different terms and what she's going to say tomorrow. You know, what will happen, I'm sure the White House will then go on the attack, will accuse her of being partisan. That's par for the course for them.

And we'll have something of a he said-she said, but for those people who are inclined to see the White House as being misleading in this whole story line, which, you know, there's a lot of evidence of, Sally Yates' testimony will add a lot of facts and details to that and will become part of the record whether the White House acknowledges it or not.

CABRERA: Bob, put yourself in Russian president Vladimir Putin's shoes. You are watching all this unfold here in the U.S., you have denied responsibility in the election tampering. What are you doing right now as you watch the FBI and Congress pursue this investigation?

BAER: Well, Ana, I mean he's -- he miscalculated on this, miscalculated with the United States, with France, with the Ukraine. I mean, I know, I have talked to Russians who advised him against this. They said, do not get in these elections. There will be a blow-back. And I think what we're going to see is this investigation into Russia is going to play out for months, if not years.

Let's don't forget that the key evidence is not in the Steele report, the MI-6 report, it's in the intercepts, it's in the phone metadata. A lot of these people are going to be called into the FBI and they're going to be asked to questions. On one hand the FBI is going to have the intercepts. On the other people are going to have to -- you know, they're going to have to give up secrets. And this is going to plague the Trump administration.

I think Josh would agree for a very long time it's very unfortunate for us, the faster we get over with it the better, but I don't think it's going to be fast.

ROGIN: Yes, I --

CABRERA: Bob, what would you be -- let me just ask a quick follow-up to Bob. As far as this hearing tomorrow, Bob, what would be your question specifically for Sally Yates and the director of National Intelligence, former director, James Clapper? BAER: Well, I think Sally Yates did her job. I mean, she went to the

White House, as been reported, and said, look, you got problems with Flynn. And the real question -- she is going to be able to document this. The real question is why did the Trump administration not listen and put a hold on Flynn's appointment? That's the real problem. Because she went in, I imagine, with this intercept with the Russian ambassador talking to Flynn, and normally a White House would just freeze the appointment and they didn't.

There's a certain amount of arrogance and indifference to the Department of Justice and the FBI, and that's turned out to be a mistake. And I think that's probably what she's going to say tomorrow.

CABRERA: Josh, since I interrupted you, go ahead with your final thought before we go.

ROGIN: Sure. I agree with Bob this is going to plague the Trump administration for a long time. I'm not sure I agree with him that this is such an overreach by the Russians.

[20:10:05] They have achieved their primary goal, which is to wreak havoc in the U.S. political system. Whether or not they got a Trump administration that's going to be more pro-Russian and I still think that are more pro-Russian than Hillary Clinton would have been, the sheer damage they've done to the credibility of our democracy, that's a win for the Russians as far as they're concerned.

And, you know, about -- on the Yates testimony, I'll just say that, like, we're not going to find out whether or not the Trump team colluded with the Russians on their interference. That's not part of what Yates knows or what she's talking about. So it will be interesting testimony, but the big question, whether or not there was collusion will still be unanswered.

CABRERA: All right. Josh Rogin and Bob Baer, thank you both for your time tonight.

Coming up, playing defense on health care. The Trump team says people won't lose coverage even though their plan calls for cutting nearly a trillion coverage from Medicaid. Their explanation.

Plus, the embrace that's raising eyebrows. A look at the friendship between the president and Rupert Murdoch amid a federal probe of FOX News.


[20:15:08] CABRERA: What will happen with the House passed health care bill in the coming weeks is anybody's guess right now. Members of the Senate including some prominent Republicans are essentially calling it dead on arrival.


SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: The House bill is not going to come before us. The Senate is starting from scratch. We're going to draft our own bill. I think we will do so and that we will come up with a whole new fresh approach.


CABRERA: But President Trump wants the Senate to step up, tweeting today, "Republican senators will not let the American people down. Obamacare premiums and deductibles are way up. It was a lie and it is dead."

CNN White House correspondent Athena Jones is covering the president in Branchburg, New Jersey. She has a lot more on this looming fight over health care -- Athena.

ATHENA JONES, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Ana. That's right. The next step for this health care bill is the U.S. Senate. It is a process that's likely to take several weeks. We've already heard several GOP senators say that they're going to rewrite the bill, or I should say write their own version of a health care repeal bill, not just pick up what the House sent to them. Of course, any changes the Senate makes to this bill will have to be approved by the House. That could be a tall order.

And there are several GOP senators who are expressing concerns about this bill. One of the chief concerns expressed not just by GOP senators but also by several Republican governors is the bill's cuts to Medicaid. Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price addressed that issue on "STATE OF THE UNION" this morning. Watch what he had to say.


TOM PRICE, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SECRETARY: We believe strongly that the Medicaid population that will be cared for in a better way under our program because it will be more responsive to them. These decisions will be made closer to them. Right now you've got Washington, D.C. dictating to the states and dictating to patients exactly what must occur. That's not how a healthy health system works. A healthy health system works by allowing those individuals closest to the patients themselves to be making those decisions, and from the president's perspective and our perspective that means patients and families and doctors making medical decisions, not Washington, D.C.


JONES: So there you heard Secretary Price insisting that people on Medicaid will receive better care, but there are a lot of folks who are concerned about the $880 billion in cuts to the program that are a part of this bill. Among other concerns, the concern that this bill does not provide enough aid to people who are low income or who are seniors to be able to afford to buy coverage.

There are also concerns about the fact that this bill would allow insurers not to cover so-called essential benefits. It's a list of benefits that were required to be covered under Obamacare. These benefits include things like maternity care and emergency room care, and then, of course, the provision that's gotten a lot of attention and would allow states to allow insurers to charge people who have preexisting conditions more money for plans.

That could end up pricing some people out of plans. And when I say some people, I'm talking about millions of people with a long list of conditions from high cholesterol to asthma to cancer to diabetes. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that nearly 30 percent of Americans under the age of 65 have some sort of preexisting condition, so that is another big concern that GOP senators and others have expressed. So it looks like a long road ahead in the Senate for this bill. If they do pass it, it certainly will not happen quickly. Back to you.

CABRERA: Athena Jones, thank you.

Coming up, the ties that bind. How the president's friendship with media mogul Rupert Murdoch could end up testing his own Justice Department.


[20:23:02] CABRERA: That's President Trump embracing Rupert Murdoch, the man whose company FOX News is currently under investigation by Trump's Justice Department.

It is no secret these two men have a long-running relationship, and now that President Trump is president it is more complicated than ever.

CNN's Brian Stelter has the latest.


RUPERT MURDOCH, CHAIRMAN, NEWS CORPORATION: The commander-in-chief and the president of the United States, my friend, Donald J. Trump.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Trump being introduced by 21st Century FOX chairman Rupert Murdoch Thursday. Trump echoing those warm words.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thank you to my very good friend, Rupert Murdoch.

STELTER: The president also touting his past financial contributions to one of Murdoch's pet causes, the American Australian Association.

TRUMP: For years, through Rupert, every year he'd send me this letter, could you please give money? I'd say, what do I have to do with that, Rupert? And I just keep sending him money and money, and now I realized that was money well spent. That's right. Right, Rupert?

STELTER: It's a line that might have gotten a laugh, but it's a relationship that's raising questions about possible conflicts.

The U.S. Justice Department, which President Trump oversees, is investigating the Murdoch-owned FOX News, looking into settlement payments stemming from harassment complaints against former FOX News boss Roger Ailes.

Could the close relationship between Trump and Murdoch stymie the pursuit of justice?

The president loves FOX News. It's his favorite network, and he's a frequent guest.


TRUMP: It was great.

STELTER: Murdoch's papers, like "The New York Post," helped to boost Trump to celebrity status in the 1980s. Much later FOX's opinion shows helped to lay the seeds for Trump's election wins.

Maggie Haberman of the "New York Times" says Trump and Murdoch now speak almost every day, even as the Justice Department investigates Murdoch's profit-making FOX News machine.

[20:25:06] Thursday's high-profile Trump-Murdoch meeting calling to mind another eyebrow raising meeting that Trump criticized heavily on the campaign trail. He blasted former President Bill Clinton's meeting with then Attorney General Loretta Lynch as the DOJ was investigating Hillary Clinton's e-mails.

TRUMP: So she met with him for 45 minutes in the back of an airline on the tarmac in Arizona. I think it's disgraceful. I think it's a disgrace.

STELTER: But now that Trump is president, it's his relationships that are raising questions.


CABRERA: All right. Brian Stelter is with us now. So, Brian, let's dig a little bit deeper here on your reporting, the relationship between President Trump and Rupert Murdoch. Seeing him publicly embrace Rupert Murdoch seems to imply he doesn't think there's a conflict of interest here. What are your sources saying?

STELTER: Indeed. This is such an unusual case. It is definitely not normal for the head of a news network to be talking almost every day with a president, but Rupert Murdoch is such an unusual media mogul, he's always been active in politics, always seeking out candidates or politicians who have power. NPR has called it, you know, a kind of mutual alliance between Murdoch and Trump. And so although there is clearly a perceived conflict of interest here, it doesn't look good to have them both in public and in private speaking so often, the lawyers, legal experts say right now there's nothing we can really make of it.

We don't know what the Justice Department is going to do. Months from now the Justice Department does not pursue charges against anybody involved in these practices, then I think people's eyebrows will be very widely raised. But right now we'll wait and see.

CABRERA: There's a little bit of reminiscent of the Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch meeting.


CABRERA: People have brought up in regard to Rupert Murdoch and President Trump in their meeting. Let me push the conversation forward and talk about Stephen Colbert because that's also made a lot of news this week.


CABRERA: His crude joke about President Trump that turned a lot of heads to say the least. Let's listen to it.


STEPHEN COLBERT, HOST, " THE LATE SHOW WITH STEPHEN COLBERT": You attract more skinheads than Free Rogaine. You have more people marching against you than cancer. You talk like a sign language gorilla who got hit in the head. In fact, the only thing your mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's (EXPLETIVE DELETED) holster.


CABRERA: A lot of people are upset about this. There's this #fireColbert. There's a Twitter campaign.


CABRERA: And now even the FCC is investigating?

STELTER: Right. Reviewing the complaints that are coming in, yes. There's three separate matters here. Number one, was he right to say it? Maybe, maybe not. Some people were offended by the joke, others saw it as glorious. Others didn't care. So number one, was he right to say it? Number two, does he have the right to say it? Does CBS have his back? Absolutely. The company is not going to be removing Colbert from the airways.

He came out and said maybe he chose a few words that were too crude that he wouldn't choose if he were doing it over again, but CBS has his back. Number three, will government regulators do anything about it? And the answer to that is no. The FCC does take in complaints from viewers all the time about everything. They review those complaints as a matter of course.

The FCC chairman came out and said we are taking this seriously, we're looking at the complaints, but, you know, normally there's not much you can do. If they had actually shown a sex act on television and not bleeped it, not blurred it, then maybe there would be a fine. But one of the great things about this country is the leniency that folks on television and all across the media have.

CABRERA: Free speech. STELTER: That's right. Especially late at night.

CABRERA: Democracy.

STELTER: Especially when you're talking about politics. So Colbert is not in regulatory hot water here, but, you know, some viewers are upset they might not watch the show. I think the reality, though, Ana, is that it is such a polarized country. He has so many fans that want to see him go as aggressively at President Trump as possible.

CABRERA: Speaking of just doing just that.


CABRERA: And the polarization right now, we know President Trump set a record in his first 100 days he might not be real excited about.

STELTER: This is wild. Yes.

CABRERA: But look at this. George Mason University's Center for Media and Public Affairs released a study last week and it showed President Trump was the butt of more than 1,000 jokes in his first 100 days, more than each of his three predecessors in their year. You can read it there, President Obama 936 jokes in his first year. President George W. Bush, 546 jokes. President Bill Clinton had 440 jokes. So does this study say anything other than comedians have gotten increasingly political over the years?

STELTER: I think that's one thing it says. I think it gives credence to Trump fans that Hollywood is just hopelessly leftist and out to get the president. But there's also more comedy shows on the air these days than there were, for example, during the George H.W. Bush or the Clinton administration. There are more comedians out there and frankly there's more news going on right now involving this president. So there's a lot to talk about, a lot to scrutinize, maybe a lot to make fun of.

CABRERA: And there are more outlets, too.


CABRERA: When we think of all the different devices that we have and all that's on the media outlets that there are. I want to talk about "Saturday Night Live" real quick because they took a jab at Kellyanne Conway. Let's watch.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Used to be our TV every single panel. One day she woke up, she was no longer there. What could have happened, she is not up in the chair. Tell me where in the world is --

[20:30:08] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kellyanne Conway.


CABRERA: So pretty funny there. But it does beg the question, where has she been?

STELTER: Yes. She has been on FOX. You know, Conway has been avoiding some of the television interview circuit. You know, she was very visible in January and February. She has been less visible lately, so "SNL" is I think right to point that out. She has been mostly speaking to conservative media instead. Her big topic on FOX this weekend was Hillary Clinton.

You know, Ana, tomorrow is the six-month anniversary of President Trump's election, six months since Election Day.


STELTER: And yet still feels like everybody in this country is re- litigating the election, whether that's Trump allies, Trump himself or Clinton. She is on Twitter today talking about it, whether there was interference in the election.

This election is something we seem to collectively not be able to get over. So Conway was talking about that on FOX this weekend.

CABRERA: Interesting. Brian Stelter, thanks for coming on.

STELTER: Thanks.

CABRERA: Always good to see you. Don't forget to watch his show every Sunday.

STELTER: Thank you.

CABRERA: At 11:00 a.m. Eastern right here on CNN.

STELTER: Yes. Thank you.

CABRERA: Now on tonight's brand-new episode of "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA" we look at Chicago, one of the most segregated large cities here in the U.S. according to the recent Census data. But why? Host W. Kamau Bell took to the streets to find out.


W. KAMAU BELL, HOST, CNN'S "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA": What does the phrase Black Lives Matter mean to you?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That is a touchy shouldn't.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's the most notorious city in the country. They exaggerate. It is worrisome.

BELL: For the younger generation, what does it mean for them?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: First thing you put in your hand is a gun.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everybody look up to the shooter. Other shorties coming up, they're like, damn, that's what I want to be.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The violence that has hit our city of Chicago is perplexing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Poverty brings on all of these problems.

BELL: What can we do to make this better?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If we want to talk about violence in our communities, we have to talk about the support systems we have.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The black schools that's getting way less funding per student.



[20:36:08] CABRERA: Breaking news on CNN. From Texas, the Republican governor there, Greg Abbott, just signed a bill a short time ago to ban so-called sanctuary cities in his state. Governor Abbott signed this legislation on a Facebook live stream saying the new law will hold police officials accountable if they intentionally decline to help with federal immigration enforcement. It will also allow police officers to ask people they arrest their immigration status. The bill is controversial. Not all police departments in Texas are on board.

Dozens of families are breathing a sigh of relief. A nation rejoicing as 82 schoolgirls kidnapped from a boarding school in Nigeria are finally home. The teenage girls were released from their captors this weekend in a swap with the terrorist group Boka Haram. Now as part of this deal we're learning five Boko Haram commanders were released by the Nigerian government but not everyone is free. Some 276 girls were originally kidnapped by this terrorist group more than three years ago. You might remember the outrage on social media and spread of the #bringbackourgirls.


EMMAN SHEHU, MEMBER, BRING BACK OUR GIRLS CAMPAIGN GROUP: It is a welcome development. It gladdens our heart. We know that even the parents of the girls are happy because it means gradually closure, we are attaining closure. And of course, many Nigerians are happy.


CABRERA: Back in 2014 then First Lady Michelle Obama tweeted this with the hashtag from her official First Lady Twitter account. Now more than 100 of those kidnapped girls unfortunately are still being held by Boko Haram.

Another American has just been detained in North Korea. The U.S. State Department says it is aware of these reports that the North Korean government stopped Kim Hak-song from boarding a flight in Pyongyang.

I want to bring in Elise Abbott, our global affairs correspondent.

Elise, this would be now the fourth known American detained in the communist nation. Do we know why he is being held?

ELISE LABOTT, CNN FOREIGN AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: We don't, Ana. All we know is that the North Koreans are saying that he had committed so- called hostile acts against the government.

Now he worked for Pyongyang University of Science and Technology, which is, you know, interestingly the same university that Tony Kim, another American that the North Koreans detained, was detained on April 22nd when he was leaving Pyongyang. They work for the same university. Now we don't know if there's any connection, but CNN has spoken to people who have known this gentleman, Kim Hak-song, who was arrested today. They say he was a professor. He was working in Pyongyang. He was of Chinese descent and had gone to Pyongyang. He was an expert in agricultural training and was going to help the North Korean people.

You know there's terrible famine in North Korea and he was hoping to bring his expertise there. So we don't really know, but, you know, any of these Americans that the North Koreans arrest is really about using them as a bargaining chip. And you know, given the tensions between the U.S. and North Korea right now it is really difficult to say how they are going to get out. As we know, those other two Americans who are being held were sentenced to, you know, 10 to 15 years of hard labor. So we don't know what the actual charges and sentences will be, but unfortunately it looks like they could be in for a long stay in detention.

CABRERA: Well, you will be following it of course for us. This of course happens on the heels of North Korea also accusing the U.S. of an assassination plot against Kim Jong-un. What more can you tell us about that?

LABOTT: Yes. Well, this came earlier this week. They were saying -- talking about a terrorist group that was working for the CIA that was going to use a chemical weapon, a biochemical substance to try and assassinate Kim Jong-un and try to topple the regime.

[20:40:14] Now this is really odd. I mean North Korea has in the past accused South Korea of trying to launch assassination plots, never the United States. And, I mean, it comes on the heels of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at the United Nations last week saying that the U.S. is not seeking regime change, does not want to change the regime, is only really looking for North Korea to abandon its nuclear and long-range missile programs. So, I mean, this really comes in the face of the U.S. saying it's not trying to get rid of Kim Jong-un, but certainly again with all these tensions between the U.S. and North Korea this just seems to be adding to the rhetoric that the North seems to be lobbing against the U.S.

CABRERA: Yes. There was all these details in that report from the North Korean media on this assassination plot but they had no evidence.

LABOTT: No evidence whatsoever.

CABRERA: Elise Labott, thank you as always. Coming up, crime in the digital realm. CNN's Laurie Segall steps into

another woman to meet a woman who says she was virtually groped. What should the consequences be? It's a story you don't want to miss next.


[20:45:34] CABRERA: This next story might make you think twice before letting a friend drive your car. Take a look at this. This is in Springfield, Illinois. Police department is on the hunt now for the woman who drove this van into the side of a McDonald's restaurant last night. Police say the driver ran away from this crash. Luckily, no one was injured but the van actually belongs to the driver's friend who was in the passenger's seat when it crashed and remained with the car apparently. The owner was given a ticket for not having insurance.

Our relationship with technology is getting complicated to say the least. For example, consider this question. If an assault or another crime happens in the virtual world, what should the repercussions be?

CNN's senior tech correspondent Laurie Segall explores this issue in her series "Mostly Human."

LAURIE SEGALL, CNN SENIOR TECH CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Ana. Well, we talked a lot about online harassment and its impact on us, what people say to each other on Twitter and Facebook and trolls. Well, there's actually a new frontier of technology that's enabling a different type of harassment. Take a look.


SEGALL (voice-over): Step into the virtual world and you'll find that there are even more complicated questions.

(On camera): Hey, guys.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, what's up?

SEGALL: I'm having social anxiety in the virtual world. Where are you?


SEGALL: You're in Alabama?


SEGALL: You're from Chicago. That's just cool. Have you guys -- can I ask you another question? Have you guys ever seen like anything inappropriate happen in the virtual world?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, not so far.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Definitely, yes, me. SEGALL: OK. The woman says yes. So what kind of inappropriate stuff

have you experienced?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: A lot of people virtually banging each other.


(Voice-over): I'm meeting a woman here we're calling Jordan. We're disguising her identity as an avatar because she's received threats after sharing the details of a unique experience.

(On camera): Can you tell me what happened a couple of months ago when you were like playing in the virtual world?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So I was playing this game called Quiver and there's a multi-player mode. And so there was a player next to me in my space, which is fine. And then suddenly he kind of came up to me and used his hand kind of like what we see now, and brought it towards my avatar's body. And basically began to virtually grope me. I told him to stop. I think that only goaded him on further.

SEGALL: It's a virtual world, but what does it feel like?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Obviously you don't feel the touch, but there is something about your virtual space being invaded that feels surprisingly real in that violation and that disgust you might feel. You know, you can't push the person. Talking to them does nothing. So I tried running away. I mean you could take off the head set and that's about it.

SEGALL: In the real world if someone gropes you in person and there's a cop nearby there's going to be repercussions.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Also, it is oddly more accepted. So other avatars were in the world with us and seeing what was going on and no one cares. And to the person, the aggressor, it doesn't feel like anything. It's kind of fun, it's a joke. But when it's happening to you, you know, when it's directed towards you it feels totally real. The mind can get tricked in the virtual space into thinking something really happened, and maybe something really did happen to me.


SEGALL: Now, Ana, after Jordan came forward with her story the game developers actually created a feature that would let people flag if their personal space has been violated. What I do think we should kind of take away from here is what Jordan said, that these actions impacted her offline. I think people think that behind the screen it doesn't feel real and that these actions don't impact you when you take off the virtual reality headset or when you get off line. But the reality is they do.

And I think there are also these very interesting ethical questions we have to start asking about how we treat one another online or in the virtual world, especially with this new frontier of technology that's just now being developed -- Ana.

CABRERA: Thank you as always, Laurie Segall.

You can catch more of Laurie's :Mostly Human" series. It's streaming right now on CNNGo.

I want to show you some live pictures right now of Air Force One. The president on his way back to the White House right now after a weekend at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey. We're awaiting him stepping off the airplane. His return of course comes ahead of a critical day tomorrow, a busy week ahead. Tomorrow is when the former director of National Intelligence James Clapper and the former acting attorney general Sally Yates will testify at a Senate hearing about Russia's meddling in the election, so a lot of eyes on that one.

[20:50:06] Coming up, he is in his way toward Europe, but Anthony Bourdain says this next place hands down has the best food. A preview of tonight's brand new episode of "PARTS UNKNOWN" in Spain's Basque Country.


CABRERA: Anthony Bourdain has traveled all over the world, so when he says a destination has the most delicious food in all of Europe, you know it's amazing. In tonight's brand new episode of "PARTS UNKNOWN" he takes us to the heart of Spain's Basque Country.


ANTHONY BOURDAIN, HOST, CNN'S "PARTS UNKNOWN": I hesitate to praise this place more than I already have.

[20:55:04] It's not really the best kept secret in Europe or the world. Because plenty of people know about it, mostly chefs. What do chefs know? They know that Basque Country, that's Sebastian in particular, but in fact the whole region, has probably -- yes, definitely, the most awesome food scene, the most incredible ingredients, the most delicious food in Europe. Don't come here.


CABRERA: I recently sat down with Anthony Bourdain to discuss the food and the culture explored in tonight's episode.


BOURDAIN: People have been trying to figure out how old is the Basque language, who are the Basque, where did they come from, do they have any relatives genetically anywhere else on earth, and apparently no. They've always been there, their language might go back to cavemen times, and pound for pound, that region, in my experience, might have the best or the highest concentration of great food of anywhere on earth. It's absolutely -- they're food crazy, they demand absolutely the best ingredients, and it's one of the most exciting places to eat in the world. And it's one of those shows I did because I could.



BOURDAIN: I knew it would be fun.

CABRERA: It was an excuse to go back and visit?

BOURDAIN: Any excuse to go to Basque territory is a good one.

CABRERA: Now, the Basque influence in Spain, I mean, this is a very small region in Spain, is it not?


CABRERA: And they don't speak Catalan. The --

BOURDAIN: No. They don't speak --

CABRERA: Typical Hispanic verse or Spanish language?

BOURDAIN: They speak either Catalan or Spanish Castilian. They had their own language. They didn't speak Spanish as well. But they had their own language. Very, very difficult to learn or to understand. And their own culture. They're famously stubborn about protecting their culture and the language and culture was outlawed in Franco Times. They were not loved during the times of fascism and Nazism.

They are resilient. They are among the toughest people on earth and the most ferocious lovers of food. Even the bad restaurants in San Sebastian are really good.

CABRERA: You can't go wrong. But you talked about how they put such an emphasis, almost an obsession, on high quality and the freshest of ingredients.


CABRERA: Why do you think there's that influence there?

BOURDAIN: You know, we asked people about this, and they kind of shrug and say, it's always been like this. The Basque like to argue about the differences between things. They'll argue about the soccer game or their traditional sport.

CABRERA: They're competitive, then?

BOURDAIN: The difference between -- not something they like to talk about. That prawn is really good. Yes, but that one is much, much better.


BOURDAIN: They've always lived close to the sea and traditionally made their living from the sea, so the seafood in particular is staggeringly good. CABRERA: I know that you were able to visit with a Basque chef, Juan

Marie Arsoc, a huge figure in the culinary world and to you personally.

BOURDAIN: Since the passing of my father quite a number of years ago, I've become really close with this man, this chef. His daughter also a chef. In a lot of ways -- he would prefer to be called my elder brother, I think, but I see him as sort of a surrogate father. Even though we don't speak the same language, we communicate in haltingly bad French and English and a little bit of Spanish. He's -- I love this man and respect him and, you know, I've made a number of shows in San Sebastian over the last 16, 17 years and they always end with me going back home.

CABRERA: How did you meet originally?

BOURDAIN: I came through -- I was introduced -- one of the first television shows ever, someone took me to the restaurant and we just became very, very close and stayed in touch and have met around the world. You know, when you're in the "Chef Mafia," you tend to bump into the various capos around the world and he's a big one.

CABRERA: Small world.


CABRERA: Tune in for "PARTS UNKNOWN: SAN SEBASTIAN." It's coming up next here on CNN.

I'm sure you're as hungry as me after that. I'm Ana Cabrera. Thanks for being with us. Have a great night and a great week ahead.