Return to Transcripts main page


Trump To N. Korea: Stop Threats Or Face 'Fire And Fury'; Hawaii's Warning Bunker Prepared If There's An Attack; South African President Zuma Survives Vote; Country Music Star Glen Campbell Dies At 81; Exclusive San Francisco Street Sells For $90K. Aired 1-2a ET

Aired August 9, 2017 - 01:00   ET


[01:00:00] ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR: Hello and welcome to CNN NEWSROOM L.A. I'm Isha Sesay.

JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm John Vause. Our breaking news this hour, North Korea threatening a military strike on the U.S. territory of Guam; in a show of force, Monday, U.S. bombers based on the island, flew over the Peninsula. Pyongyang calls that a provocation, and is also warning Washington: any signs preparing an attack, and the U.S. mainland would be turned into a theater of nuclear war.

SESAY: On Tuesday, U.S. President Donald Trump took a break from his working vacation at his golf club in New Jersey to deliver an alarming message to Pyongyang.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal safety. And as I said, they will be with fire, fury, and frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.


SESAY: Well, let's get right to the Korean Peninsula. And CNN's Alexandra Field is live in Seoul, South Korea. Alexandra, good to see you. President Trump's comment is being taken at face value or rather seen as classic Trump bombast. I mean, what's the reaction there?

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Look, officially, the focus from the region, from various (INAUDIBLE) throughout the season has been to condemn the rhetoric that's coming to Pyongyang, and the actions that are being taken, and the blame is being squarely placed on Pyongyang for ratcheting up the tensions. Not much being made publicly, on the official level about President Trump's comments is that because, as you point out, some people perhaps expect to hear that kind of rhetoric from Mr. Trump, if not from a U.S. President.

Well, maybe, but also you've got to take into consideration the fact that there are strong alliances here; you're talking about South Korea, you're talking about Japan -- decades old alliances with the U.S. These are countries that depend on their relationship with the U.S. for the security and the defense that they so require at a time of this kind of heightened tension. So, it doesn't seem like anyone would try and directly point a finger at the U.S. at this moment in the equation. Yes, it is. Again, we can't say it enough, unusual language to hear an American president using incendiary, and quite reminiscent of the kind of rhetoric that you usually hear from Pyongyang.

As for those breaths that are coming from Pyongyang, well, to a certain extent, people in the region are very used to hearing this kind of language, these kinds of threats. What makes this case different, however, is that these are very specific threats, and Pyongyang has demonstrated some of the capacity to back some of their threats; you saw two ICBM tests last month, you now have this intelligence assessment that they might have successfully miniaturized a nuclear warhead that could be mounted to one of these missiles. That wouldn't be needed for an attack on Guam.

In the case of an attack on Guam, you're talking about the medium or long-range missiles. Why Guam, specifically? Well, the message from Pyongyang is that this is direct retaliation for the training flights from D-1 Bombers that were launched from the airbase in Guam. They see that as a highly provocative measure, and they say that this would be retaliation. They're certainly warning the U.S. not to provoke them further, Isha.

SESAY: A situation to watch closely. Alexandra Field, there in Seoul, South Korea. Always appreciate it, thank you.

VAUSE: Well, to our panel now. Senior Advisor to the nuclear disarmament group N Square, Paul Carroll; Director of the U.S.-China Institute at the USC, Clayton Dube; Politico Senior Reporter, David Siders; and CNN's Senior Reporter for Media and Politics, Dylan Byers. Thank you all for being with us.

SESAY: Hello, everyone.

VAUSE: Paul, to you, list down off -- with the president said, you know, we don't normally hear a U.S. president talking in these terms. Normally, the strategy is to lower the temperature. So, is this fire and fury threat that we're hearing from Donald Trump, is this everything in more than the regime in Pyongyang could have hoped for? Doesn't this simply confirm what they've been saying about the United States for years?

PAUL CARROLL, SENIOR ADVISOR, N SQUARE: Well, it does, unfortunately. It plays into their own narrative, not only on the international stage but domestically. I mean, even though it's a dictatorship, Kim Jong- un and his leadership, does have to satisfy and even mobilize and sort of excite the North Korea population. So, in one sense, Donald Trump's statement plays exactly into that narrative. But in another sense, it does confuse of puzzle our allies. Despite what we're hearing from Seoul, you know, well, that's the American president, that's classic Trump.

[01:05:30] Nonetheless, it is a line, it's a rhetorical line, and so will we back it up? If we do, that's real trouble. That's a war. If we don't, credibility is diminished. So, if none of these situations that I see this is being a good thing on what the president said. What would be positive now is some type of diplomacy, some type of message to North Koreans that, hey, let's talk about options, let's talk about things that we can do to ratchet thing out?

SESAY: All right. Clayton Dube, to you next. You and Paul Carroll make the point that rhetorical lines are being drawn here. If you're sitting in Beijing if you're in the leadership, what are you thinking? I mean, how are reading all of this, bearing in mind the U.S. has long been looking for China to solve the North Korea problem?

CLAYTON DUBE, DIRECTOR, U.S.-CHINA INSTITUTE AT THE USC: Well, Beijing ordinarily expects for the response from Washington to be measured, clear, precise, and it doesn't expect Washington to match Pyongyang bombast word for word. And so, this is a puzzlement both to potential adversaries and to long-standing allies. The people who are most upset by this are the people of South Korea. They're the ones that are truly on the firing line. And they are the ones that would suffer first if there were to be any kind of conflict, and so the Chinese are trying to take their measure of the United States. And we are proving to be a puzzle rather than operating clearly and in a measured way.

VAUSE: Well, there is a, obviously, confusion out there, there are also a lot of criticism out there of the statement by the president. Senator John McCain, one of the main lawmakers who's weighed in on this. Listen to what he said.


SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R) ARIZONA: The great leaders that I have seen, they don't threaten unless they are ready to act, and I'm not sure that President Trump is ready to act. And so, maybe it'll turn out all right, he's the president, I'm not. But I don't think that some of the great leaders that I've admired would've taken that same path. I just don't think that's the way you attack an issue and challenge like this. It's not terrible in what he said but it's kind of classic Trump, he overstates things, you know. The Presidents and leadership that I admire, that I've had anything to do with would not have said that.


VAUSE: All right. So, Dylan, you know, it's essentially become -- it's muted criticism about the silly, stinging criticism of Trump.

DYLAN BYERS, CNN SENIOR REPORTER FOR MEDIA AND POLITICS: Yes, absolutely. And look, I think the other issue here is: A. you have to actually have a plan to attack if you're going to make statements like that; B. it's a question of understanding what the role of the president is in the world. Historically, if you think about this as a school yard, because right now it feels like Pyongyang and Washington are two kids in a school yard going after each other -- yes, or kindergarten. You know, historically, the president of the United States has seen himself bulked in an almost supervisor role of the rest of the world -- understanding that there are multiple facets at play, understanding that China's at play, that Japan is at play, South Korea is at play.

Also, understanding that it is your role, as the president of the United States, to tone down the rhetoric; this -- President Obama did this to a point that he got criticized for it. But right now, it feels like has blinders on and he's just looking straight at Kim Jong- un and trying to match him at his game. And I don't understand the end game that particularly, as Senator McCain said, you actually don't have a plan in place.

SESAY: Dave Siders, you know, we have the president inflaming the situation. We have the Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, trying to bring the temperature down, opening the door to the possiblity of talks. And you heard Clayton Dube saying, if you're Beijing, this is a puzzle, excuse me, that the U.S. positioned. Why can't this administration get on the same page? Why can't they get a message, and why when it comes to North Korea?

DAVID SIDERS, SENIOR REPORTER, POLITICO: Well, I think it's not just North Korea. I mean --

SESAY: Well, yes, don't you think of North Korea right now?

SIDERS: Administration from a get-go. But I think the problems are the same, and this is really a test may be of John Kelly. Did he know about the statement? Was he -- did he advise the president not to say that, and then was turned down? If he didn't know, why not? I mean, all reporting from colleagues in Washington says that they don't -- that this vetted through the State Department. So, you wonder who knew about the statement, he didn't say the words twice, right? So, maybe somebody else did. And what level of consultation was there? And if not, I think some people who just following this president on how the message will be very concerned about how he does that.

[01:10:29] BYERS: If I can just say one quick point about message though, CNN had a poll just a few days ago, basically found that 75 percent, three-quarters of American citizens, don't feel like they can trust what's coming out of the White House, which is staggering -- the lack of credibility there.

I think on the world stage, particularly when you start talking about diplomats, about military officials in all of these countries that are involved in what's going on with Pyongyang right now. I think they're similar skepticism. And I think they look at that as traditional Trump being Trump, Kim Jong-un being Kim Jong-un, and they understand that the people are ultimately going to decide what's going here, are the people around them. And I think those are -- there's a little bit of solace in that if any solace can be found.

VAUSE: Maybe a tiny bit but not (INAUDIBLE). OK. We have a statement from the Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, this is what is read in part: "Isolating the North Koreans has not halted their pursuit of nuclear weapons. And President Trump is not helping the situation with his bombastic comments. The United States must quickly engage North Korea in a high-level dialogue without any preconditions." Paul, how likely are those unconditional talks? You've mentioned this a short time ago. And you know, what were the chances that Kim Jong- un would actually engage in talks at this point?

CARROLL: I think the point made about sort of the adult supervisors in the U.S. administration is a very good one. We have several people in this administration that are military commanders, and the president seems to respect and to those commanders. Those are the ones that, again, I would home deliver clearly the message of the implications about what war would be.

What Senator Feinstein said, I think, is also incredibly important. The U.N. Security Council sanctions that we passed, present actually quite a remarkable opportunity; it was swift, it was unanimous. It's all the regional power including Russia and China on the same page in a way we haven't since the second-half of the Bush administration. When we had followed on talks, we had several albeit failed, but several times when all of the six parties -- of the six party talks -- were in fact in unison.

On paper, we have that today, and so that's the sticks. The sticks are all sort of marching to the same drummer. What we don't have is a well-defined menu of carrots, of incentives, of enticements for the North Koreans to get that to the table. So, the short answer to your questions: if were Kim Jong-un and obviously in Pyongyang, I would think, I don't hear a lot of offering acts. I hear a lot of hammers, but I don't hear a lot of options for me to gracefully, and with face and with confidence, talk to these people and get something out of it.

SESAY: And David, back to you. Last week, National Security Advisor, H.R. McMaster, made it clear that the president was not prepared to deal with the threat of North Korea with nuclear weapons. Take a listen to what he said.


GEN. H.R. MCMASTER, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR: They have nuclear weapons that get through the United States; it's intolerable from the president's perspective. So, of course, we have to provide all options to do that, and that includes a military option.


SESAY: Well, David, isn't it the reality, at least, you know, looking to the recent reporting from the Washington Post that we're getting the new reality of North Korea's nuclear program and where it stands? Isn't it just the fact that the U.S. might have to live with that reality?

SIDERS: But they are -- they're so, I mean, that they have that nuclear capability. I think it's -- I think most analyst that I talked to today and yesterday, say if not this year, then, or next year. This is just a matter of time, right, so within a couple of years. And I think the risk is not necessarily that we have a premeditated pre-emptive strike from Donald Trump and advisor for making a decision. But there's something escalates is these (INAUDIBLE) to do. Wars don't necessarily start because leaders and a couple of different board rooms make very informed choices, right? They often start with miscues. And I think the concern among the security community is that this amplified rhetoric doesn't help.

VAUSE: McMaster also said in that interview that, you know, North Korea is a global threat which requires a global solution. And we've seen there is zero support for what Donald Trump has been suggesting with his fire and fury comment.

DUBE: That's correct. The Chinese have said that this kind of language, these kinds of threat/counter-threat don't move us forward in any way. And so, I'd just like to echo what has been said, the U.N. sanctions are significant; China bought into that. And so, that is mobilizing the international community to isolate North Korea even further than it already is. And that is probably the only course that we have available to us -- that and the sure deterrence.

[19:15:27] SESAY: Dylan, quickly to you. You made the point that it's politically expedient to talk more at times of, you know, has sagging political fortunes. Given the poll numbers being what they are for President Trump, do you see this kind of rhetoric continuing?

BYERS: Up to a point. You know, at a certain point, this goes back to a question that John asked earlier about the president putting himself in a box. You can only make so many threats and make so many promises before you have to actually follow through on something. I think what's going on with this -- you know, the saber rattling for Trump is critically expedient because it takes attention away from some of the negative stories. The saber rattling that's going on with Pyongyang is convenient because it fulfills this narrative that Kim Jong-un is sort of protecting his people against this great, terrible threat -- that is the United States. Obviously, the remarks from Trump play into that narrative.

You know, I think it just points back -- one thing I see here is, I don't see a reason why Kim Jong-un wants to go to war. He's pilfering his country. He's enjoying the spoils of that. Why does he want to fire and burns down Korea down, which I'm sure he understands America is capable of doing. For Trump, I'm a little more worried. I actually understand why it becomes so politically expedient to go to war, because that does satisfy so many people who start to believe that North Korea is a problem that's, you know, a needle in America's side, and we should do something about it.

VAUSE: Clayton, just a really short with you. Is there a concern, you know, within Beijing that, you know, Donald Trump, you know, he got a big loss in the polls when he launched 59 missiles in Syria. You know, he did that while Xi Jinping was at Mar-a-Lago. It was one of the impressive moment for the president. That maybe, you know, he's this as a way of, you know, boosting his standing at home and around the world.

DUBE: Leaders have to worry about just that. They have to worry that the impulse to take actions, to be seen as a strong leader, and action-oriented person, that wanting to do that might push him into something like this. But the Chinese are very clear that everybody losses if there's any kind of outbreak of violence on the Korean Peninsula. We have the Korean economy obviously at risk, the Chinese economy at risk, the Japanese economy at risk -- we are talking World War III.

VAUSE: Just very quickly, Clayton, would China back North Korea if there was any kind of confrontation?

DUBE: Not that they would necessarily back North Korea. The problem has been described. Once you have military action, all sorts of things can happen. And that the Chinese may see this as an encroachment, and they may see some sort of necessary action to stand up to American power.

VAUSE: OK. OK, Clayton, we'll leave it there. But thank you all very much. Clayton, Paul, and David, and Dylan here with us here in the studio thank you all for a very enlightening discussion. Thank you.

DUBE: Thank you.

[19:18:36] SESAY: Thanks, all. More on our breaking news after the break; why possible North Korea mini nuke could drastically change the nuclear standoff with the U.S.



BILL ENGLISH, PRIME MINISTER OF NEW ZEALAND: I think the comments are not helpful in an environment that's very tense. Everyone wants to avoid military confrontation, and the path ahead there is for North Korea to comply with U.N. sanctions and for international pressure to push them in that direction.


VAUSE: New Zealand prime minister there, commenting on the U.S. president's warning to North Korea to stop the threat or face "fire and fury" like the world has never seen.

SESAY: Well, North Korea's latest threat is to strike the U.S. territory of Guam. Pyongyang says it has a strike plan which could be carried out as soon as leader Kim Jong-un approves it. The threat appears to be a direct response to Monday's fly over of U.S. bombers over the Korean Peninsula. Well, some U.S. intelligence analyst believed North Korea has miniaturized a nuclear warhead.

VAUSE: If true, it would be a major advance. Some experts thought it would take much longer; more now from Tom Foreman.


TOM FOREMAN, CNN REPORTER: This photo purports to show Kim Jong-in with a miniaturized nuke, and if it's the real deal, here's what we know about it. It would be roughly two-feet across, probably would weigh several hundred pounds, may be five-six hundred, and would likely have the same punch as the nuclear weapons the U.S. dropped on Japan 72 years ago this week. But look at the tremendous difference in size, these were each around ten-feet long, weighed about ten thousand pounds; had to be carried in by a heavy bomber. Something this small could much more likely be carried in the nose cone of one of those missiles they've been testing lately.

And that tells us a lot because -- look what we've seen in the latest test. The last missile they had went about 2,300 miles up, way beyond on the space station, beyond many satellites out there. It only covered a land distance of 621 miles, but that's because it went straight up and came straight down. If flattened out that trajectory and fired it across the land, it could reach Guam, Hawaii, Alaska, and depending on the weight of the payload, some scientists believe, technically, it might be able to reach the middle of the United States and some of the cities there -- some scientist said that. But I say technically because if you look at the overall scoreboard of what North Korea is doing, this still has some big challenges in front of them.

Let's give them a green light on range, say they do enough thrust maybe to get to the United States mainland. Accuracy, maybe a big question mark still though, we're going to call that a yellow light, because getting a missile like this on that flattered trajectory into space, back out of space, coming into the atmosphere without tearing apart and then putting warhead on target, that's very, very difficult and hard to make reliable. But remember, only a few ago, we had red light here on nuclear warheads because some of these scientists thought they lack the technology to make one small enough. Now, that, at the very least, has changed to yellow, and so you can see they continue making progress despite the whole world is essentially telling them they would like them stopped.


SESAY: Our Tom Foreman there. A key U.S. ally, Japan, is speaking out in support of President Trump amid the nuclear tension with North Korea. A Trump official says Japan backed the U.S. decision that all options are on the table.

VAUSE: Japan is also pledging to strengthen Security Corporation with the United States. Well, we're joined now by CNN Military Analyst, Lt. Col. Rick Francona, for more on what a war on the Korean Peninsula might actually look like. And again, Colonel, we should suppose that you know, war is not about to break out, isn't it? Forces mobilizing and nothing like that. But out of all the options -- out of all the military options on the table, which one is least bad? Or is it just all in? It's all in or nothing.

LT. COL. RICK FRANCONA, CNN MILITARY ANALYST (via Skype): Well, they're all bad, I guess, you know, if you use your phrases of what's the least bad. You know, the United States could mount a pre-emptive military strike against North Korea going after those facilities that we believe could launch a nuclear weapon at the United State. The problem with that, any military action -- whatever plan we do, however, we decide to do it, it won't be enough to stop a regional confrontation. The North Koreans had been planning to attack Seoul. They have the

artillery in place to do 10,000 tubes aimed at that city to start a war there. It would devastate the city and that would be the first opening salvo for the North Korea, anything we do would draw that reaction. So, I think we have to factor into any military plan. So, right away, you realize that any military confrontation on the Korean Peninsula is going to be devastating in terms of human life and property.

[01:25:26] So, you know, there are no real good options going into this. But I think it's important to stress that, I don't think either side wants a war. I mean, the North Koreans don't want to fight a war. The North Koreans did not develop the nuclear weapons to drop them on the United States; they developed these weapons to prevent an attack from the United States or at least that's the rhetoric coming from Pyongyang.

SESAY: Col. Francona, I've got to ask this, you know, as we talk about, you know, the least bad options and what a strike would look like, would China standby and let the U.S. bomb its neighbor?

FRANCONA: Yes, that's a big question. You know, the worst scenario for the Chinese is a force reunification of the Korean Peninsula, with the South Koreans in the dominant position. And of course, that invites U.S. forces to also be there, and that put American force directly on a Chinese border; something they do not want.

Now, with the Chinese intervene military, you know, that's a really big step. I don't know if we would see it -- of course, we saw that during the Korean War, I don't if we would see that again. And that's a big red card, and that's another thing that the Pentagon is planning to look to at. What are the reactions to the regional players here, not just the Chinese but you have to factor on what are the Russians going to do? You know, they have a border with North Korea. Also, we've got, you know, our allies, the Japanese and the Filipinos in the area as well.

VAUSE: You know Colonel, in 60 years, only once has the U.S. actually considered a pre-emptive strike on North Korea, it was 1994. The Defense Secretary was looking at some kind of, you know, a military offensive against the Yongbyon Nuclear Department. It never went through with it because the consequences in this were unimaginable; that was what, 23 years ago before it had the missiles before it had 16 nuclear weapons in its arsenal. So, given it was unimaginable back then, it must be truly horrific now.

FRANCONA: Oh, absolutely. I mean, things have gotten so much worse. Whereas in the past, you were looking at, actually, a confined war on the Korean Peninsula, possibly extending to Japan and also crossing at the Chinese. But now, you're looking at a possible strike on American territory, Guam as we were talking about, also the mainland United States. And the technology that the North Koreans have developed is quite impressive. They're not only developing a missile, whether an ICBM with a nuclear warhead, they're also developing a mobile launcher, they're also developing submarine launched capabilities; all of these complicate the military planning. And the North Koreans have done pretty much what they've said out to

do; they've developed a deterrent. Rather than the United States talking about realistically, a military option; we're talking about do we contain then, how do we deal with them, and I think in the future we're going to be looking at how do we live with the nuclear armed North Korea?

SESAY: Colonel Francona, it is always good to speak to you. We always appreciate the analysis. Thank you so much.

VAUSE: Thank you, sir. We'll take a short break. When we come back, how the U.S. is preparing for a North Korean nuclear strike; we'll head to one state on the front lines of a possible attack.

SESAY: And then, how President Trump's handling of the North Korean threat is being viewed at home? Stay with us.


[01:30:54] JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back everybody, our breaking news, the threat between the U.S. and North Korea escalating at alarming level.

ISHA SESAY, CNN, ANCHOR: North Korea has warn, it's considering a strike on Guam, a U.S territory, and it's long range missiles can reach the American mainland. But can the North Koreans actually make good on those threats.

Our Brian Todd reports.


BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): King Jong-un appears to have ramped up his capability to deliver his deadliest weapons and is drawing a storm warning from President Trump about threatening the U.S.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They will be met with fire, fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.

(voice-over): U.S. Intelligent officials have assessed that North Korea has produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit insides its missiles including its long range ICBMs that could reach the United States. That's according to multiple sources familiar with the analysis of Kim's missile and nuclear program. The one source tells CNN, this is not a consensus view by the entire intelligence community.

LT. COL. TONY SHAFFER (RET.), FORMER U.S. MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS: Because of the North Korean progress, Hawaii, Alaska, Washington State, Oregon, California are all now threatened directly by the progress that Un and the North Koreans have made.

(voice-over): A missile experts explains where that miniaturized warhead would go and how it would work. THOMAS KARAKO, DIRECTOR FOR STRATEGIST & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: -- the thing is nose cone are shroud would be the warhead. That would, you know, goes up in the space separates, comes back down and it got a pointed objects is going to enter the atmosphere very, very fast.

(voice-over): Sources tell CNN, it is not believe the warhead capability has been tested. And there's another key question about the missiles that would deliver it.

DAVID ALBRIGHT, INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE & INTERNATIONAL SECURITY: It's unclear that that reentry vehicle that would hold the warhead would survive coming back into the atmosphere and reaching the target.

(voice-over): For a warhead to reach its target, it has to re-enter the atmosphere from space at very high speed. So, the engineers need to protect it from extreme heat. North Korea has already been testing heat shields that protect the warhead during its fiery reentry.

President Trump's National Security Adviser H.R McMaster recently said the possibility that North Korea could posses nuclear weapons capable of reaching America would be close intolerable, and could lead for the U.S military response. What could that response be?

SHAFFER: One of the options is to use military weapons, precision strike weapons to take these weapons out both in their height sites via deep underground facilities as well as they're being mounted to the weapon themselves. These are all throughout North Korea. We do know where lot of them are.

(voice-over): But the option comes with the warnings about how Kim Jong-un could strike back.

SHAFFER: Because we have Seoul right on the boarder within direct artillery range, one of these will very likely retaliations would be a launch of weapons direct artillery weapons against Seoul that the Seoul for example is a hostage city.

(on camera) A densely populated city of more than 10 million people also in a target range of Kim and his million men army, some 28, 000 American troops in South Korea, some estimates project tens of thousands of people killed in the first couple of days of a potential conflict.

Brian Todd, CNN, Washington.


VAUSE: And with North Korea making a threat against the Island of Guam. The governor there responded a short time ago.


EDDIE BAZA CALVO, GOVERNOR OF GUAM: I want to reassure the people of Guam, that currently there is no threat to our island or the Mariana's. My Homeland Security adviser, who is in communications with Homeland Security and the Department of Defense notes, that there is no changing the threat level resulting from North Korea events.

I want to ensure that we are prepared for any eventuality. I will be convening the unified coordination group which includes myself and the rear admiral and to discuss the state of readiness of military and our local first responders.


VAUSE: Well, Guam is not only island North Korea could strike. Hawaii is 75,000 kilometers away but still within range of Kim Jong- un's missiles.

SESAY: CNN Sara Sidner takes us inside a bunk in Honolulu. And she shows us what would happen if a missile will launched at Hawaii.


[01:35:06] SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We're inside a bunker inside the Diamond Head crater. There are six feet of concrete above me, six feet of concrete in the walls. This is the place where the emergency operating center state warning point exists. And the reason why this place is so important is this is where the warning to all the Hawaiian Islands will come from.

See that phone there? That phone -- we'll get a phone call from Pacific command once they determine that a missile is coming from North Korea headed this way. Then, this phone will be picked up Hawaii's (ph). This will send out call to all of the counties simultaneously and they will warn their population that this is going to be an attack and to prepare.

There will also be a tone that will be sent from here. That is the plan to all of the islands. And you will hear a warning sound and a siren coming to all the islands. And there will be also simultaneously everything going out on the televisions so that you'll know that this is happening here on the Hawaiian Islands.

Now, one of the most important things that people need to know is you can survive this if you were a certain amount away from where the detonation happens. And in order to do so though, you need to have a plan. Here's the kicker, there is only 20 minutes from the time of launch for North Korea before the bomb falls here in Hawaii.

It doesn't give you much time. You'll probably have 15 minutes warning to get somewhere safe. And that is something that this state is the first to work on. That planned to try and save life incase of a nuclear attack.

Sara Sidner, CNN, Honolulu.


SESAY: Now, at least seven people are dead and 175 injured after a strong earthquake struck a popular tourist area in Southwest China on Tuesday. CCTV reports people are buried under the rubble and rescuers are working to clear the area. VAUSE: Meantime, surveillance video shows items falling from store shelves in northwest China where another earthquake hit on Wednesday. No were dead or damage or injuries from that video.

SESAY: It's time for quick break now. And the alarming exchange between the U.S. and North Korea comes as President Trump faces growing challenges at home.

VAUSE: Plus, North Africa so-called take (ph) one president by another scare, just ahead why Jacob Zuma party is under pressure despite his words.


VAUSE: Welcome come back everybody. President Trump's bellicose threat to Pyongyang comes as he faces increasing criticism and challenges at home.

SESAY: And the latest poll number show he is using American's trust.

Sara Murray has the details.


SARA MURRAY, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): President Trump issuing a sharp warning today to North Korea.

TRUMP: North Korea does not make anymore threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen. He has been very threatening beyond a normal state. And as I said, they will be met with fire, fury and frankly power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.

[01:40:13] (voice-over): The President saying dire consequences lie ahead as North Korea's nuclear threat continues. The warning coming as the President injects a dash of policy to his New Jersey retreat.

TRUMP: -- it is horrible what's going on with opioid and other drugs.

(voice-over): Vowing to combat the opioid crisis as Trump faces the credibility crisis of his own.

Six months into his presidency, just 38 percent of American's approval to job Trump is doing, 56 percent disapprove according to the latest CNN polls. But it's clear the new President is already facing a credibility gap with 60 percent of American saying they don't believe Trump is honest and trustworthy.

Add to that, only a quarter of American say that they believe all or most of the official communications from the White House compare to 30 percent who say they don't trust anything they hear from the President's office.

A series of questionable moves by the administration may only fuel American skepticism, like, this recommendation from Department of Agriculture officials to drop the term climate change and instead refer it to weather extremes, according to an e-mail obtained by CNN.

The guidance comes under a President who has frequently questioned the scientific consensus behind human impact on rising global temperatures. But Trump has also faced scrutiny for his handling of classified information.

On Tuesday, he retweeted a Fox News report based on anonymous sources who leaked the information. It declared U.S. via satellites detects North Korea moving anti-ship cruise missiles to a patrol boat. This is what Nikki Haley, the ambassador to the United Nation had to say about that issue.

NIKKI HALEY, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: I can't talk about anything that's classified and if that's in the newspaper that's a shame.

(voice-over): But the President apparently has no qualms about once again sharing potentially classified information.

In July, Trump tweeted about a covert CIA program to armed Syrian rebels. After the Washington Post reported, the administration plan to end it. Sources say, Trump also shared highly classified information with Russian officials when he invited them into the Oval Office in May.

REP. TED LIEU (D), CALIFORNIA: It is alarming the casualness with which President Trump shares classified information.

(on camera): Now, in terms of North Korea, we know that President Trump has spent quite a bit of time over the last couple of days, huddled with senior U.S. officials about how to deal with threats from North Korea.

One thing that they have made clear is that every option is still on the table and that includes the military option.

Sara Murray, CNN, Bridgewater, New Jersey.


VAUSE: Joining us once again, Dylan Byers, CNN's senior reporter for media and politics and Politico senior reporter, David Siders.

Dylan, you know, the president chief of staff, John Kelly, he may have brought up some more into the White House. But he still has not going to hold of Donald Trump's smart phone and his Twitter account. And that's one of the biggest problems for this White House, right?

DYLAN BYERS, SENIOR REPORTER FOR MEDIA & POLITICS: Right, absolutely. And so the big question, the big question last week was what can John Kelly do to sort of impose smarter on this White House and his president, the question this week is what happen to John Kelly? Where did John Kelly go?

Obviously, the ability to instill any sort of discipline on this president is extraordinarily limited. He is going to do whatever he wants to do. He is going to tweet whatever he wants to tweet even if those tweets aren't inaccurate. He's going to say what he wants to say about North Korea even if that creates problems and headaches for his own military advisers. So, there you have it.

VAUSE: He's almost addicted to the instant reaction I think he gets from --


VAUSE: -- I think the other tweet and headline news.

SESAY: Yes, I guess so, I mean, let's talk about CNN poll issues that majority, 52 percent of American say President Trump's tweet are not an effective way for him to share his views on important issues, 72 percent say they do not send the right message to other world leaders. But David, as President you can look at those numbers and think what?

DAVID SIDERS, SENIOR REPORTER, POLITICO: You know, I almost wonder if he doesn't look at this, like we used to look at in newspapers at poll and of readers saying what kind of stories you like and they always say, we like stories on higher education and technology and science.


SIDERS: Well, you know, it's clear they like the crime story. And I'm not sure that this President doesn't look at his, you know, his core base and say, they want me on Twitter and that's where I'm going to be.

BYERS: I mean, we shouldn't ignore the addictive quality of may it bring up like May just very well being addictive.

VAUSE: Yes. I mean, the I set the number you like it, that's pretty much his base though if you look at the polls 52 percent say, it doesn't send the right messages that that his base numbers. There was this really interesting story from Vice News, twice a day, according to three former and current White House officials.

The president receives two folders, one in the morning, one in the afternoon and the folders are filled with screenshots of positive cable news chyrons, those lower-third headlines and crawls, admiring tweets, transcripts of fawning T.V. interviews, praise-filled news stories, and sometimes just pictures of Trump on T.V. looking powerful.


[01:45:11] VAUSE: -- at the moment, but those fall has been pretty been.

BYERS: Yes, they probably would be breaking (ph). So we -- I actually spend the day sort of looking into those to see how much it was scrambled. The truth that Vice story might over stated a little but not entirely. What we do know and this coming from two senior administration officials, there are folders and they include pictures, photos, screenshots of the chyrons, the lower-third of the screen that our viewers can see right now, showing how cable news covered every event that Trump that did.

So while you're dealing with North Korea, while you're dealing with tax reform, while you're dealing with your inability to pass health care, you're preoccupied with what those lower third of the cable news screen says. So he gets that packet. In addition, he gets another packet of just news headlines which presidents aboard him have done.

The difference here is that it seems as though those are skewing positive, right. So obviously, there's an attempt to sort of please this president as you say, positive headlines are hard to come by in this administration, I spoke to Jen Psaki, CNN contributor former Obama communications director in the Obama White House. She said, look, never did Obama receive anything like this, if he did, he would have thought it was an April fools.


BYERS: I mean, the idea that you would be obsessed with cable news when you were the president of the United States most powerful person arguably in the world.

SESAY: And David, to that very point, I mean, listen, I think we can all accept that political leaders like praise, they like praise, they like the headlines that is pretty common. But this president does seem to needed more than others that we've seen in recent times. So --

VAUSE,: You think?

SESAY: I'm just facing it and opening it up there. That being said, this kind of need or addiction from outside sources, kind of opens them up to be influence, being manipulated.

SIDERS: Well, I think that it narrows his world view, right? If staff in order to manage this president is still in as reported having, you know, folders delivered with positive news, you wonder about his appetite for reading outside of his lines. And I think that is a bigger concern just about being able to put things in context, like in North Korea situation or other things.

And I think that's limiting for anybody and certain people -- his critics worry about for the president.

VAUSE: But Dylan, this is sort of what they do to NBC when he was at the apprentice, they would control the flow of information which he receive so that, you know, he can -- basically, he was looking of what they wanted him to see.

BYERS: Right, which is one thing when you're at media network and another thing when you're the president of the United States. And the problem to David's point is there is a certain point your decision making, your world view becomes influenced not by the experts who might be featured on this network or in the New York Times but rather by Sean Hannity or Steve Doocy or Drey Park (ph).

VAUSE: Yes. BYERS: I mean, the idea that that would influence your world view and your context in the way you think about these things rather than pulling from a number of different versus or rather in fact relying on smart advisers to tell you, you know, what the news is out there and what the lay the land is. But having this control narrative, it's so truly --

VAUSE: It is the problem when the president of the United States does not like bad news because that's the job. You deal with the bad news.

SIDERS: Yes, no, I think it's a problem. I think for the same reason, you know, doing so. Do we want the president making decisions based on, you know, what I say here on any important subject? No, we wanted an adviser. Yes, that's right.

And so this preoccupation I think with the news is what the problem is. It's how many, you know, previous presidents have not spend so much time watching television, have not been so much energy, you know, focused on, that looking in the mirror. And I think they've been looking where outwards. And so that's, you talk to his criticsl. I think that's the concern.

BYERS: You know, Obama was a voracious clear of news. He was against those fun. Obama is also a voracious consumer of sports scores. In fact, he would often dummy has (ph) if he got part in a meeting. But the difference in the way that Obama consume news is that he consume news looking for new ideas, looking for sort of refresh perspective on things trying to bring in smart people. Trump is just looking for affirmation.

VAUSE: Yes, full television apparently in the bedroom and in the White House, yes.

BYERS: It's going to be part of the day.

SESAY: Gentlemen, thank you.

VAUSE: Thank you very much.

SESAY: Thank you very, very much.

VAUSE: Well opinions eagerly waiting results on preparing tight presidential election, almost 20 million people were ready to vote, some waiting hours to cast their ballots was also like expected until late on Wednesday at the earliest.

SESAY: Well, the incoming president Uhuru Kenyatta here on the left is seeking another term, sending of a challenge from a long time rival, Raila Odinga. Raila Odinga has rejected partial result posted online by election official that show Kenyatta leading.

[01:50:00] VAUSE: South African President Jacob Zuma has survived his ninth vote of no-confidence even though the ballot in the national assembly was secret.

SESAY: All position party had hoped in vain that an anonymous ballot, I should say would mean some will make it to through the doubling ANC party might join them against their president. David McKenzie reports.

DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well the (inaudible) on president as his known survived yet another political scare. President Jacob Zuma was not voted out in that vote of no-confidence in parliament but it was a pretty close fight. The reaction from ANC MPs when they found out the results of the rare secret ballots. After to the vote, President Zuma addressed supporters here in Cape Town and he was (INAUDIBLE).


JACOB ZUMA, SOUTH AFRICAN PRESIDENT: They are pumping propaganda through the media that the ANC is no longer supported by the people. It is their own imagination.

The ANC is supported by the overwhelming majority of this country. They will realize in 2019 when we win in a big numbers once again.


MCKENZIE: Zuma saying that the ANC still speaks for the majority of South Africans. Still, thousands of South Africans came to the Parliament present saying that Zuma must go.

Zuma has faced three protests and anger from South Africans because of a (INAUDIBLE) of corruption allegations against the embattled president. In parliament, they had a fiery debate and the opposition calling directly to ANC MPs to vote their conscience.

MMUSI MAIMANE, DEMOCRATIC ALLIANCE LEADER: I know what Nelson Mandela would have done in this House today and you know it too. He once said, "May your choices reflect your hopes and not your fears."

I'm asking you today to overcome your fears, to show courage when the people of this country needs you the most.

MCKENZIE: Zuma of course has repeatedly denied allegations of corruption but the opposition will be hardened by this vote. Despite the fact that they didn't win, they will feel this puts the pressure, even more squarely on the ANC as we moved towards the elective conference later this year.

David McKenzie, CNN, Parliament, South Africa.

VAUSE: Well, next here on NEWSROOM L.A., how some real estate investors bought a street lined with multimillion dollar homes suggest 90,000 dollars? We'll explain.


SESAY: Fans ushering their affection for country music and T.V. star Glen Campbell who died, Tuesday at the age of 81 after long battle with Alzheimer's disease. A memorial wreaths as a momentums are being left as a tribute to him right now along the Hollywood Walk of Fame. VAUSE: The (INAUDIBLE) artist is best remembered for hits "Rhinestone Cowboy", "Gentle On My Mind", and many others, many others. He also tried acting, he was on a T.V. variety show during a decades long career. Glen Campbell left behind his wife and eight children.

SESAY: He was a talent.

To San Francisco now, where residents of an exclusive neighborhood filled with mega mansions (INAUDIBLE) that a couple bought the street for just 90,000 dollars.

[01:55:02] VAUSE: This is actually the street we're talking about. OK, so how's all this possible? As Dan Simon reports, stunned residents found out the hard way.


DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It is one of the most expensive neighborhoods in what is already one of the most expensive cities in America. San Francisco's Presidio Terrace, 35 homes, each worth many millions of dollars. That was some opportunistic real estate investors maybe looking it's profits of in those who live here.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Well, we are just completely flabbergasted.

SIMON (voice-over): The common reaction among neighbors after learning someone was to swoop in and buy their private street.

SAM CHUNG, RESIDENT: I was (INAUDIBLE) in the impression that it's our street.

SIMON (voice-over): Well, it was their street until the city put it up for auction. And what appears to be a bizarre snafu, the home owner's association went 30 years without paying it's property taxes. How much you might ask? The (INAUDIBLE) sum of just $14 a year.

When you add it all up, the city claim it was at $994.77 to be exact for all the years the taxes went uncollected.

AMANDA FRIED, THE OFFICE OF THE TREASURER AND TAX COLLECTOR: It was very strict if people fail to pay their property taxes for more than five years, we must offer the property for auction.

SIMON (voice-over): But now in a lawsuit, the association is saying the city pulled a fast one, because it's been setting bills to an old address and made no reasonable efforts to let any of the neighbors know the street would be put up for auction.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There should have been notice to the residence.

SIMON (voice-over): As for the couple who snatched it up with the highest bid of $90,000, they make no apologies and are just trying to figure out what to do with this prestigious real estate.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: At the moment, we are really looking to hold on to this. You know, property like this doesn't come longer often in San Francisco.

SIMON (on camera): So what might one do with a private street in a pricey neighborhood? Well, for one, the couple in fury to try to collect money from residents trying to park in front of their own homes or they can try to charge outside who's looking for a parking spot. After all, finding parking in San Francisco is difficult.

(voice-over) For now, it appears the home owners and what you might call their street landlord will be having coffee anytime soon.

Dan Simon, CNN, San Francisco.



VAUSE: I love that story. Oh, I'm so sorry for the (INAUDIBLE) but I still feel bad for the people who (INAUDIBLE).

SESAY: OK, (INAUDIBLE) CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm Isha Sesay.

VAUSE: I'm John Vause. Stay with us. A lot more news after a very short break.


SESAY: This is CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. The head of this hour.

VAUSE: Red lines in an unprecedented warning. President Donald Trump threatens North Korea --