Return to Transcripts main page

NEW DAY

North Korea Opens Line Of Communication With South Korea; New England Bracing For Powerful Nor'easter; What's Next For The #MeToo Movement In 2018? Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired January 3, 2018 - 07:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


[07:30:00] SEN. BEN CARDIN (D-MD), RANKING MEMBER, FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: There's so many problems with a wall. Will we give him additional resources for border security? Yes, because border security makes sense. But that's technology; it isn't a wall.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: All right, Senator.

One thing we know for sure is that deadline is coming. We're done with the first three months. We have less than three months to go on it and lives will be very badly affected if nothing is done, so let's see what you can get done down there for those people.

Senator, thank you --

CARDIN: I agree with you. Thank you, Chris. Thank you.

CUOMO: Alisyn.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: OK.

For the first time in nearly two years, North and South Korea are talking. What does that mean for the U.S.? Two geniuses join us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: A major breakthrough in diplomatic relations between North and South Korea. A hotline that was unused for nearly two years has been reopened this morning. U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley dismissed this as having much impact on the U.S.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY, U.S. AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS: North Korea can talk with anyone they want but the U.S. is not going to recognize it or acknowledge it until they agree to ban the nuclear weapons that they have.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: At the same time, President Trump tweeted an eyebrow- raising tweet.

[07:35:02] He said, " I, too, have a nuclear button, but it is a much bigger and more powerful one than his," meaning Kim Jong Un, "and my button works!"

Joining us now is the president of the Eurasia Group and editor-at- large at "Time," Ian Bremmer. And, CNN counterterrorism analyst, Phil Mudd. Great to have both of you gentlemen to talk about all of this.

So, Ian, the idea that North and South Korea are talking, this is huge, yes?

IAN BREMMER, PRESIDENT, EURASIA GROUP, EDITOR-AT-LARGE, TIME: It's a breakthrough, no question.

CAMEROTA: It's a breakthrough.

BREMMER: Another breakthrough.

CAMEROTA: So --

BREMMER: Big sanctions supported by everyone, including the Chinese.

CAMEROTA: They worked.

BREMMER: They've had some impact in my view, absolutely. You give Trump credit for some of that stuff.

CAMEROTA: Absolutely.

BREMMER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: The sanctions -- we just heard Gordon Chang. The sanctions had teeth and Kim Jong Un is hurting and he reached out for help. He needs South Korea's help now.

BREMMER: Yes. Now, let's be clear that the South Koreans are working with North Korea more closely, or want to, in large part because they're scared that Trump's "America First" policy is not in any way a South Korea first policy.

So, the South Koreans are going to be more aligned with China. More willing to cut their own deal with Pyongyang that leaves the United States by itself.

CAMEROTA: And why is that bad? Why is a wedge between South Korea and the U.S., and South Korea realigning away towards China -- what's the repercussion for the U.S.?

BREMMER: Well, I mean there are two.

One is if Trump isn't able to come to terms with the fact that that's OK and the United States isn't going to go to war against North Korea, so he's going to have to pivot at some point because that deal is not going to be cut with America. America needs to be a part of it.

This is our ally. So, if they say we don't want to do military exercises with you because that's not part of the deal, well then, we've just kind of lost a comparatively important ally -- they've gone away. Secondly, China is becoming the key actor with a lot of players in this region, as opposed to the United States. Where is their economy is going to turn, you know? Who are they going to want to do more business with? Their Internets -- who are they going to be synced up with?

Ultimately, a U.S.-led world is not just a more stable world, it's also a world that we profit from. Trump's policies frequently have impact tactically. But long-term, when he's gone, when he's no longer president -- I know in the United States we don't do long-term, right? Neither our corporations nor our president. It's just election cycle.

But, long-term, this is a world that our kids are not going to profit from and that, of course, is a problem.

CAMEROTA: Phil Mudd, how do you see all of these shifting sands?

PHILIP MUDD, CNN COUNTERTERRORISM ANALYST, FORMER COUNTERTERRORISM OFFICIAL AND SENIOR INTELLIGENCE ADVISER, FBI: Boy, Ian Bremmer nailed it. I could just support what he says and get off the camera here, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right.

MUDD: Let's break this down simply. There's a carrot and a stick.

I agree. I think the Trump people deserve some credit for this, as do the Obama people. Sanctions on the North Koreans, I think, are part of what brought him to the table.

We won't know. We don't understand North Korea but clearly, there's a reason they picked up the phone.

The second piece of this, though, is what we head into now, and that is where is the carrot here? Presumably, you want a more stable relationship with the North Koreans. An isolated North Korea means instability, which is not good for America.

The only way to bring stability is to have a conversation with them. So, are we in that conversation, Alisyn, or are we out? And if we're out, do we choose to allow the Chinese, the Russians, the Japanese, and the South Koreans to proceed without us?

This kind of reminds me of what the Trump people did on climate change. If you're not going to participate, the world's going to move ahead without you, and I think that's what the tweets yesterday suggest.

CAMEROTA: OK, let's talk about the tweets for a second.

So, the president, as you know, tweeted about him having a bigger button than Kim Jong Un, which I guess is a euphemism for big hands.

Anyway, Ian, do you think that this is a problem internationally and diplomatically speaking -- these kinds of tweets?

BREMMER: I mean, less than the media does. And I understand why the media covers it. It's entertaining.

CAMEROTA: Well, it's also -- it's not just entertaining. It's also peculiar --

BREMMER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- to hear your president speaking like a 10-year-old.

BREMMER: But it's not news, right? In the sense that we've now known about this for a year, it's not surprising. He does it all the time. It doesn't merit the kind of breathless headlines that it continues to get.

CAMEROTA: Well, only if there are -- is a ripple effect from it.

BREMMER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So does that -- do we know if this bothers Kim Jong Un? Is he entertained by this or does it make him --

BREMMER: Well, there's a --

CAMEROTA: -- more likely to hit his big button?

BREMMER: There's a reason why we no longer cover Kim Jong Un and North Korea's breathless propaganda, which is some of the most artfully written. I agree that Trump has a bigger button, but Kim Jong Un actually has better propaganda.

CAMEROTA: Oh, it's in -- I get it -- quite colorful.

BREMMER: It's more entertaining. And you can follow it if you want to --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

BREMMER: -- on Twitter, but most people don't because after a couple of years of it we all recognize that well, it's not really moving the needle.

CAMEROTA: And you see these tweets as the same way?

BREMMER: Well, sure. I mean, when I talk to foreign leaders around the world they're not hanging off of Trump's tweets in the way they respond.

They're reacting to Trump's lack of competence. They're reaction to Trump's pretty solid national security team. They're reacting to is Tillerson going to be there in a few months or not, much less so the tweets.

Again, I get why the media does it. It is entertaining. It absolutely drives more people to pay attention to what we're saying, but let's not pretend it's policy.

And on North Korea, in particular, the point, as Bill just said, as I've said, is that we're increasingly out of the conversation. And if we're saying no, not like Tillerson, we aren't going to talk to these people until they don't have any nukes anymore, as Nikki Haley said, that's not reality, right?

[07:40:09] I mean, they have nukes. They're not getting rid of them.

CAMEROTA: Right.

BREMMER: We're taking ourselves out of the conversation and that, long-term, means that China is going to be pulling much more of the -- of the triggers.

CAMEROTA: Phil, how do you see the president's big button?

MUDD: Well, I think there's a couple of ways to look at this.

First, in the short-term, why don't we take it seriously? Do we assume -- and this is remarkable to say about a president making public statements -- do we assume that the Americans aren't going to show up at the table? With a typical president you could look at that tweet and say that must mean we don't believe in talks.

I think Rex Tillerson is supposed to have lunch with the president today.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

MUDD: I suspect one of the conversations is we might show up at the table regardless of what the president said.

The final thing I'd say on this is I think this is an advantage for the North Koreans. If they're talking to the Russians and the Chinese who might be saying you need to slow down a bit, if I were the North Koreans I could -- I would say why slow down?

The president threatens me every day. I have a much less significant economy and military. My only solution to answer an aggressive American president is to continue with my missile and nuclear campaign.

I think it's an advantage for the North Koreans, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Right. So, you see it as having a direct effect, not just entertainment value.

MUDD: Yes.

CAMEROTA: OK. Phil Mudd, Ian Bremmer, great conversation. Thank you, both --

MUDD: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: -- very much. Great to have you here -- Chris.

CUOMO: I don't see how anything coming from the president could be just entertainment value. It just doesn't make sense, but always an interesting debate.

How about this? Cold snap gripping much of the nation. Now, a monster storm moving up the East Coast.

This will happen. How bad and where? Details ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:45:16] CUOMO: All right. Nobody likes the cold, but it's going to get a lot worse than just temperatures, especially for New England. People there are bracing for a powerful Nor'easter.

CNN meteorologist Jennifer Gray is at the CNN Center with more. Who gets it and how bad?

JENNIFER GRAY, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Well, it's starting to develop now and so folks in northern Florida and southern Georgia getting it right now. And you can see that purple. That's an icy mix.

We already have I-10 shut down in both directions just east of Tallahassee for about 50 miles. And maybe even a little burst of snow in the bottom of the boot of Louisiana. That doesn't happen very often.

But this is going to get its act together over the next 24 hours. We're going to see a wintry mix and even some snowfall across the low country on into the northern North Carolina. And by the time it gets into northern New England, we are going to see a powerful Nor'easter.

This is going to intensify rapidly. We could see a foot or more of snowfall in places outside of Boston, and even in northern Maine. New York City could see an inch or two. We also could see an inch or two of snow in Philadelphia.

Along with that, you're going to have very powerful winds. And a lot of these bays and right along the coast we have ice chunks, and so that could possibly impact the coastline as well.

And so, here are your latest snowfall totals expected during the storm. The brunt of it, Alisyn, is supposed to hit by Friday.

CAMEROTA: OK, very good information for all of us to have, Jennifer. Thank you so much.

Now to this. In Peru, there's been this horrifying bus crash that's killed at least 48 people. Peru's transport chief says a tractor- trailer rammed the back of the bus causing it to fall off a cliff known as Devil's Curve. A Peruvian official says an initial investigation shows both vehicles were traveling too fast.

CUOMO: All right. In New York City, we now know that they're going to install more than 1,500 protective barriers in high-profile locations. The security measure's a response to a disturbing but growing trend of cars being used as lethal weapons by terrorists.

Now, you'll remember back in October eight people were murdered, nearly a dozen injured when a man drove a rented pickup truck down a busy bicycle path near the World Trade Center.

CAMEROTA: Nobody won last night's Mega Millions jackpot. That means the top prize for Friday night's drawing goes up to at least $418 million. And if that's not enough cash for you, tonight's Powerball jackpot is expected to top $440 million.

Now, the odds of winning both the Mega Millions and the Powerball jackpots are 88 quadrillion to one.

CUOMO: So you're saying I've got a chance?

CAMEROTA: Yes, you have a chance. I've never used the word quadrillion or I've never even seen it in prompter before, but that's it.

CUOMO: So this is that weird time that we here on NEW DAY, as a family, decide to put our money in --

CAMEROTA: Yes.

CUOMO: -- and trust it all to a guy --

CAMEROTA: To Phil.

CUOMO: -- we would trust with almost nothing else --

CAMEROTA: That's right.

CUOMO: -- Phil, who I can tease right now because I'm sure he is dead asleep --

CAMEROTA: He's sound asleep.

CUOMO: -- somewhere in the back.

CAMEROTA: He doesn't know that we're making fun of him.

CUOMO: So he doesn't know.

CAMEROTA: That's right.

CUOMO: Somebody will tell him and then he'll be angry later.

CAMEROTA: OK, but that wasn't even our kicker. Here's our kicker, OK? Listen, watch this.

Not being perfect puts you into jeopardy on "JEOPARDY." Take it from contestant Nick Spicher. His "JEOPARDY" answer counted for a minute before being taken back -- watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEX TREBEK, HOST, "JEOPARDY": A song by Coolio from "Dangerous Minds" goes back in time to become a 1667 John Milton classic.

Nick -- NICK SPICHER, CONTESTANT, "JEOPARDY": What is "Gangsters Paradise Lost."

TREBEK: Yes.

Our judges have reevaluated one of your responses a few moments ago, Nick. You said "gangsters" instead of "gangsta's" on that song by Coolio. So, we take $3,200 away from you so you are now in second place.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: OK. Alex Trebek should never say gangsta.

CUOMO: He didn't make it past the cracker police. He wasn't gangsta. I'd sue.

CAMEROTA: OK, listen, here's how they --

CUOMO: I would sue.

CAMEROTA: Here's how they dealt with it.

CUOMO: All right.

CAMEROTA: On the Website, judges explained that gangsta and gangster are listed separately in the Oxford English Dictionary. OK, two different words. Each has a unique definition.

So that correction cost Spicher $3,200. However, he still came out on top at the end of the show, thank goodness.

For the record, Coolio told TMZ that he would have counted Spicher's answer.

CUOMO: Of course, he would. That's why he is Coolio.

How do you feel about the gangsta-gangster decision?

CAMEROTA: I would have given it to him. I think that, to me, it's just like a colloquialism. I think it is the same.

CUOMO: It's pronunciation. That's really what it is.

CAMEROTA: Pronunciation -- it's pronunciation, you're right.

CUOMO: Yes. The OED, what do they know? What do they have on us? Nothing.

CAMEROTA: Nothing.

CUOMO: They're not --

CAMEROTA: Go to the primary source, Coolio. OK.

Meanwhile, the #MeToo Movement is shaping up to again be a major player in 2018, but now, who's paying for women's stories and is that OK? That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:53:49] CAMEROTA: The #MeToo Movement giving voice to the very real problem of sexual harassment and abuse. So how will the worlds of entertainment and politics continue to address this issue in 2018 and how does it help all women in the country and throughout the world?

Joining us now is CNN contributor and "ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT" host, Nischelle Turner. And, CNN legal analyst, Areva Martin. Great to see both of you.

NISCHELLE TURNER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR, HOST, "ENTERTAINMENT TONIGHT": Good morning.

AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, ATTORNEY AND LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Good morning.

CAMEROTA: Listen, so much has happened, obviously, in 2017 with #MeToo.

In 2018, it seems like there's going to be a call to action. It seems like people are banding together and trying to make these things count. Not just the anecdotal, not just have some high-profile men fired. Where do we go from here?

So, Areva, let me start with you.

One of the things that's happening is that there are groups on both sides of the political spectrum. There are, you know, some sort of high-profile, right-wing bloggers, there are left-wing activists, and they're beginning to offer money to women who will come -- or men, I suppose -- who will come forward with stories against, say, sitting Congresspeople.

So listen, if you take money for your story, does that kill your credibility?

[07:55:02] MARTIN: I don't think so. As long as the story isn't made up, I'm not sure I'm overly concerned about people needing and taking money to help them finance lawsuits against men who have abused them.

And I think we're getting really hung up on some of these details when the bigger issue is did the action occur? And if a woman was abused, if she experienced sexual harassment or sexual abuse, she has every right to come forward and to pursue that, either criminally or civilly.

And we know that powerful men often have been able to silence women because they have more money. They can hire more lawyers, more investigators, and they can prevent women from telling their stories.

So, if someone comes forward and says I can help you finance your legitimate lawsuit where there are legitimate claims, I'm not overly concerned about that --

CAMEROTA: Yes, I hear --

MARTIN: -- as long as the story is true.

CAMEROTA: I understand, Areva, what you're saying, and just one more beat on this. I mean, what if there is no lawsuit? What if they just paid -- get paid for their story -- for telling their story?

What if -- obviously, you know how this works. The statute of limitations passed, there's no evidence, so they're just paid to publicize their story.

Do you feel differently then?

MARTIN: No, because people are paid all the time to tell their stories. That's how movies are made. That's how books are written. People are paid to tell their stories often.

But the question is, is it a valid story? Is there corroborating evidence? Did this happen?

And as long as it's true, I think it's important because these stories are what's fueling the change -- the sea change, the cultural change that we have experienced in 2017 and that continues, hopefully, in 2018.

Without those stories, we wouldn't be having this national conversation. We wouldn't be talking about changing the balance of power. We wouldn't be talking about creating safe workspaces for women.

CAMEROTA: Nischelle, I mean, look, one of the questions of 2017 after all of these actresses -- high-profile actresses -- Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie came out, it was like OK, well, what's next, right?

TURNER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So we know that Harvey Weinstein then falls in this epic way but then, what's next? Here's the answer.

So, there are now -- there's this 1,000 women in entertainment in Hollywood the likes of -- I mean, let me just read you some of their names. Emma Stone, Oprah Winfrey, Jennifer Aniston, Meryl Streep. I mean, the names don't get any bigger than this --

TURNER: Right.

CAMEROTA: -- have raised a $13 million fund to help women with their cases of sexual harassment.

Tell us what we need to know about what's going on in Hollywood.

TURNER: Yes. I mean, you kind of took the words right out of my mouth because the question that I had been asking, whether it's on red carpets or in interviews since all of this started happening, is what's next? What -- how are we going to take this conversation and move it forward?

And I was told by Oprah months ago because we had heard she was meeting with these really powerful women in Hollywood. She said believe me, we are doing something.

Kerry Washington told me a few weeks ago, we're not playing.

So, what they have done is come up with this "Time's Up" campaign. And this group of women -- this entertainment industry group of women have said enough is enough. We are going to take our talk and move it forward.

They created this legal defense fund for women in blue-collar jobs who maybe want to come forward and tell their stories of harassment and abuse and don't have the means to do it, so they're giving some breath to that.

They're also creating different subgroups, one of them called "50/50 by 2020" where they're pressuring entertainment companies to make their leadership half women by the year 2020. That, I think, is really kind of a big ask and a big tell, so we'll have to see if that happens.

But they have also been having workshops and meeting weekly to try to get their strategy together so they can move forward as a unified group.

One of the things that we'll see this weekend at the Golden Globes, all the women are going to come out and wear black as a statement. That's not the only thing they're going to do. They also said they're going to take that opportunity on the red carpet not to talk about fashion, not to talk about frivolous things, but to talk about gender inequality and sexual harassment, and what we need to do to root this out in Hollywood.

They are really making strides. Now, I think they still have some galvanizing to do -- some things to do. I know they're going to propose some legislation as well. But they are really starting to take their words and make it into action and I applaud all of these women for doing this.

CAMEROTA: Oh, absolutely. I mean, they're putting their money where their mouth is.

TURNER: Absolutely.

CAMEROTA: Everyone wondered if this was just a blip -- just a moment. People questioned whether it was really a watershed, you know, moment in time, and it sure seems as though --

TURNER: Yes.

CAMEROTA: -- 2018 is going to be that.

So, Nischelle, Areva, thank you very much. We will obviously continue this conversation. MARTIN: Thanks, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right. We're following a lot of news this morning so let's get right to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: A major diplomatic breakthrough between South Korea and Kim Jong Un.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What he tried to do is to get the U.S. off the Peninsula so he can intimidate South Korea.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Donald Trump's political diplomacy is dangerous and for anyone to assert otherwise, I think it's just crazy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's not going to let Kim Jong Un have the last word on what it means to have nuclear weapons.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This isn't a game. We are talking about nuclear war here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have a president who is just tweeting out utter madness. Off-script doesn't even begin to describe it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In a tweet, the president blasting the DOJ for being part of what he calls the deep state.