Return to Transcripts main page


Oprah's Awards Speech Sparks 2020 Rumors; Trump Lawyers Want to Limit Mueller Interview; North Korea Says it will Send Delegation to Olympics; Huge Oil Tanker at Risk of Exploding After Collision; Lyft Showcasing Self-Driving Cars On Vegas Streets. Aired 1-2a ET

Aired January 9, 2018 - 01:00   ET




JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Hello, everybody. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM. I'm John Vause, live in Los Angeles, where Oprah Winfrey, the former queen of daytime television, is believed to be seriously considering a run for the White House.

KRISTIE LU STOUT, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): And I'm Kristie Lu Stout, live in Seoul, where negotiators from North and South Korea are face to face for the first time in more than two years.

The Winter Olympics and family reunions, these are two of the main topics up for discussion right now between the North and South. Pyongyang says it is going to send a delegation to the Winter Games next month in PyeongChang, South Korea, and Seoul is proposing a resumption of reunions for families separated after the Korean War.

Let's bring in CNN's Paula Hancocks, who is live near the truce village. That's where these North-South talks have been taking place since 10:00 am local time this morning.

And Paula, the North Korean delegation, they're going to the Winter Games.

How did Seoul and Pyongyang come together to send Pyongyang to PyeongChang?

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Christie, it was relatively quick. I mean, they started the talks at 10 o'clock this morning and by just after 1:00, they had announced that they would be going to the Olympics.

So this high-level North Korean delegation, we're told, will include athletes. It will include a cheering squad and others, a visitors group. So it certainly is exactly what South Korea wanted. And they really got to that point quite quickly.

We also understand from the South Korean side that both leaders are able to watch in real-time exactly what is going on. President Moon Jae-in, audio and video and able to intervene if he wants and the North Korean leader, Kim Jong-un, has the audio to listen in real time. He has a hotline to the area as well so he can intervene if need be.

Now it does seem to be quick this morning that this has happened but it has been a long time coming.


HANCOCKS (voice-over): A youth soccer tournament in China last year, the only venue where North and South Korea were talking, according to Chang Mun-soon (ph), the governor of Ganguan (ph) province, where the Winter Olympics will be held.

Standing here next to North Korean sports official Mun Ong (ph), he says he tried three times over three years to lobby for North Korean involvement at PyeongChang. Last month he said the attitude had changed and they started listening.

"This youth soccer exchange," he says, "was the first cooperation between North and South Korea since the current administration. The fact that it was established is a sign the relationship between North and South has improved a lot."

As talks start at the border village of Panmunjom, Governor Chae (ph) knows the devil is in the detail. At the Sydney Olympics, one argument centered around the size of the cheering squad.

But even before anything is decided, Chae (ph) has been making plans.

"There are three different ways for North Korea to come here," he says, "by cruise ship, by land over (INAUDIBLE) and by plane. If they come on our cruise ship, issues like accommodation are also resolved."

Chae's confident helping the North Korean delegation to come to the games and putting them up will not violate sanctions passed against North Korea's nuclear and missile program; as he said, sporting events are not included in the restrictions.

Two North Korean figure skaters, Riyun Tayok (ph) and Kim Ju-shik (ph) have qualified for the Games but missed the deadline for registration. The IOC may give them a wild card to allow them to participate.

Chae wants them to form a joint North-South Korean team, a rare show of unity between two neighbors still technically at war.

North and South Korea marched together at the opening ceremony at the 2000 Sydney Olympics under a flag showing an undivided Korean Peninsula. As for who can come to the Olympics, speculation is rife Kim Jong-un could send his sister, Kim Yo-jung (ph).

Chae would like U.S. president Donald Trump to come but he's happy it may be his daughter, Ivanka. The names have not yet been confirmed.

"I'm really hoping that Ivanka and Kim Jong-un's sister meet at the Olympics," he says. "It's our hope that this can be the starting point for dialogue for North Korea and the United States." (END VIDEOTAPE)

HANCOCKS: So the talks have resumed once again this afternoon. We understand that the South Koreans would like to talk about those family reunions. They'd like to talk about potential military talks in the future.

But, of course, there are a few details to iron out with the Olympics as well. Certainly the IOC will be involved now to see whether or not they give a wild card to those two figure skaters -- Kristie.

STOUT: Yes, these games will certainly change the dynamic between Seoul, Pyongyang as well as Washington and, of course, change the fate of at least two North Korean athletes expected to participate in PyeongChang.

Paula Hancocks, reporting live from near the DMZ, thank you.

Now joining me here in --


STOUT: -- Seoul is Hak-soon Paik (ph). He's a senior research fellow and director of the Center for North Korean Studies at Sejong Institute (ph).

Mr. Paik, thank you so much for joining us here on CNN. North Korea is going to the Winter Games. It appears that the (INAUDIBLE) was made today at these high-level talks near the DMZ or at the DMZ.

But in reality, was this something that was brokered and agreed upon a long time ago?

HAK-SOON PAIK, CENTER FOR NORTH KOREAN STUDIES, SEJONG INSTITUTE: I think Kim Jong-un, you know, has completed his, you know, nuclear and missile programs in his own way and tried to do something about lowering the, you know, treacherously heightened threat of war, even potentially nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula.

He has to deal with president Donald Trump just like us, who, I think he has some suspicion, you know, about his unpredictability and also unorthodox kind of behavior on the part of Donald Trump. So I think --


STOUT: A question about Moon Jae-in, the South Korean president. We know that the South Korean president, if we could talk about him for just a moment, he campaigned on the platform of engagement with North Korea. He promised last year that there would be a peace Olympics.

Does he gain politically from this move?

PAIK: Right. Yes, you know, definitely Moon Jae-in, you know, has repeatedly, you know, promoted this Olympic Games as a game for peace. And, so, you know, tried to reach out in a Korean dialogue. And what we are seeing today is exactly the starting point of dialogue

for the improved relationship between the two countries. But what I'm trying to argue here is that, even though Kim Jong-un offered dialogue with South Korea on the occasion of this PyeongChang Olympic Games, he is actually offering dialogue to the United States.

North Korea traditionally has adopted three different approaches to Washington, D.C., depending on the situation and also considering their policy goals.

Number one, for instance, in a confrontation; and number two, engagement; number three, going to Washington, D.C. through South Korea and Seoul. So I think, you know, this time is exactly the third path, going to Washington through Seoul.

So, you know, Kim Jong-un has been under serious pressure in his own way, as I pointed out, to lower the tension on the Korean Peninsula. So will he, you know, declare a completion?

This is a political and a diplomatic declaration but declared to have perfected a nuclear-tipped ICBM. But at the same time, he is conducting dialogue with the South in order to go to Washington, D.C.

STOUT: Yes, it's quite a diplomatic coup by Kim Jong-un, despite not stopping or putting a pause on its weapons program for the time being. He has scored this diplomatic coup with South Korea, as you said.

He has his eyes on the prize. He wants, Kim Jong-un wants to have talks with the United States.

So will Donald Trump follow Moon Jae-in's lead and engage in diplomacy with Pyongyang?

PAIK: I think this very volatile, you know, uncontrollable situation, confrontation here on the Korean Peninsula, you know, poses a very serious threat and dilemma, not only for North Korea but also for the United States.

You know, it may ignite war, potentially nuclear war, out of, you know, mutually betraying a miscalculation based on the misperception of each other on both sides.

So I think President Trump recognizing the need to lower the tension on the Korean Peninsula, not believing Kim Jong-un as a reliable partner to, you know, to talk with, even though he is repeatedly talking about a military option.

I think he should go beyond a sort of reluctant support of inter- Korean dialogue we began today in order to, you know, deal with more fundamental, you know, stake we have to deal with.

For instance, how to, again, how to avoid a war, a potential nuclear war, and how to, you know, denuclearize North Korea, not immediately but bring everything under control at least and how to find the permanent solution to the peace settlement in Korea. And more importantly -- [01:10:00]

PAIK: -- how to maintain and strengthen U.S. leadership without unleashing a war or a nuclear war in this region.

STOUT: Hak-soon Paik, joining me live from here in Seoul, South Korea, thank you so much for that analysis.

We'll be back in just a few minutes with more on the talks. Let's head back to Los Angeles. John Vause is standing by there.

John, really interesting to hear from that Seoul-based guest just now, saying that even though the United States is not present at this inter-Korean talks underway at the DMZ, Donald Trump still very much in the mind of Kim Jong-un, who is monitoring the talks in real time. Back to you.

VAUSE: Yes, very much so. We'll look at the politics now of the North Korean talks, how it plays into U.S. politics and Donald Trump. Our CNN political commentators, Democratic strategist Dave Jacobson and Republican consultant John Thomas are with us.

OK. So over the weekend the U.S. president basically took credit for this face-to-face between North and South Korea. He said it wouldn't be happening without his recent tough talk. This is what he said.


DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: A lot of people have written that, without my rhetoric and without my tough stance -- and it's not just a stance, I mean, this is -- this is what has to be done if it has to be done -- that they wouldn't be talking about Olympics, that they wouldn't be talking right now.


VAUSE: So, Dave, it could be the tough talk. It could be that the sanctions on the Pyongyang regime are starting to bite. But that was still an initiative by this White House.

Trump sure showed a lot of flexibility here, delaying those military drills until after the Winter Olympic Games. That got him a lot of goodwill in South Korea.

Does the administration deserve some kind of credit for all of this?

DAVE JACOBSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I don't think Donald Trump can go a day without thinking he deserves some credit for something. We're talking about an egomaniac, bottom line.

VAUSE: But does he deserve credit for this?

JACOBSON: That's the question.

Yes, he's not part of the conversation, he's not part of these -- these are bilateral talks. And so I don't give him any credit. Look, I think it's a positive step in the right direction. We should

do whatever we can to avoid a catastrophic war. Millions of lives are at stake. But here is one of the more pressing issues that I think will come up in the weeks ahead. There's been all this talk about secretary of state Rex Tillerson and whether or not he's going to leave the administration.

And there's been a number of reports of infighting within the Trump administration, some calling for war, some calling a so-called bloody nose, I think McMaster has been quoted with calling for that with --


VAUSE: -- H.R. McMaster.

JACOBSON: -- correct, correct. And then you've got Rex Tillerson, who has been pushing for diplomacy. But if he leaves over the next couple of weeks, the question is going to be open about whether or not the Trump administration is actually going to continue to pursue diplomacy.

VAUSE: John, just to another point, though, the U.S. is now on the sidelines. In the past, it would have been in the driver's seat, essentially directing where all of this goes. And there is some handwringing, there's some concern in Washington about what happens when Koreans talk amongst themselves when the Americans aren't there and what the consequences of these direct talks could be.

JOHN THOMAS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, first of all, the question you asked Dave, I think Trump does deserve some credit. It's movement. This is a very tricky situation and, for the first time, we're actually seeing movement. I also think that part of what Rex Tillerson's job is to have back channels to South Korea, that while they may not be directly involved in the talks, that they're monitoring the situation.

I would imagine at some point the U.S. will get back involved. I think this is a step in the right direction. It's by no means solving the problem. But in such a challenging time, the fact that these two parties are even having a dialogue is a good step.

VAUSE: But you know what's interesting though?

If you go back 30 years or back to 1987, just a little more than 30 years, which is when the North Koreans blew up a South Korean airliner and killed pretty much everybody on board, a year later though, Washington and Pyongyang sat down for direct talks, official talks in China.

And the way the Reagan administration did it back then was by using the Summer Olympics. If the North Koreans provided a period of quiet, were on their best behavior, then Washington would ease some of the financial restrictions and some of the sanctions.

And it was clever. It was smart. It was subtle.

And, Dave, it worked. There are similarities right now because we're coming up to the Winter Olympics. There's been a period of tension.

But is this current administration capable of pulling a similar diplomatic feat?

JACOBSON: I don't think the word subtle is in Donald Trump's dictionary, unfortunately. That's the challenge. You've got this unhinged, radical individual, who is all over the map.

We've seen him undercut his own secretary of state, who was pushing for diplomacy. We've had him say "fire and fury." I mean, moreover, you've seen all of this tough talk but you haven't seen a whole lot of action beyond the sanctions, which were a good thing, so that's the question, is like


THOMAS: -- you put Donald Trump's Twitter feed aside, his foreign policy moves have been largely traditional with conservative, Reagan- like ideology. So it isn't farfetched, tweets aside.

VAUSE: OK. I bet he doesn't use fire and fury again.

We're going to take a short break. And you guys are going to stay with us.

When we come back, could it really happen?

What are the chances Oprah Winfrey would actually make a bid for the White House?

We'll have --


VAUSE: -- more on that in a moment.

Also on Saturday, it collided with a freighter, now it's feared an Iranian oil tanker might explode and sink. The latest details also coming up.




VAUSE: You may have seen her impassioned speech at the Golden Globes. Well, now there is a lot of buzz around Oprah Winfrey running for president in 2020. Some of her close friends have told CNN she's actively thinking about it. Here is Brian Stelter.


OPRAH WINFREY, ACTOR: A new day is on the horizon.

BRIAN STELTER, CNNMONEY SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An acceptance speech or a campaign kickoff?

Make no mistake about it, Oprah Winfrey is thinking about running for president. Two sources close to the media icon say she's been having conversations about this for months, with some in her inner circle urging her to run.

Winfrey's speech about the #MeToo movement almost sounded like a stump speech.

WINFREY: Speaking your truth is the most powerful tool we all have.

STELTER (voice-over): Winfrey's long-time partner, Stedman Graham, was asked by an "L.A. Times" reporter if Oprah would run. His response, "It's up to the people. She would absolutely do it. She already has Hollywood's vote."

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But there is only one person whose name is a verb, an adjective and a feeling and that is Oprah.

STELTER (voice-over): Does the rest of the country agree?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't even know her political thoughts, frankly.

STELTER (voice-over): In 2015, Trump praised Winfrey.

TRUMP: She's a friend of mine. She's a great person.

STELTER (voice-over): Both Trump and Winfrey are rich and famous. "Forbes" says Trump is worth $3.1 billion; Winfrey, $2.8 billion. And both know how to put on a show. But that's where the similarities stop.

She is seen as liberal. He is conservative. She is America's generous aunt. And he is America's testy uncle.

TRUMP: You're fired.

STELTER (voice-over): He's 71, she is 63.

WINFREY: All that is God.

STELTER (voice-over): She has a show about spirituality. He rarely talks about religion.

TRUMP: Two Corinthians, right, Two Corinthians.

STELTER (voice-over): She promotes Weight Watchers. He loves McDonalds. She got her start as a reporter; he attacks the media.

TRUMP: It's time to expose the crooked media.

STELTER (voice-over): She has a Focus Book Club.

WINFREY: The joy you're going to have reading this for the first time.

STELTER (voice-over): And he reportedly does not have time for books.

TRUMP: I read areas, I'll read chapters. I just -- I don't have the time.

STELTER (voice-over): Where Trump's brand is divisive, embracing voter anger, Winfrey promotes civility and unity.

WINFREY: By the time of the next presidential election, are we more likely to have come together?

STELTER (voice-over): Winfrey sometimes shoots down 2020 talk.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there any chance you'll run for office?


STELTER (voice-over): But other times, she stokes the speculations.

WINFREY: I thought, oh, gee, I don't have the experience, I don't know enough. I don't -- and now I'm thinking, oh.

STELTER (voice-over): She has the platform, national TV shows and 41 million Twitter followers.


STELTER: That's almost as many as Trump.

She also has a presidential friend, Barack Obama. It's unclear if the two of them have talked about an Oprah ticket. But, hey, it's too bad Trump doesn't need a V.P., because this is what he said in 1999.

LARRY KING, CNN HOST: You have a vice presidential candidate in mind?

TRUMP: Well, I really haven't gotten quite there yet.

KING: Well, it's just --

TRUMP: Oprah. I love Oprah. Oprah would always be my first choice.

KING: Oprah?

TRUMP: Oprah.

STELTER (voice-over): Brian Stelter, CNN, New York.


VAUSE: OK. John and David back with us.

Dave, OK, be honest, this enthusiasm for Winfrey, it's basically a Democrat revenge fantasy, right?

JACOBSON: It's a 24-hour fad, hopefully.

I mean, who doesn't love Oprah? Don't get me wrong. But I think in the wake of Donald Trump, we need somebody who really understands the mechanics of government.


JACOBSON: And we need somebody who is going to be able to, like, immediately roll back this horrifying agenda that he's put forward, taking America back years.

And, frankly, look, I think Democrats in 2020 should have a healthy debate. If Oprah wants to run, more power to her, let her do it. But she needs to get up on the debate stage and prove herself to be the strongest candidate in 2020.

VAUSE: Mix it up, OK.

Whenever I hear about actors running for public office or running for the White House, I always think of that one moment in the first "Back to the Future" movie. This one.


CHRISTOPHER LLOYD, ACTOR, "EMMETT BROWN": Tell me, future boy, who is President of the United States in 1985?


"BROWN": Ronald Reagan?

The actor?

Then who's Vice President, Jerry Lewis?

I suppose Jane Wyman is the first lady.

"MCFLY": Well, wait, Doc --

"BROWN": And Jack Benny is the Secretary of the Treasury.

"MCFLY": You've got to listen to me.


VAUSE: OK. It was a punch line, John, but now is this really where we're heading? It's all about name recognition, likability? Politics use to be Hollywood for ugly people and now, what, politics is just Hollywood?

THOMAS: Yes, the brand -- it's all about branding and who comes in with a big brand and if that brand can be harnessed to align with what the nation wants.

I think we're talking about Oprah. I'd love to see her run. I don't see her pulling the trigger simply because there is a big difference between being a beloved talk show host and getting in the gutter in politics. I don't see her wanting to engage in that. VAUSE: OK, well, there is a lot which can happen before 2020 and that includes the Russia investigation. We're now being told that the president's lawyers believe that the special counsel will soon request an interview, a one-on-one with Donald Trump.

Dave, what will the consequences of that be if the president stops short of that full interview, sort of what Bill Clinton did when he was president during the Monica Lewinsky scandal?

JACOBSON: I would hope that there would be a bipartisan revolt against the president. Look, I think a lot of Republicans fundamentally believe that we need to see through this Mueller investigation.

Lindsey Graham was on some of the Sunday shows the other day, endorsing Bob Mueller's investigation, saying it needs to continue. So I think it's going to raise questions and, you know, about the president and whether or not he's hiding anything from the American people and why he's not being forthright and transparent and why he won't answer the tough questions.

At the end of the day, four people have been charged already and this was his campaign.

VAUSE: I mean, and, John, you know, Donald Trump is no stranger to testifying in court. He's done it a lot of times and also been called out for not exactly being entirely truthful a lot of times during that testimony. This time, if he's got nothing to hide, then he should be fine, right?

THOMAS: I don't think so. I mean, any defense attorney will probably tell you, keep your mouth shut as much as you can. All Donald Trump has to look at is Bill Clinton and the definition of it --


THOMAS: -- so there are ways to perjure yourself or say things you regret. And I think the big danger here for Donald Trump is not about Russia collusion because I don't think he believes that happened at all. I think the big danger is what's the scope of this investigation?

Are they going to ask Donald Trump something that has nothing to do with Russian collusion from 20 years ago and nail him on accounting errors like they did with Paul Manafort?

VAUSE: Funny you should mention Russian collusion because the administration continues to push back on Michael Wolff's book, "Fire and Fury," saying that, you know, it's all fake news and that Wolff never had permission to be in the White House.

But Trump's former deputy assistant, Sebastian Gorka, wrote a piece in "The Hill" on Monday, the usual stuff, fake news, blah, blah, blah. But there was this one line and it reads, so -- this is Gorka -- "When I met Michael Wolff in Reince Priebus' office, the former chief of staff, when he was waiting to talk to Steve Bannon, you know, the fired strategist. And after that I'd been told to also speak to him for his book.

My attitude was polite but firm, thanks but no thanks.

Dave, Gorka just gave the game away. He that confirmed Wolff actually had White House approval, which is what Trump is saying never happened.

JACOBSON: Precisely. He validated Wolff.


JACOBSON: Look, maybe not everything that's in the book but I think what Wolff said on "Meet the Press" the other day, when he was interviewed by Chuck Todd, was, "Read the book."

Like there may be a couple of misstatements here and there but it's largely the broader context of the conversations happening within the White House and senior officials close to Donald Trump.

As strategists, particularly looking at a presidential race, perhaps one poll doesn't necessarily tell you precisely a snapshot of what folks are doing on the ground. You look at trends.

And if you look at the trend of this book and the comments and the statements, maybe not everything is totally 100 percent factual but the trend is overwhelming and it shows that people are frankly dangerous about this president in the Oval Office.

THOMAS: That interview with Chuck Todd was telling in the sense that Wolff avoided saying that all the facts were accurate, which seems bizarre to me, in a nonfiction piece. But to say that the intent is that the viewer should be able to sit with Wolff on the couch and believe that it were true.

Isn't that like more of a fiction piece?

There are so many --


THOMAS: -- was there chaos at the time he was there?

Yes, absolutely. But looking at the specifics, seems like a liberal fantasy of the way he wrote it rather than what actually happened in the White House.

VAUSE: OK. He talked about the big takeaway being the fact that, according to Wolff, 100 percent of those around Donald Trump believe he's not capable of executing the job of the presidency.

Trump is going for his physical at the end of the week and we're being told that he will not have a psychiatric examination. One of the issues is his recent decline in speech, according to some.

In May last year, "Stat News," which is a part of the "Boston Globe," it's a medical publication reviewed decades of Trump's on-air interview, compared them to his question and answers since his inauguration. This what they found.

They then went off and asked experts in neurolinguistics and cognitive assessment as well as psychologists and psychiatrists to compare Trump's speech from decades ago to that in 2017. They all agreed there had been a deterioration and some said it could reflect changes in the health of Trump's brain.

So Dave, given that this is the President of the United States, his finger on the nuclear button, there are these questions that are being asked. Democrats are meeting with psychologists to find out what's going on.

A psychiatric examination of the president, is that beyond -- is that reasonable?

JACOBSON: I think it should be a bipartisan issue. I think it's something that both Democrats and Republicans in Congress should enact into law and, look, at the end of the day, like, you want a mentally stable, rational, pragmatic person in the Oval Office.

Whatever your --


VAUSE: Show us birth certificate and have a psychiatric examination.

THOMAS: It's funny; we wondered the same thing about Hillary Clinton (INAUDIBLE) her health but that was out of reach. The fact is, if Trump is even operating at half-speed and he's still essentially the chief strategist and outwitted 16 Republican candidates and a Clinton dynasty, that's incredible.

VAUSE: Well, Trump may be actually operating at half-speed because we're now learning what executive time, is according to the news website, Axios. Trump's days in the Oval Office are relatively short from around 11:00 am to 6:00 pm.

Then he's back to the residence. During that time he usually has a meeting or two but spends a good deal of his time making phone calls and watching cable news in the dining room adjoining the Oval.

Then he's back to the residence for more phone calls, more TV, also a lot more tweeting.

OK, so this is called executive time.

But and, again, John, the problem isn't that the president likes to watch TV and he likes to tweet. The problem is that they're pushing back on this and saying that he doesn't watch any TV when we clearly know that he does. It's like when they say he doesn't play any golf and we can see him playing golf. Just own it.

THOMAS: Well, I think they should. But they don't want to give into the sense that he only watches TV. I think Trump is just like my executive office, which has three plasma TVs or LCDs on the wall. I'm watching all the shows all day long while I'm on the phone and working.

And I think that's what he's doing. He's one of the literally hardest working candidates we've ever had run for president and now people are accusing him of essentially being lazy when he becomes president. That doesn't seem accurate to me.

VAUSE: Final word, Dave.

JACOBSON: Adult daycare.


VAUSE: Right.

JACOBSON: That's what it is. Like I feel like the response to this, the fact that they're going, like, above and beyond, saying that he doesn't even watch cable news, like they're going -- they're reaching too far to protect the guy.

VAUSE: There is nothing wrong with the president tweeting and knowing what's going on in the world or watching TV. Just own it. OK. Because clearly he does. And he drinks lots of Diet Coke.

Dave and John, good to see you guys.

OK, short break.

When we continue back, high level talks between North and South Korea are already producing results. We'll have details on the North's plan for the upcoming Winter Olympics in just a moment.



VAUSE: You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause with the headlines this hour.

North Korea says it will send a delegation of athletes and diplomats to next month's Winter Olympics in South Korea. Negotiators from the North and South are meeting right now in the demilitarize zone, their first face-to-face talks in more than two years.

British Prime Minister Theresa May has reshuffled her cabinet with new positions announced Monday at 10 Downing Street. Also, a handful of cabinet members were fired. According to her office, the reorganization will help Mrs. May with the ongoing Brexit talks.

And close friends of the media mogul, Oprah Winfrey, says she's actively thinking about a run for the presidency. It comes out that her rousing speech at the Golden Globes where she declared a new day is on the horizon. The White House says we welcome the challenge.

Let's have more now, the talks underway between North and South Korea, CNN's Kristie Lu Stout will have all those developments, she joins us now live from Seoul -- Christie. LU STOUT: John, thank you. Now, not only are we learning about North Korea's plan for the Olympics, there will be a delegation that will go to Pyeongchang about one month from now.

But also, South Korea has been proposing military talks with the North. For more on all of this, let's bring in Paul Carroll, he is the Senior Advisor for the Nuclear Security Group N Square. He joins me now from San Francisco, California.

Paul, thank you so much for joining us here on CNN. So, Kim Jong-un will get to see his athletes take part at the Winter Games, progress is being made to facilitate military talks as well as his Korean family reunions, there's a lot of diplomatic activity going on here. But does this equate to a saw in relations between North and South?

PAUL CARROLL, SENIOR ADVISOR, NUCLEAR SECURITY GROUP N SQUARE: Well, I think it's too soon to tell. I think that we need to keep in mind this is a marathon.

And when I say -- I say this, I mean, the entire dynamics of the relationship not only between North and South Korea but between the other players: the United States, China, Japan, and a little bit on the periphery, Russia.

So this is a tactical move, it's an important one and would I call it a thaw? I would call it the beginning of a thaw. I mean, the freezer door is open. What happens next remains to be seen but the early reports are very encouraging, there will be North Korean athletes at the games. There will be a joint presence in the parade from the early reports.

So this is precisely the kind of baby steps that need to be taken to open up the potential for broader reengagement and discussion on a whole range of topics.

STOUT: Yes. Getting North Korea to the games is a big baby step forward for better inter-Korean relations but what does it mean for the ultimate goal here? You know, some sort of resolution to the North Korean nuclear crisis?

CARROLL: Well, I think it depends on who you ask when you say the ultimate goal. If you ask Beijing, their ultimate goal is to stability, right? They've been willing to live with a certain amount of misbehavior from their North Korean counterparts.


The ultimate goal for the United States I think, as you say, were focused solely on the nuclear missile program. That seems to be the only thing we can think and talk about. And we're not very good at listening about what other sort of equities in the region are. What's the North's ultimate North's ultimate goal? Well, regime survival. So, what we have to do is square these circles and this inter-Korean dialogue, again, is sort of a tow in the tent, but it's a long way from getting the players sort of on to the same page and then understanding that there's going to have to be some give and take, and no one's going to get everything they want. But I'm encouraged, I think this is very much a positive first step.

STOUT: The second part of the inter-Korean dialogue is happening right now, the proceedings kicked off this morning at 10:00a.m.

We know that the leaders of South Korea and North Korea are able to listen in and monitor these conversations, Donald Trump cannot. The U.S. is not part of these talks underway, should the U.S. be concerned about that?

CARROLL: I think we should be concerned but not so much in a way of that this is a security risk. I mean, not to be flip about it but all I can think is it's like a Thanksgiving dinner and you're not sure whether you could -- whether you should invite, sort of, your -- you know, your uncle that drinks too much.

Our allies in Seoul as well as our rivals in Pyongyang don't quite know what to make of the United States, which leader should they listen to, is it the President himself, is it Secretary of State Tillerson, is it Secretary of Defense Mattis, is it Nikki Hailey at the U.N.?

There is daylight between our leadership and what they say and what they seem to do. And so, I think it's important that the U.S. not be involved in this, this is about the Koreans and their rapprochement if you will or at least their temporary rapprochement.

So, I wouldn't say the U.S. should be concerned but we should be very much in close touch with our allies in Seoul as the proceedings go forward.

STOUT: But when the U.S. and the world sees those North Korean athletes in that big delegation take part in the Pyeongchang Winter Games exactly one month from now, is that going to signal a significant shift, a shift away from that ratcheting up of tensions that we were experiencing all of last year?

CARROLL: No. I think, actually, that's sort of the cherry on top of the sundae. What we need to really pay attention to is the rest of it. Let's see if as the games which last several weeks proceed, will the North Koreans refrain from other missile tests, nuclear tests, or other kinds of provocations.

Likewise, the United States and South Korea has already agreed to postpone our annual military exercises until after the Olympics, that's extremely important as well. So, if those two, sort of, you know, voluntary restrains hold, then there can be dialogue about other things.

I think the presence of North Korean athletes and participating side- by-side with South Koreans is extremely important but it's also symbolic. The substance will come later and the substance can come as the games proceed.

STOUT: Yes. At the moment, getting North Korea to the Winter Games is just window dressing now. Paul Carroll of N Square joining us live from San Francisco, a pleasure to speak with you and do take care. Let's head back over to Los Angeles where John Vause is standing by.

John, we'll go over to you.

VAUSE: Kristie, thank you. There's a raise against time in the East China Sea with fears an Iranian oil tanker could explode and sink after colliding with a freight ship over the weekend.

Big black smoke has been billowing from the tanker, hammering search and rescue efforts. CNN's Alexandra Field joins us now live from Beijing. So, Alexandra, what's the latest on bringing this fire under control, and also, the search and rescue efforts?

ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, frankly, John, the conditions are working against everyone's favor when it comes to this search and rescue operation.

You are talking about flames that are still very much active, you've got flames on the water, you have a ship that's on fire, you have smoke that is billowing from this massive tanker, it's a tanker that's about the size of a U.S. aircraft carrier.

Chinese officials, of course, have raised concerns about poisonous gas being emitted from the ship, also from the toxicity of this heavy smoke that's coming from it. We know that the weather has also complicated efforts.

But a number of vessels have been sent to that area to try and reach the crew members who could be on board. We know there were 32 people on board that Iranian Tanker that was making its way to South Korea with a haul of a million barrels of oil.

Authority say that they have recovered one body, they have not identified that body, certainly they continue to search for 31 other people but you do have this complex system that's really keeping them from getting closer to that ship it seems.

We know that this is a joint effort from Chinese vessels, they're being supported by South Korean vessels, and they're getting some support from the U.S. Navy in the air but certainly you cannot overstate the fact that time is very much of the essence here.

This is a collision that happened over the weekend, this tanker collided with the Chinese freighter, all 21 people on board that freighter were rescued. That is the positive news in all of this as the search continues for the 32 people who were onboard the Iranian tanker.


In terms of the environmental impact of this, this is something that's certainly raising concerns, again, we're talking about a million barrels of ultra-light crude oil. Environmental activist say that's actually easier, John, to clean up than a heavier crude oil.

But it's more flammable and that's why Chinese officials are concerned that this tanker could actually explode and then sink if that entire haul of oil then drops to the surface of the sea there. They say that that will make the clean-up enormously complicated.

A lot of factors working against them, John, of course, first and foremost, the mission to rescue anyone who may have survived this -- John.

VAUSE: Okay. Alex, thanks for the update, we appreciate it. With that, we'll take a short break.

When we come back, the Me Too Movement and the Golden Globe, an empty Hollywood gesture or a turning point in the struggle to end sexual harassment?


VAUSE: Well, the Golden Globes on Sunday, there was the Me Too Movement, there was Oprah's speech, almost seem like the winners at the Globes maybe in an afterthought.

Oprah accepted the Lifetime Achievement Award calling for a future where nobody ever has to say Me Too again. And some of the women there actually used their roles as presenters to make a very point about Hollywood's gender disparities.


RON HOWARD, AMERICAN ACTOR AND FILMMAKER: We are honored bring you back to this, and this, to be here to present the award for Best Director.

NATALIE PORTMAN, AMERICAN ACTRESS: And here are the all-male nominees.


VAUSE: Even before the ceremony began, on the red carpet, there was a protest, many actresses and women who turned up were actually wearing black, it shows solidarity for victims of sexual assault and harassment as well as discrimination.

It was inspired by "Time's Up Initiative" that is planning to fight sexual harassment across all industries. The stars also brought activists along as their date -- well some of them did at least, Susan Sarandon was one of them and she invited our next guest to the Golden Globes with her, Journalist and Activist, Rosa Clemente is here. Thank you for coming in. It was kind of a big night, right --


VAUSE: -- on so many levels.

CLEMENTE: Yes, it was an amazing night. It was an incredible experience. I'm a long time organizer in various works based out of New York City where I grew up, in the Bronx.

And to have an international audience and a platform where we are empowering women or let's say women are using the power that they've always had, it was an incredible night.

VAUSE: I just want to say this out of the way very quickly so we can move on, women were asked to wear black as a protest.



VAUSE: There's some criticism it all kind of fell a bit flat and didn't work. Rose McGowan who accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault, for example, she tweeted this, "And not one of those fancy people wearing black to honor our rapes would have lifted a finger. Had it not been so, I've no time for Hollywood fakery."

But I love you (INAUDIBLE) you know, the one who (INAUDIBLE)


VAUSE: -- Harvey Weinstein. To sort of point because other people said, you know, look, they're all glamorous, they're dripping in diamonds. These are $2,000, you know, outfits. It kind of just looked like Golden Globes, you know, as per usual, but everyone decided to wear black. You know, Nicole Kidman wore -- that's the third time she wore black to the Golden Globes, for example.

CLEMENTE: Yes, so let me say that I actually know Rose McGowan and I know what she has been through. I was with her at the Women's Convention in October when she really went fully public in an organizing space. So, first of all, us as organizers were not dripping in anything, OK? You know, we weren't.

VAUSE: Good point, yes.

CLEMENTE: And I think it was beyond just wearing black. I think those actresses that -- no, I know those actresses that walked with us, they were moved by an article from the farmworker's alliance, Monica Jimenez and the farmworkers alliance said we as farmworkers stand with you women, even though you women have privilege and have access and have visibility, we understand that every woman deserves dignity in the workplace. So, whether you're in Beverly Hills or in the South Bronx, whether you're in Iran and Puerto Rico, right, we all deserve dignity, not only in the workplace, but we deserve dignity in life.

And also, we are long-term organizers so we were not there as an accessory, no one is using us. There is work that has already happened. $17 million has been raised for legal defense fund that women that don't have the financial needs will be able to access. The next step to the work that we're doing is all of us in the organizations and projects that we represent will be working and these actresses will continue to use their platforms to uplift that work.

VAUSE: But you were with Susan Sarandon. And here is part of what she said during the award ceremony. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SUSAN SARANDON, ACTRESS: Tonight, we've got all of these women

standing up for each other, and the men, too.

GEENA DAVIS, ACTRESS: And the men. Yes, these five nominees have agreed to give half of their salary back so that women can make more than them.

SARANDON: Yes, I'm -- I don't think that actually happened yet, but that's a great idea.


VAUSE: You know, this issue of equal pay, it seems to be symbolic and symptomatic of the -- of the whole issue because it's about respect, it's about value, it's about women being treated with dignity. And until this issue is resolved, then this seems to be at the core of so much of the sexual harassment problem, not just in Hollywood but across the society, and not just in the United States but around the world.

CLEMENTE: I would agree with you. That's what we talk about when we talk about systemic change. The fact that women made I think $0.74 to a dollar.

VAUSE: Yes, black women make even less, and Latina women less, and -- yes.

CLEMENTE: And let's, you know, women make the least, right? So, until there is systemic change in equity and how we are paid, the system of imbalance will continue. But, look, this is a national audience and not every country watching and every person watching is under a capitalistic system. And I think, unfortunately, the United States, we have capitalism on steroids, where everything is monetized, everything is -- or if you don't have money, then you don't have access or equal rights or dignity or, you know, it's like, look, we got people --

VAUSE: It determines so much about where you go, what you can do, when --

CLEMENTE: Yes, but the fact that in 2018, we still have to have arguments that if me and you are doing the same job we deserve the same pay.

VAUSE: Yes, it's ridiculous.

CLEMENTE: It's ridiculous.

VAUSE: Very quickly, we're out of time. But Puerto Rico, I know you're passionate about what's happening there.

CLEMENTE: Well, that's why I went to the Golden Globes. The progress is called and I hope that people go check it out.

VAUSE: Pronthemap. Thank you. I wish we had more time.

CLEMENTE: No, it's fine. Thank you so much.

VAUSE: Thanks for coming in. I appreciate it. OK. A short break, when we come back, we're getting a first-hand look at what's down the road for the humble car or the preview from the electronics convention in Las Vegas. And you may be interested in this because apparently, the cars may not be around much longer. We'll explain.



VAUSE: If the latest in tech is your thing, then you should be in Las Vegas in the coming hours when the Consumer Electronics Show will open, one of the largest tech conventions in the world. Quite often this is where the latest trends come from. Carmakers will be there, they'll focus on 5G Networks and self-driving features. That brings us to Lyft, the share-riding service is actually looking to lead the way in the self-driving trend. It's teaming up with a number of companies, including -- what have we got -- automotive technology company which is putting driverless cars on the road in Las Vegas. And we put Samuel Burke in one of those cars to find out what it's like.


SAMUEL BURKE, CNN BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: We picked up this ride through the Lyft app, but the technology is actually active. So, are you guys kind of agnostic about the technology? Will you partner with multiple companies?

ROBBY RASMUSSEN, LYFT: The platform is definitely a strategy of collaboration. And so, we already have seven partners already signed up for the platform and this is our second public pilot.

BURKE: And do you envision a scenario where Lyft drivers will have employment because they're backup drivers to these self-driving cars?

RASMUSSEN: Right now, ridesharing accounts for a relatively small percentage of total miles driven in the United States, and as we scale this technology, we'll be able to start addressing many, many more of those miles. However, there's a lot of these rides that actually require a person. We've started doing partnerships with a lot of companies that help get elderly to their doctors' appointments, for instance.


VAUSE: Well, for more, joining us here in Los Angeles, Ed Kim, the Vice President of the industry analysis at AutoPacific and automotive marketing and research firm. Good to see you, Ed.


VAUSE: It's been a while.

KIM: Yes.

VAUSE: OK. It seems like this debate about self-driving cars, it's not question of if but when.

KIM: Definitely.

VAUSE: So, will it be a matter of a few years? Will it be a decade or so before it becomes kind of normal practice? And then when it does actually happen, what will it look like?

KIM: Well, yes, it's a multi-parked question. So, basically, we're going to start seeing a lot of autonomous tech, sort of the beginning levels of it in the coming years. Next two, three, four years within -- by early next decade, we'll have several automakers doing pilot programs, testing smart city infrastructure by employing a ride hailing services like Lyft, like Uber, working in a confined geographic area. From there on out, we'll start seeing this becoming a lot more common.

A few decades from now, I'm actually envisioning a scenario where many of the automakers -- or many consumers have stopped buying private automobiles and are moving to these autonomous ride hailing cars because the biggest advantage of these that these ride hailing services are selling is that this will be cheaper and better than private car ownership.

VAUSE: Funny you should mention that because Bob Lutz who's the former vice chairman at General Motors, he's made this prediction. It's amazing when you read this, his rationale and his -- well, how he sees the future playing out. A few years, he says these self-driving automated pods will take over. Auto retailing will be OK for the next 10, maybe 15 years as the auto companies make autonomous vehicles that still carry the manufacturer's brand and are still in the highway. But the era of the human-driven automobile, it's repair facilities, it's delearships, the media surrounding it, all will be gone in 20 years. I mean, it's a logical prediction to make, but it's a mind- blowing thing to try and understand that everything you've grown up with, everything that you've known is just not going to be there. It's all going to change.

KIM: Yes. Yes, definitely. I don't know if I agree with that timing. 20 years may be a little aggressive but 30, 40 years, I think that's a definite possibility. In fact, I think it's a pretty likely scenario. You know, if you think about it, right now, think about air travel. When you are selecting an airline to fly, you don't really care if it's an airbus or a Boeing that you're flying on, you're really concerned more about the service and price and, you know, those sorts of things.


Ultimately, it will be the same thing for automobiles. And that means that automobiles will increasingly become more commoditized. And automakers themselves could really end up being more suppliers to ride-hailing services rather than end consumers like you or -- like you or me. VAUSE: The implications for the economy's taxis, the trucks, the delivery guys, it's a huge shakeup.

KIM: Yes, massive.

VAUSE: In the meantime, though, it seems Toyota may have unveiled what looks to be like the next step in this progression. It's a self- driving delivery van. On Monday, it showed -- what is it -- a delivery guy for Pizza Hut, I think. So, clearly, it's better if you got any problems, you know, to risk a pizza, not a person. So, is this sort of thing likely to be, you know, widespread, you know, in a relative short period of time?

KIM: Well, certainly, commercial usage is a natural fit for autonomous technology. And, you know, as you alluded to, there is less inherent risk to passengers, I mean, you know, the technology is still somewhat in its infancy. So, if you're using this technology initially to deliver goods and services, that does present itself as a good -- as a very, very viable test bed before a really widespread rollout transporting people like you or me to here or there.

VAUSE: Right. Very quickly, G.M. is investing in Lyft, for example. Overall, are the automakers ready for this, do you think? Have they taken the steps necessary?

KIM: I think it varies. I think -- I think General Motors in particular is doing a very, very good job of looking at the tea leaves, reading the tea leaves, looking at the future and preparing themselves for the future. Other automakers perhaps not so much. But I think the most proactive automakers are the ones that are really looking at the future and seeing that the business model of the automakers is really going to change pretty drastically in the coming decades.

VAUSE: Wow. Interesting times.

KIM: Definitely.

VAUSE: Upheaval and disruption everywhere.

KIM: Very much so.

VAUSE: Ed, thanks for coming in.

KIM: All right. Thanks so much.

VAUSE: Cheers! You've been watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles, I'm John Vause. Please join us on Twitter @cnnnewsroomla. There you can find highlights and clips from our show, may even find out where Isha has been. I'll be back with more news right after this.



VAUSE: This is CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. Thanks for staying with us, everybody. I'm John Vause.