Return to Transcripts main page


International Manhunt; The Search for Carles Puigdemont; Koreas Tensions; Kim Jong-un's Visit to China; White House; Expulsion of Russians from America; International Sanctions for Russia; Spy Poisoning: Russian Diplomats Expelled across U.S. and Europe; U.S. Government Investigating Facebook's Data Methods; Facebook Promising To Win Back Trust, Do Better. Aired 2-3a ET

Aired March 27, 2018 - 02:00   ET



JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: Also ahead, two unarmed African-American men shot dead by police within days sparking protest and new demands for change.

ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR: And in a devastating string of earthquakes, after landslides in Papua, New Guinea that have destroyed homes and so many lives in the island nation.

Hello and welcome to our viewers around the world. I'm Isha Sesay.

VAUSE: I'm John Vause. If you missed the last two hours, don't worry, because we still have one more hour to go. This is Newsroom L.A.

SESAY: We're looking at an extraordinary, coordinated response in growing number of countries are expelling Russian diplomats over the nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy in the U.K., They include the U.S., Canada, Australia, Ukraine, Norway, Albania, and 16 countries in the European Union.

VAUSE: The announcements were made almost simultaneously in an attempt to disrupt the Kremlin's intelligence gathering operation. British Prime Minister Theresa May is welcoming the show of solidarity over the attempted murder of Sergei Skripal and his daughter. Skripal was a former Russian agent.


THERES MAY, BRITISH PRIME MINISTER: Together, we have sent a message that we will not tolerate Russia's continued attempts to flaunt international law and undermine our values.


VAUSE: Well, for more of that, here is CNN's Michelle Kosinski reporting in from the State Department.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Sixty Russian diplomats. According to the Trump Administration, aggressive spies have one week to pack their bags and get out. A dozen Russians will be kicked out of New York at the U.N., 48 others at embassies and consulates around the U.S. The Russian consulate in Seattle will be shuddered, administration officials saying thing too close to U.S. submarine base, a sharp U.S. response to the nerve agent attack, poisoning former Russian Sergei Skripal and his daughter and others in the U.K.

ADMIRAL JOHN KIRBY, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I think this is a good move by the President and the administration. I'm glad to see it. It sends two strong messages to Putin. One is we're going to you hold you accountable for your crimes, and number two, that you're not going to be able to continue to divide and sow chaos and discord in the west.

KOSINSKI: This move cuts the number of Russian diplomats in the U.S. by 13 percent. Officials saying this will make the U.S. safer from Russian espionage. More than a dozen U.S. allies also expelling diplomats and Russia already warning it will do the same right back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The United States reached a very bad step. I'm sure that time will come they will understand what kind of grave mistake they did.

KOSINSKI: The much harder line than previously seen from this administration, especially from President Trump, who only days ago defied his national security team's warning, in all capital letters, to not congratulate Vladimir Putin on his election victory. On a phone call with Putin, Trump didn't even bring up the poisoning attack or election meddling, which lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans are worried that this administration is not tackling.

Now, Trump will have a new National Security Advisor in John Bolton, the new Secretary of State in Mike Pompeo, both of whom have called for strong action against Russia. But in 2016, Bolton criticized President Obama on Fox News for taking the same action in nearly expelling diplomats.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That is utterly useless. So if you make them feel pain and others feel pain, then the possibility of deterring future conduct like this increases. That's what we need to do.

KOSINSKI: Former CIA Operative Bob Baer agrees.

BOB BAER, FORMER CIA OPERATIVE: You go after Putin's money. You go after the oligarchs. You hit them in their pocketbooks.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Boldness, absolutely right. I don't usually agree with him but he's right on this. You really have to make them feel pain and expelling 60 diplomats does not go far enough.

KOSINSKI: Russia has sensed something bubbling up. They knew some kind of response was coming. So they've been trolling the U.S. online for days, even tweeted out a poll asking people which U.S. consulates should be shutdown in Russia. But the Trump Administration has also issued its own stark warning to Russia, saying if they do retaliate, the U.S. could well take further action against them, Michelle Kosinski, CNN, the State Department.


SESAY: Well, CNN National Security Analyst Gayle Tzemach Lemmon joins us now, Gayle good to see you as always. So many experts out there are questioning the real impact of expelling 60 Russian diplomats. And in your view is this move that will really hurt Russia enough to serve as a deterrent?

GAYLE TZEMACH LEMMON, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: We'll stay tuned, right? There is the message and then there's the mission, right? So the message is very loud and clear. We are going to do something. We have coordination across the countries, and that includes the European Union.

[02:05:00] It includes the United States. We are going to do something about this. Now the real question is what you asked is about the mission, right. How much does this actually make a difference to what Russia is doing and their actions in terms of espionage and in terms of disruption of elections, in terms of targeting of people, right?

That is a question that we don't have an answer to. And it's also a question about how effective is any of this in the electronic era.

SESAY: I mean what we do know though, Gayle, I mean regardless of whether this actually acts as a deterrent. We do know that they are more meaningful steps that could have been taken. That much we know in the sense of sanctions and the financial penalties against those in Putin's inner cycle.

LEMMON: That's true, but I don't think that we should downplay the symbolism. And it's not just -- it's because is not just the United States, right. It's not just the United Kingdom. You talk about Germany, which expelled folks, and Germany's foreign minister came out with much harsher language than you heard from his predecessor.

You talk about Poland for the first time expelling a diplomat who comes from Russia. So I do think that the symbolism here matters, but that is an absolutely correct point that you make, right. This is potentially just the start, and we don't know yet where this ends. I would be willing to place the right wager that we are not in even the second round of this hand.

SESAY: I mean Russia's response has been I guess typically Russians. They put out this tweet which has been -- talks about a great deal earlier in the day. They put out this tweet, basically asking people to vote. And the U.S. administration ordered the closure of the Russian consulate in Seattle. What U.S. Consulate General would you close in Russia if it was up to you to decide?

And they give three options to the voting public. I mean at least on the face of it, Russia does not seem overly worried, but do you think that it is just bluster. LEMMON: Right. I mean they have managed the information messaging

around this as well as they could, right. The very cheeky and crowd source, your diplomatic response to an expulsion, the likes of which we've never seen, I think it's pretty par for the course in terms of what they have been managing to do in response to this, and also a well leading up to this, right.

It wasn't like it came out of the blue. This has been a diplomatic volley that has been going back and forth between the United States and Russia, between the United Kingdom and Russia, and I think today was the first round some of that action.

SESAY: I mean in sense of the response, do you see taking the -- I mean again, back to the whole thing about sanctions, not to undermine the motive to play them down. But it is a bit of a dance though. I'll let you know, expel some of yours, you can expel some of mine, that we have seen in the past. I mean do we think the Russian retaliation will be just that.

LEMMON: It's a bigger waltz than we have seen, but it is still a waltz, right. And the question is what comes next. And truly, we have never lived in an era where the electronic means of spreading information, spreading disinformation was this effective. So it does make you wonder how effective any of the old school responses to a very new generation of diplomatic intervention, a new generation of disinformation really will be.

And I don't think we have the answer to that. And I also don't think we know just how far this will go, Isha. We don't know what the Russian response will be, and we also don't know if the Americans, that the British, if the Europeans will say you know what this don't go nearly far enough. And the Russian response will escalate and then we'll see an escalation in return. I think we will have to stay tuned on that.

SESAY: Gayle, always appreciate it. Thank you for the insight.

LEMMON: Great to see you.

VAUSE: Jessica Levinson is a Professor of Law and Governance at Loyola Law School and Michael Genovese is President of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University, and they're with United States now for more on this extraordinary international move. Britain's Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson tweeted out this.

Today's extraordinary international response by our allies stands in history as the largest collective expulsion of Russian intelligence officers ever, and will help defend our shared security. Russia cannot break international rules with impurity. Michael, given this strain that we've seen over the last 14 months between the Trump Administration and traditional allies, especially in Europe, the fact that the United States joined in on this, it would be seen as significant and sending a specific message to Putin at least on paper.

MICHAEL GENOVESE, PROFESSOR, LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY: Right. It was very significant because in the past 14 months, Trump has not played well with others, especially allies. This has brought him into the family a little bit, and if you can get some rewards, maybe it will encourage them to do more. But the optic of Trump-Russia has been so bad for the President that he was desperate for something that would make him look good, make him look strong, make him look like leader at a time when the Cold War Russia associated in the same sentence with Trump has been bad news. So this is a big win -- I think a big win for the President.

VAUSE: But at the same though, Jessica, the most sweeping purge of Russian diplomats in the United States since 1986 in the Reagan administration...

[02:10:00] -- And yet, the President, he is like Marcel Marceau, there is not a word. You know we just sort of -- you know the Russians did not want to go and he's silent.

JESSICA LEVINSON, PROFESSOR, LOYOLA LAW SCHOOL: Well, thank god for that. But yeah, I mean I do appreciate your miming.

VAUSE: Thank you very much.

LEVINSON: But I would say, yes, I think that this is a high point for Trump. And I think that frankly, he had to do this because if we hadn't we would've been such an outlier in the international community. And I think that our response would have been so disparate. And then it really would have fed into everyone's view that you know this -- I'm thinking back to the debate where the statement was well you're just a puppet for the Russian government.

And Donald Trump, like any good schoolyard bully said I'm not a puppet, you're the puppet. Exactly, and I think that you know frankly just this had to happen. I'm glad that it happened, but we didn't want to take one more step to look like an outlier on the international status.

VAUSE: OK. The White House Deputy Press Secretary on Monday, he dodged the question when he was asked why the President hasn't spoken out about this expulsion of Russian diplomats. He had this answer instead.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The United States has issued sanctions on key Russian oligarchs in response to the meddling in the 2016 election. So I wouldn't close any doors or I wouldn't preclude any potential action. But the President doesn't telegraph his moves.


VAUSE: OK. So, Michael, he's saying there could be more to come. But you know the bottom line here is the President doesn't telegraph his moves. We wouldn't know them because there haven't really been any moves against Russia in any significant way from the President.

GENOVESE: And he generally doesn't think long-term and strategic. I think that's one of the keys. It is a question of is this move the end game or is it one in a sequence of steps that Trump and our allies will play against Russia. And that's the key. Will Trump stay on board with the allies if they move further and further.


LEVINSON: And I would say he absolutely does telegraph his moves all the time. I mean he has been so vocal about so many things. I mean think of the amount of time and space we've spent talking about crooked Hillary, the fake news, as compared to the really important international incident.

VAUSE: Yeah. OK, so the silence from the President on Russia, silence from the President Stormy Daniels, you know film star suing the President as she re-released from this nondisclosure agreement, which obviously did not stop her from appearing on 60 Minutes on Sunday, and she shared some salacious details of her alleged frist with the President.


STORMY DANIELS, FORMER ADULT FILM ACTRESS: You know talking about yourself on our way to work. And I was like someone should take that magazine and spank you with it. And I'll never forget the look on his face. I don't think anyone has spoken to him like that.


VAUSE: Jessica, the problem here is not the dirty details, but the details about this hush money which hasn't really been any firm denials from the White House that it was paid and the President was part of it. It's old and sort of gray, furry, fuzzy area right now.

LEVINSON: I mean for me the $130,000 is the name of the game. I frankly don't really care that much who President Trump had an affair with. I think this is an issue that Melania Trump can deal with, but with respect to Michael Cohen deciding to use -- excuse me, Michael Cohen, the President's lawyer deciding to use a dummy corporation to funnel $130,000 in what hush money to Stormy Daniels 11 days before the election sure looks like it's connected with the election.

And if it was made in furtherance of his desire to win as candidate Trump, then it looks like a contribution. If President Trump knew and said yes that's a great idea, then it's a coordinated contribution. It's an in-kind contribution. Either way, we're looking at something about $127,000, $127,500 above the contribution limit.

VAUSE: And the Wall Street Journal reports that Cohen apparently complained that Trump didn't pay him back quickly enough. Michael, in the past, the President, he did not hold back when he was accused of you know sexually inappropriate behavior. It's not the tone he used to take.


DONALD TRUMP, UNITED STATES PRESIDENT: These claims are all fabricated. They're pure fiction and they're outright lies. These events never ever happened. Every woman lied when they came forward to hurt my campaign. Total fabrication, the events never happened, never. All of these liars will be sued.


VAUSE: OK. So it must've been a very difficult Sunday night for the President because he did not tweet until Monday morning, and he was kind of very vague. We think it's about the Stormy Daniels interview. So much fake news, never been more bogus, or more inaccurate, but through it all our country is doing great. So, Michael, explain -- they're all lies, I'm going to sue them, fake news.

GENOVESE: Well, he's a braggart and he threatens and he's the bully.

[02:15:00] And so verbally he's trying to bully these women, but then you get the serious claim and his silence is deafening. But I want to just disagree a little bit with Jessica, because I think beyond just breaking campaign laws, campaign finance laws, if they were broken. Because he's President, he also drags all of us in the mud with him on this dirty story.

And do we need to hear about spanking the President in his tidy whiteys? Do we need to hear about a grown man having unprotected sex with a pornographic star, a Playboy Bunny, and his wife? This is just tawdry and it's ugly and we're dragged into the mud with him. And so I think it goes beyond just breaking of the law. It goes to the very heart and soul of who we are as a people.

LEVINSON: And I think frankly it's because we're all in kind of a triage mode and we're all just drinking water from a fire hydrant, that I find myself in the situation of saying well, sure, so the President's lawyer probably paid a porn star about an affair. But let me tell you what I'm really worried about.

VAUSE: That's pretty low for what's acceptable, I guess.

GENOVESE: But also, this is a metaphoric thing for the Trump Presidency. It's all about him, selfish and reckless, dangerous behavior, and we're the people who are riding on the back of this trolley, and it is going screaming, all out of control.

VAUSE: Very quickly. Trump tweeted over the weekend. He had no problem hiring the best lawyers who wanted to work for him. We found out on Monday that two more high profile lawyers in D.C. are refusing to join the Trump team. They say they can't do it because the conflict of interest. Jessica, how can the President of the United States, who has a ton of money, not be able to hire a lawyer in Washington, D.C.

LEVINSON: Well, it is actually rather stunning. But there are so many really sterling conservative attorneys who have said no, I can't do it.

VAUSE: We're almost out of time so.

LEVINSON: Sure. So there are honest situations of conflict of interest, but there are honestly ways to get around that when you're trying to figure how to serve the President. Not in all cases, but the fact that he has to say look, that's not happening is a great indication.


GENOVESE: And all the good lawyers are already employed by working for the ex-Trump officials who have been thrown out and have been indicted or are facing...


VAUSE: And Mueller has 16 of the best lawyers in the country working for him, so a lot of work for lawyers these days. I guess that's a good thing. Michael and Jessica, thank you.

GENOVESE: Thank you.

SESAY: Who would have though it, hey.

VAUSE: Yeah. Well.

SESAY: (Inaudible) is detained. A general court will decide the next legal steps for (Inaudible) where the drive from the Catalan independence stands right now. We'll tell you.

VAUSE: Also, motorcycle escort, flashing lights, limousine, speeding through Beijing, all of them in heightened security. So who is the special visitor? Details when we come back.


SESAY: Well, a German court will decide whether to extradite the former Catalan President to Spain.

VAUSE: Carles Puigdemont appeared in a regional court Monday. He faces up to 25 years is prison on charges of rebellion in Spain over Campeones campaign through independence.

SESAY: Protesters are against his arrest and violence in Barcelona when police clashed with demonstrators. For more on this, CNN's European Affairs Commentator Dominic Thomas joins us here in L.A., Dominic, good to have you with us because this is all very dramatic the way this man was taken. I mean talk to us about how this all went down, it's like a movie.

DOMINIC THOMAS, CNN EUROPEAN AFFAIRS COMMENTATOR: Right. So from what we understand, he was traveling in Finland. And on Friday, the Spanish Supreme Court essentially issued an international warrant, right, a European arrest warrant for Carles Puigdemont and he was on his way back to Belgium where he's been living in self-exile for several months now, had already covered several hundred miles.

And from what we understand, the Spanish Secret Service had attached a GPS locator to his vehicle, and when he passed over into Germany and the vehicle was gassing up at a station, the German authorities have been notified, came in and arrested him.

SESAY: My goodness. What I find really fascinating other than the cloak and dagger a Bond-like tones to all of this, I thought the arrest warrant had been withdrawn though. So help me understand the legal course that got us here.

THOMAS: The whole point of the European arrest warrant is to move away from the realm of politics. And when the European Union finally put this into place in 2004, it was to be a purely judicial matter. And there are 32 different clauses covered by this warrant that range from trafficking, to murder, fraud, and particularly the question of terrorism.

SESAY: It sounded like a generic warrant -- 32.

THOMAS: Right. But at the time he was in Belgium, and so the other provision is that if under those 32 clauses, the actual act for which the warrant has been issued is not covered in those. You then move to local law. So in other word, the country has to execute the warrant in the case of Belgium was not likely to issue, to extradite him on the charges of rebellion, which is what the Spanish state wanted, the much higher charge, not misuse of funds.

So the big question now is that he's in Germany, is that the question of the misuse of public funds is a no-brainer. It is clear that he could be extradited on that. The question will be whether or not the German authorities are willing to extradite him on the charge of rebellion.

[02:22:20] And for that, we need to find an equivalent in German law, the closest to that would be the question of high treason, that high treason is very clear involves violence. And so here we have an elected official, now whether or not people in Catalan are unanimous over this or not. It's an incredibly divisive issue, but the fact is that he's an elected political official. And many would argue that he has not himself incited violence as the path to this referendum.

SESAY: It is actually a full-blown conclusion. It's just a matter of the charges. He's in Germany now.

THOMAS: Right. He's in Germany - well, it is a difficult question because it's almost impossible to say that this has been -- that this cannot enter the world of politics, right. He is in obviously the most populous German country, with Merkel recently now appointed Chancellor. And there has already been some utterings from the left party. The FTP has also spoken about this. So it's not an easy road, but in terms of the juridical, judicial aspect of it, it is clear that the one that has been issued, that that Germany's responsibility is to extradite him.

The question will be what are the particular charges that they're willing to go along with, and if it's just misuse of public funds, that is not going to be enough for Prime Minister Rajoy, who wants to make sure that the other 20 plus people that were charged by the Supreme Court on Friday, the higher charges will be charges in parallel to those of Puigdemont. They don't want him extradited back to Spain on just misuse of public


SESAY: But Mariano Rajoy -- this is like an inferno that can't control. I mean his hands are kind of tied on his front, politically speaking. But also the implications on the ground there in Catalonia, and he can't control where this will go.

THOMAS: No. And it's obvious that what happened Friday was another process of escalation, right. The Supreme Court finally handed down its verdict. You have now six people that are international fugitives from Belgium, Germany, Switzerland, and Scotland. And all these international spaces have to weigh in on how they're going to respond to these various arrest warrants. But I would argue that Rajoy's position in Spain is increasingly fragile.

People have had enough of this. And the question really is whether or not Rajoy is the best person in place to be able to negotiate some kind of end to this incredibly divisive issue that has been going on for months now.

SESAY: Which has political and economic implications.

THOMAS: Enormous for the rest of Europe.

SESAY: Dominic Thomas, always appreciate it, thank you.

VAUSE: Well, it seems they could be in Beijing right now. This high- speed convoy was spotted headed to an official guest house used by foreign dignitaries. Chinese officials are not giving away any details, but there is wide speculation that the stealthy traveler is the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un . And we're receiving instruction now live from Beijing.

So Andrew, one big clue here is the arrival of the North Korean VIP train, the train that Kim Jong-Il and his father Kim Ul-Sung once used. So Kim did arrive on that train. It could be quite a ride. A Russian diplomat described Kim Jong-Il's train, he said it was stuffed by beautiful lady conductors and live lobsters were shipped to stop along the route to Moscow, or in cases, are Bordeaux and burgundy red whines.

So if we can find some discarded lobster shells and empty bottles of burgundy, and this is in fact Kim Jong-un visiting Beijing, it would be significant and a chance for Kim to mend some fences.

ANDREW STEVENS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely, John. No evidence of lobster shells at this stage, but there is certainly plenty of evidence that there is someone, a VIP from North Korea in Beijing. And just incidentally, that train you're trying about, that was one of six apparently built by Kim's father to ferry him, not only to China, but also to Moscow as well. But what we know at this stage is that there is a very, very heavy security presence around the center of Beijing, Chaoyang Avenue, which is the main thoroughfare that has placed 20 or so meters right from the train station going to Tiananmen Square, which is the leaders compound where President Xi Jin-Ping does business.

So it is assumed that there is a meeting going on there at the moment. According to one contact we've been speaking to, has got a very deep knowledge of North Korea, there is a very strong possibility, as they put it, that this is in fact Kim Jong-un . What is also the key here is we won't to actually get an official read out of this until that mystery visitor has left, John, if protocols are anything to go by.

When his father arrived here, the news was only let out after he had left. So we don't know when he's leaving, but if there is this police presence right out at the station this afternoon. It does suggest he may be actually leaving today at some stage. He did get in yesterday afternoon, we understand. I keep on saying here because there is widespread speculation that it is in fact Kim Jong-un . There have some suggestions it could be his sister acting as a special envoy.

[02:27:20] But to your other point that mending fences here, there has been concern in Beijing about the meeting obviously between North Korea and Donald Trump, meetings between the North Korea and South Korea. The concern is that is North Korea moving close to the walls of the U.S. So obviously, it's in Kim Jong-un 's interest to keep China on site here. Remember, John, China is the most important ally that North Korea has, even though the relationship hasn't been great since Kim Jong-un took office.

It's still far and away the most important country for North Korea's very survival. It is the economic lifeline. So given the fact that this looks like it's the first trip that Kim Jong-un has ever made as leader outside North Korea, perhaps it's no surprise that Beijing is his port to call, John.

VAUSE: Like lips and teeth, their relationship according to Mau back in the day. Andrew, thank you, good to see you, Andrew Stevens live in Beijing.

SESAY: We're going to take a very quick break here. Papua, New Guinea is reeling after a devastating string of earthquakes, aftershocks and landslides. Many have lost everything, and yet, this natural disaster has gone almost unnoticed by the rest of the world. We'll give it a try and find out why when we come back.


[02:30:55] JOHN VAUSE, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.

ISHA SESAY, CNN INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: And I'm Isha Sesay. The headline this is hour. The U.S. is giving 60 Russian diplomats and their families a week to leave the country. They're being expelled after a nerve agent attack on a former Russian spy in England in all nearly two dozen countries have now been ordered -- are now ordered rather Russian diplomats back to Moscow.

VAUSE: Heavy security has surrounded a Beijing guesthouse where a mystery guest is staying. And officials tell CNN there's a strong possibly it's the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Officials in Pyongyang and Beijing have refused to put down any details but all this time just weeks before Kim's planned meetings with the president of South Korea and the United States.

SESAY: In Russia, exits were blocks and the alarm system was turned off in the Russian mall where a fire killed 64 people on Sunday. The Siberian city is now mourning the victims. Many of them were children. Russian President Vladimir Putin says criminal negligence entails this is to blame for the fire.

VAUSE: But one of the poorest countries is reeling from a frightening string of earthquakes and aftershocks, but most the world seems paying little attention. The latest quake to hit Papua New Guinea stuck on Monday.

SESAY: Well, there no deaths from the 6.6 magnitude tremor but another quake measuring 7.5 triggered landslides killing dozens of people and burying entire villages last month, and ever since then there have been aftershocks reported in part from the country nearly every day.

VAUSE: CNN meteorologist Pedram Javaheri joins us now from Atlanta with more on this. So, you know, this is a region I guess which is used to earthquakes but nothing like this.

PEDRAM JAVAHERI, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. You know, this was a -- an incredible one and it was a very shallow one too. Typically, when you get to magnitudes 7, 8 very rare as they are. They're typically fairly deep in this particular one that occurred in February was sitting around 15 or so kilometers deep. But when you take that energy, you can calculate the amount of energy release that radiates from the epicenter and it was really remarkable when you break the numbers down, equivalent to 179 Hiroshima atomic bombs. Over five billion sticks of dynamite being released within that epicenter and of course when you look at how much energy that is as far as they're powering an average American home, it would be able to power 118,00 years of an average American homes energy needs. That is the amount of energy released from the epicenter of this particular quake. So that really kind of puts it in perspective and of course when you take at -- take a look at the millions of quakes we have single year on our planet, only 15 of such come into similar magnitudes of 7 to 7.9.

The epicenter of course and the surrounding vicinity up towards a 140 aftershocks in the past month or so and when you look at the area of disturbance here, we know this is a collision point here for many tectonic plates on our planet and namely one of which being the Australian Plate that dives right underneath the Pacific Plate. The amount of motion, the convergence point right here as much as 107 millimeters per year. So it takes a finger nail growth in a year multiply that by three, that's how frequently these plates are moving against one another every single year. So again, very, very typical to see a lot of aftershocks, a lot of earthquakes in this region. Very atypical to see one of this magnitude and unfortunately with one of these original shock, you're can expect thousands of aftershocks potentially continuing years if not decades as we've seen in the past before it is all gone. So it's really a frightening for a lot of folks across this region, John.

VAUSE: OK. Pedram, thank you for that. Appreciate the update.

JAVAHERI: You bet.

SESAY: Well, photographer and filmmaker Thomas Nybo joins us now on the phone from the Southern Highlands of Papua New Guinea. Tom, good to have you with us. Help me understand why has the world largely ignored this disaster?

THOMAS NYBO, PHOTOGRAPHER AND FILMMAKER: You're right. This is largely a forgotten disaster. Almost nobody is talking about the dire situation here in the Highlands and I think a big part of the problem is that these affected areas are among the most remote communities on the planet. And also, there's not much of an international media presence on a day-to-day situation. So, in these areas, I had to fly in to some of these villages by helicopter. The roads sometimes don't exist or they're covered in SUV-sized boulders from landslides triggered by the earthquake. Yet, the story is some 270,000 people, many of them children are in need of urgent assistance.

[02:35:05] They're lacking food, shelter, clean water, and latrines. Remember, these remote areas they're high in the mountains. It's cold. It's rainy. Many of the natural water supplies have been compromised by the landslides. Nobody knows exactly what the death toll is. But it's certainly above 100, entire villages have been wiped out, families were buried alive. And we have countless children traumatized by the likes of something they've never seen nor imagined.

SESAY: Yes. I mean the conditions are just horrific. And you took some images that captured this tragedy and we want to show our viewers. This is an image of a woman who lost seven children and her husband. Can you tell us a little bit more about what happen to her and her family?

NYBO: The earthquake struck between 3:00 and 4:00 A.M., closer to 4:00 A.M. She was in her home that she shared with her seven children and her husband. And when the earthquake hit, she ran tough the house, checked on the safety of the children, all seven children ran out first with her husband. She told me, they ran out first and they got buried by the landslide. She was the last one out. She still got hit by the landslide. It pushed her down the mountain and broke her leg. But her entire family was killed. Seven children and her husband and she lost her house. So, now, she is in a hospital in Mount Hagen. She's unable to walk without assistance and she has nowhere to return to and no family to return to.

SESAY: It's just terrible. It's just truly heartbreaking. I mean and Thomas, we want to put up this picture of a little boy in blue in one of these mountain areas that you talked about where they basically perceived. They need everything. I mean I know that you're talking to these people and this boy standing amid the debris just sums up the level of devastation. How much -- how much aid is getting to them? I mean what has the humanitarian response to this?

NYBO: The good news is this week UNICEF has now flown in 23 metric tons of supplies, tents, water purification tablets, blankets, emergency nutrition supplies. But you're right. The needs are staggering and just yesterday, I spoke with some people who walked five hours to a jungle village that hasn't been reach by anybody. You need helicopters to reach some of these areas. You need earth moving equipment to clear the roads. It's hard to even comprehend what the actual need is. Yet, alone, to raise the funds to deliver that aid because from the beginning four weeks ago nobody has really been talking about this emergency.

SESAY: Oh, well, Thomas, we're grateful that you are out in the world and you are able to see these scenes first hand and report back to us, and Thomas Nybo there in Papua New Guinea at site of multiple earthquakes and aftershocks. Thomas, thank you. Be safe out there.

VAUSE: Well, after two African-American men both unarmed were shot dead by police within days. Many are asking one again, could there be a problem where police training?


[02:40:11] SESAY: There's outrage in the U.S. over the killing of an African-American man at the hands of police. An autopsy has now confirmed that 22-year-old Stephan Clark died of multiple gunshot wounds. Two police officers in Sacramento, California fired 20 shots at him last week killing him in his grandmother's backyard. Officers were responding to a report of a man breaking car windows. They thought Clark was pointing a gun at them. The police didn't find a weapon at the scene. They found only a cellphone. The officers involved are now on paid administrative leave. We're about to show a video of the shooting from the body camera of one of the officers involved. We warn you this video is disturbing.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) gun. Show me your hands. Gun, gun, gun.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 5-7, shots fired. Somebody is down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Show me your hands.


SESAY: Shot 20 times in his grandmother's backyard. Just days later a deputy in Houston, Texas shot and killed an African-American man who police say was unarmed. The sister of 34-year-old Danny Ray Thomas that he was struggling with depression and was not in his right mind. Witnesses say Thomas was talking to himself and hitting cars as they passed by last week. You see in here his pants are down around his ankles. Police dash cam video shows him having an argument with the driver at an intersection. A deputy orders Thomas to get down. Instead, Thomas walks toward the deputy who shoots him once in the chest. The deputy has been place on administrative leave. Authorities have launched separate investigations into these shootings. Retired Los Angeles Police Sergeant Cheryl Dorsey joins us now. She is the author of Black and Blue. Cheryl, good to see you. It's unfortunately. It's always for these -- for these moments. Help me understand something. I want to start with Stephan Clark shot in Sacramento.

SGT. CHERYL DORSEY (RET.), AUTHOR, BLACK AND BLUE: Our police trained to shoot people based on a suspicion.

SESAY: I mean because -- I mean that's what we're looking at here. He was holding a cellphone. He was holding a cellphone. They thought they shot.

DORSEY: Absolutely not. Listen, you're not trained to think. You need to know particularly when you use deadly force. And so officers should receive an amount of training. You should be able to identify as a trained police officer who uses a gun as a regular what a gun looks like and there was no urgency for these officers to even confront this young man. They could have setup a perimeter. They could have asked for backup. They could have asked for an air unit. There were so many other things that they could have done before they went to deadly force as a first resort rather than a last resort is we're thought.

SESAY: Take a listen to Benjamin Crump. He is representing the family as you know very well. He has represented a number of black families who lost their love ones by the hands of police. Take a listen to what he had to say.


BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY: People who committed a mass shooting in Florida were not shot once. But a young black man holding a cellphone is shot 20 times.


SESAY: And what about that point? He's talking about Nikolas Cruz, Parkland shooting killed 17 people. We've talked about Dylann Roof before who shot a -- the African-American church he was taken without injury. How is it that we have these situations where white males on suspicion thought killing people -- multiple people are taken in to custody safely and we keep having these situations with black men and boys dying?

DORSEY: Well, because there's no accountability. And so, if you don't do anything to deter that bad behavior then why would an officer do anything differently? What needs to happen is that police departments need to take a book out of the page of the Baltimore City Solicitor and start holding officers financially accountable when they violate policy and they used deadly force in a way that's unnecessary, unwarranted, and unjust. And until there's a consequence for bad behavior then officers are going to continue to say, my bad, I got it wrong. I thought it was this. You can't argue what's in my head and then they live to offend again.

SESAY: How much of this, you know, again, you know, to peel it all the way back. I mean let's talk about Danny Ray Thomas who was shot Houston. I mean here is a man pants around his ankle, seen talking to himself, hitting cars, clearly something not quite right just visually looking at him. Why again is the perception or the threat attached to brown and black males so great that it precludes benefit of the doubt or explicit warnings or a split second to take a minute and get that perimeter.

[02:45:17] DORSEY: You know, I -- I'd obviously don't know what's in their heart, but it's very difficult to argue with what someone said is in their head. And so, when officers see that they can say, "I was in fear for my safety" or "I couldn't see this where their hands were in a way that made me feel uncomfortable, and again, there's no consequence for their behavior, then, did works.

And so, every time they find themselves in a situation where they afraid. And if you're afraid like that, you really shouldn't be the police. But when they find themselves in a situation like that, then, they play to get out of jail, free car if you will, I was in fear. It's very difficult to argue I was in fear. And what other profession allows you to make this kind of mistakes? None.

SESAY: As someone who has been in the police force, when this moment happen that you and I discussing? What is the conversation internally?

DORSEY: Internally, for people that look like me, is that -- it's outrageous because we understand. Listen, I've spend 20 years on Los Angeles Police Department, and I spent it all in patrol. I never shot anybody. And so, I know that there are ways to do this job. Their ways to take back people in the custody. They've run, they cast, they fuss, they don't want to go to jail, it's inherit to what we do. And there's the way to do that without harming them or without being harm.

So, when a police chief says that we're going to conduct an investigation, we're going to have a conversation as the chief did in Sacramento. And we're going to get to the bottom of this. And did in the next instances. I think there's reason why someone might turn the volume down on their audio.

SESAY: And we wouldn't even get to that, in Sacramento, that the volume is turned down.

DORSEY: Right. I mean, it has been intellectually dishonest when he says there is a reason why someone might do that. And so, when you say that to me, chief, then everything else that comes after that is of no use to me because now, you have no credibility.

SESAY: And then, once again, you find this on the situation where relations between the community and the police, splinter, and in progress that was made is lost because people are afraid.

DORSEY: And I'm not sure that we made it, I think we just keep going backward.

SESAY: Cheryl Dorsey, thank you. Always appreciate your honesty, thank you.

DORSEY: Appreciate you. VAUSE: A good to seashells going to wild.


VAUSE: OK, was an initial break, when we come back. Facebook on the fire and under investigation. Here's (INAUDIBLE), he's looking in how the company gathers and gives out your private information.


VAUSE: Well, Facebook is now the focus of a government investigation. The Federal Trade Commission is looking into how the company handles personal information from its users.

SESAY: This former revelations that the data firm, Cambridge Analytica, accessed information from 50 million Facebook users without their knowledge. If you want to know exactly what information Facebook has on you. There's a way to find out. Samuel Burke, explains

SAMUEL BURKE, CNN BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: Facebook is keeping records of every phone call and text message you sent. That's the surprise, some Android users are discovering as people across the globe start taking a closer look at the data tech companies are collecting about all of us.

If you want to see everything that Facebook knows about you, just go to the upper right-hand corner and scroll down to settings. That will take you to this page where you'll click download a copy of your Facebook data. Then, click start my archive, and Facebook will e-mail you a copy of all the intimate details that social network knows about you.

Inside that file, Android users are seeing Facebook has been collecting logs of all their phone calls and text messages for years. Android maker Google hasn't responded to our request for comment. But Facebook says Android users explicitly opt in for this future when they download its Messenger app or a slimmed down version of the social network, an app called Facebook Lite.

Facebook says they do this so Android users can find people more easily. But they don't explain why they take the extra step of saving the data on their servers. Users who don't realized they been sharing this data are getting a rude awakening when they delete their Facebook accounts and look through this archive data for the first time.

"Wow! My deleted Facebook zip file contains info on every single cell phone call and text I made for about a year. Cool, totally not creepy."

Even users who don't have the main Facebook app on their phone or finding out they have given over their call and text message logs too. "Don't have Facebook installed but I do use Messenger and Instagram. Interestingly, they only tract when I ring my parents and girlfriend. I never used Messenger in regards to my parents, weird. A new Reuter's eve tells poll shows that only 41 percent of Americans trust Facebook to obey U.S. privacy laws.

Facebook says you can opt out at this future at any time, and they'll to lead all the call and text message logs they have saved about you. To do that, Android users will have to go to Home, tap on their Profile Picture. Then tap People, and under Synced Contacts, that setting can be turned on or off.

And with the tech giant under scrutiny, every piece of data we share with the company knowingly or not is getting a second look. Samuel Burke, CNN, London.

VAUSE: Kurt Wagner, joins us now from San Francisco. He is the senior editor for social media at Recode. Kurt, thanks for coming back. Hey, Facebook, it's admitted to has actually be logging phone calls and text, but tonight this was done without permission posting this on his web site. "Call and text history logging is part of an opt-in feature for people using Messenger or Facebook Lite on Android. This helps you find and stay connected with the people you care about. And provide you with a better experience across Facebook. People have to expressly agree to use this feature."

Which doesn't actually seem to be in totally the case here right? Because, when you log in with you using Android, it actually request access to your contacts and all your call history on Android devices. You know, it's actually opt-in, it doesn't seem Facebook is actually being straight up and honest.

KURT WAGNER, SENIOR EDITOR FOR SOCIAL MEDIA, RECODE: Right. You're giving Facebook permission but they're asking for very front in a kind of the way that this things sometimes work is it. It looks like you almost have to say yes in order for -- you know, the app to work. So, yes, technically, people gave Facebook permission to do this but I think that there's a lot of people would say, "Hey, this didn't really feel like they ask in the appropriate way.

VAUSE: And this seems to be the problem right now for Facebook, this is a real lack of trust. So, everything just have feels and kind of sinister. You know, because the statement with today will say there technically true but in reality, it's quite different.

WAGNER: Right. And I think something like this on a given week, you know, let's rewind a couple of years that something like this had happened. I think people would have been upset, and I think we would have moved pass this very quickly. But in the light of all of the camera journalistic stuff, giving everything we've learned since the 2016 presidential election here in the U.S. I just think that Facebook is kind of run out of runway for anyone giving them the benefit of the doubt.

And when you add this on top of all of the other things that are happened recently, it just makes a really difficult to feel bad for Facebook, and there's reasons that so many people are upset about this new finding when you add it to everything else.

VAUSE: OK. Apart of the strategy to win back trust here, Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg, took out four-page newspaper ads, Old media across the U.S. and Britain apologizing for the Cambridge Analytica scandal. This is part of the ad. "This was a breached of trust," Zuckerberg said, "and I'm sorry we didn't do more at the time. We're now taking steps to make sure this doesn't happen again." He finish this with a promise to do better, but I guess the question now there to Facebook is just how transparent it wants to be when it comes to personal data on how its share and how it's monetized. I want it back like she had on its revenue.

WAGNER: Yes, you know, I was thinking about this. There having been a lot of advertisers so far that have come out and said, "Hey, we're going to pull back from Facebook." And I would be shocked if they were. I mean, up until about 10 days ago, the best thing about Facebook as an advertiser is that it had all of this data, right?

You could go to Facebook and you could reach anybody that you really needed too because they have all this information. So, the fact that -- you know, consumers and Facebook users are finally maybe realize in this, and come in a groups with it, advertisers should have and have known this for some time.

So, I don't necessarily see this hurting Facebook's revenue right now because again, if you're spending money on Facebook before, you kind of went and spent money there because of this exact reason that they have all of this data.

[02:55:09] VAUSE: Yes, look, Facebook seems to paying the price for not having -- you know, a decent disclosure policy when it came to you have data was used and how it's collected. But, you know, Facebook is (INAUDIBLE) in social media platform that does that. So, when you actually see other joins in social media, you have come forward with some kind of disclosure policy?

WAGNER: Well, you know, I think Google is the other big one, right? It's not necessarily social media but everyone uses Google Search, and they have a ton of information about you if you use their Gmail, or -- you know, Google Maps, or anything like that, obviously, there's Twitter, that's another social platform that has a lot of information about people.

And I think what you're seeing with the U.S. government now, with -- you know, politicians asking Mark Zuckerberg to come to Washington and testify. Is it they're starting to lawn Google and Twitter into those conversations? I think, there was a story in the Washington Post today that -- you know, politicians invited all three companies to come to Capitol Hill.

So, I think, when you -- when you realize that, "Hey, this is Facebook is kind of the scapegoat right now," or is there certainly, the leader in this. There is going to be other companies that do very similar things that are going to get crowd into this conversation. And I think, we're already starting to see that happen.

VAUSE: Yes, it seems the scandal has now muted to its second week which is -- you know, quite a long time in the 24-hour news cycle. Do you think it's moved beyond the original controversy over Cambridge Analytica or the misuse of 50 million -- they -- of 50 million Facebook users. And they saw it seems we (INAUDIBLE) big tech backlash. We really want to know how there if (INAUDIBLE) being used.

WAGNER: Yes, I think, this really open everyone's eyes up to -- you know, how much power Facebook has, how much data and information that Facebook has. And I think, you know, you saw it in the New York Times' ad that Facebook took out over the weekend. They basically said, hey, we're going to investigate if there are more companies out there that did something similar to Cambridge Analytica. And we believe that there might be, right? There is probably a very good bet that there are other companies that have a lot of personal data from Facebook users that we do not know about. And I think Cambridge Analytica obviously was what started this whole thing. I do agree with you, I think this has moved well beyond just that scenario. This has become a, hey, how are we as consumers protecting our data and what is Facebook and Google and others, what are they doing to protect our data as well?

VAUSE: Yes. It feels like that it's kind of a tipping point and this isn't over for a long shot and not for a long time. Kurt, thanks for being with us. Appreciate it.

WAGNER: Yes, thank you.

SESAY: Really scaring.

VAUSE: Yes. I am -- you know, Facebook for a month, I delete it by mistake and I didn't back on from my phone. So, put it miss it.

SESAY: So, he's OK based on what you saying.

VAUSE: I will. (INAUDIBLE) to a Facebook having a back to me for us come along, that's why.

SESAY: You been watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles.

VAUSE: I'm just sort it is.

SESAY: You are (INAUDIBLE). I'm Isha Sesay.

VAUSE: I'm John Vause, the news continues with Rosemary Church. What (INAUDIBLE) on the Facebook, I think. She didn't like that she'll be with you after a short break. You've been watching 3 hours of NEWSROOM, L.A. Thanks for being with us.

SESAY: Hope you enjoyed it.