Return to Transcripts main page


Rudy Giuliani Revealed Some Details On The Russian Probe And Stormy Daniels In His Recent Interview; President's Pick For CIA Director Gina Haspel Nearly Walking Away From The Job; Senator John McCain Feisty As He Battles An Aggressive Form of Brain Cancer; Anthony Bourdain's "Parts Unknown" Premieres; Stormy Daniels Appeared in "Saturday Night Live". Aired 7-8p ET

Aired May 6, 2018 - 19:00   ET



[19:00:00] RUDY GIULIANI, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LAWYER: I don't know when the President learned about it. He could have learned about it after or not connected the whole thing at that time. The reality is those are not facts that worry me as a lawyer. Those don't amount anything but what said to the press. That's political. What matters to me as a lawyer --.


GIULIANI: Gee, I don't know, you know a few Presidents who did that. I don't think this President has done that, but in any event that's not the crime. The crime is it wasn't a campaign contribution. Not a campaign contributions.

STEPHANOPOULOS: You said he -- make payments to other women for the President.

GIULIANI: I have no knowledge of that. But I would think if it was necessary, yes.


ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: Yes. You heard that right. That was Giuliani not ruling out the possibility that Trump's former fixer Michael Cohen paid off other women beyond Stormy Daniels for Trump.

And Giuliani didn't stop there. He also had quite a few things to say about the Mueller probe and Trump owes strategy going forward.


STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you confident the President will not take the fifth in this case?

GIULIANI: How could I ever be confident of that? When I'm facing a situation with the President and all the other lawyers are in which every lawyer in America thinks he heed be a fool to testify, I have got a client who wants to testify. Please, don't -- he said it yesterday, and, you know, Jay and I said to ourselves, my goodness, you know, I hope we get a chance to tell him the risk that he's taking.


CABRERA: Well, let's get right to CNN's Boris Sanchez at the White House.

So Boris, we also learned and heard from Giuliani about what would happen if Mueller subpoenaed the President as well as his thoughts on Presidential immunity.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Ana. Rudy Giuliani taking a very different tone than we have seen from the President's legal team before when it comes to discussing this special counsel.

My colleague Dana Bash spoke with Rudy Giuliani shortly after he met with the President today at his golf course not far from here in Virginia. Giuliani essentially telling Dana Bash that it is part of the founding father's vision for the United States to have the President have some sort of executive special privilege that prevents him from being indicted.

Look at this statement he gave to Dana Bash. This is why the founding fathers created immunity for a President, so the President cannot be indicted. It is that idea which later led Giuliani to say or rather earlier had Giuliani saying to George Stephanopoulos on ABC that they would not comply with any subpoena sent by Robert Mueller. Listen to this.


STEPHANOPOULOS: What happens if Robert Mueller subpoenas the? Will you comply?

GIULIANI: Well, we don't have to. He's the President of the United States. We can assert the same privilege as other Presidents have.


SANCHEZ: Legal minds are divided on whether that is actually the case or not. I did want to point out something else that he told Dana Bash. She asked him about what the President said earlier this week regarding him not having all his facts straight when he went on FOX News and on national television and contradicted much of what the President had previously said about the Stormy Daniels' saga.

Giuliani saying he had not looked over 1.2 million documents that detailed the entire case and, therefore, he's still working on getting up to speed on everything that the President has going on legally. Unclear if in those more than million documents there are any details about when the President learned of that hush money payment to Stormy Daniels or if he knew what he was reimbursing Michael Cohen for after the campaign -- Ana.

CABRERA: Boris, let me ask you about these other comments regarding the Stormy Daniels scandal and Giuliani's suggestion that Cohen might have paid off other women. We are now getting reaction from Stormy Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti. What is he saying?

SANCHEZ: Yes. He essentially called this media tour and the response from the White House a train wreck. Listen to this.


MICHAEL AVENATTI, STORMY DANIELS' LAWYER: It's an absolute unmitigated disaster for Rudy Giuliani and the President. It's a train wreck. I can't believe that that actually just happened. I mean, what we witnessed by Rudy Giuliani may be one of the worst TV appearances by any attorney on behalf of a client in modern times.


SANCHEZ: Aside from Avenatti's opinion we have to point out that there have been denials, contradictions and still many unanswered questions from this White House that should be relatively simple to answer -- Ana.

CABRERA: All right, and yet thereto are so many more questions now after all of these appearances by Rudy Giuliani today.

Thank you, Boris Sanchez.

Let's try to get some answers for everybody with our legal panel and political expert and historian who are with me. Former federal prosecutor and former assistant U.S. attorney Daniel Goldman joins us. CNN Presidential historian and former director of the Nixon Presidential lawyer Tim NAFTALI is with us. And CNN political analyst Ryan Lizza.

So Daniel Goldman, I will start with you. Giuliani saying the President may not comply with the subpoena from Mueller if he is subpoenaed. Can he do that?

[19:05:01] DANIEL GOLDMAN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, he could certainly litigate this. I think we have to separate what he is talking about with executive privilege from the Fifth Amendment question which is a separate one. No President has ever asserted the Fifth Amendment. It's generally considered to be political suicide because you are saying that your statements can be incriminating and no one really wants the President of this country to be someone who has incriminating -- self-incriminating statements to make, but it has been litigated. It was hit gated back in Nixon's time. It was litigated through Bill Clinton. So --.

CABRERA: Bill Clinton's civil case with Paula Jones, right?

GOLDMAN: No, the subpoena was -- yes, sorry, you are right. It was a civil case with Paula Jones, but the idea of a subpoena and asserting the executive privilege. So it has this specific question has never been answered, but there is a general view in court cases that no one is above the law. And so while they may be able to limit the scope of the questioning based on some executive privilege assertions, I think legal experts generally don't think that they would be able to avoid complying all together. CABRERA: And yet you mentioned he could invoke the Fifth Amendment.

Listen to what the President has said about that in the past.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Have you seen what's going on in front of congress? Fifth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, horrible. Horrible. The mob takes the fifth.

If you're innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?

When you have your staff taking the Fifth Amendment, taking the fifth, so they are not prosecuted, I think it's disgraceful.


CABRERA: Tim, could these words come back to haunt him?

TIMOTHY NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Well, they wouldn't be the first words from the President to come back to haunt him.

I want to add something to what Daniel said. This very question of the limits on Presidential privilege or executive privilege, this was litigated. This came before the Supreme Court in 1974. That President, it happened to be Richard Nixon, made the same argument. I can deny you. I don't have to respond to a subpoena.

CABRERA: That was over the tapes.

NAFTALI: Over 64 tapes and the Supreme Court said we know Presidents can make the argument that -- for national security. They know they can make the argument for separation of powers. We know they can make the argument that high level communications have to be protected, but there is a limit to executive privilege. And when criminal issues are at stake and free trial -- the access to a free trial is at stake, you have to give the materials.

So this was litigated. It is settled law. And by the way, it's not a narrow precedent. It wasn't 5-4. It was a unanimous decision by the Supreme Court.

CABRERA: But the specific situation that this President is in is slightly different than what Nixon was in in that case. And so I think that's what creates a little bit of the uncertainty.

NAFTALI: The critical difference it's testimony versus material or evidence.

CABRERA: And why does that matter?

GOLDMAN: Well, it may or may not matter but it's not squarely on point. There's other case point which talks about whether you can get the information from another source.

As a former prosecutor I would argue that you cannot get someone's testimony from anyone other than that witness. You cannot get it from documents. You can only get it from the specific witness so that would make the argument even stronger in favor of the -- of the prosecution being able to get Trump to comply with the subpoena.

And by the way, just as a correction, it was special counsel or independent counsel Ken Starr, the grand jury subpoena in the Clinton case. It not the Paula Jones case. That was a different case.

CABRERA: Right. Which had to deal with executive privilege.

GOLDMAN: With whether or not it could go forward. There is a lot there.

CABRERA: It all gets a little bit wishy-washy in mind because there are so many different cases and situations that we are trying to work our way through. So I'm glad we have experts like you to help up with us that.

Let me ask you, Ryan, this question. Because I talked with former Trump White House lawyer Jim Schultz earlier tonight and he was pretty critical of Giuliani. He said he thinks Giuliani needs to stop talking off the cuff and be more strategic. However, Giuliani told our Dana Bash he and Trump do have a strategy. That they have come up a plan and that Trump likes the way things are going and what he is seeing, perhaps a bad strategy, but a strategy?

RYAN LIZZA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, this reminds me a little bit of the Scaramucci episode in July and Jonathan Swan, great reporter for "Axios" has a piece tonight where he said the mooch has been thrown around the west wing in recent days with people in the White House comparing the Giuliani situation with Scaramucci. Scaramucci came into the White House with a lot of fanfare, was praised and had a disastrous ten days.

In the beginning Trump supported him and liked him but as he sort of flew closer and closer to the sun Trump sort of discarded him and pushed him out of the White House with the help of the chief of staff John Kelly.

I'm not saying that's where Giuliani is going to end up, but sometimes Trump praises a performance like Giuliani's and then he has second thoughts when there's a great deal of backlash from the media and especially from supporters, members of Congress, people he cares about.

I haven't really seen anyone from Democrats to Republicans to the media to some of the -- the hardest or biggest supporters of the President praising Giuliani's performance here. The only account we have of Giuliani's performance being praised seems to be from Giuliani himself saying the President likes what he's doing. So we have -- I feel like we have seen this move before, and it doesn't always end well for the Trump employee.

[19:10:50] CABRERA: That is true. However, Congressman Adam Schiff says maybe there is some method to this madness. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) REP. ADAM SCHIFF (R-CA), RANKING MEMBER, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Look. I have to say I'm a little taken aback by this new lawyer Giuliani's strategy here, his legal defense for the President seems to be a bit orthodox and start out by saying you can't believe the President of the United States. That's our defense, so when he says things you've just got to discount them. And more than that trust me, this wasn't a violation of campaign laws. Neither one of those things is pretty persuasive.


CABRERA: So do you think, Daniel, that the strategy could be don't believe the President? Don't believe the President? He doesn't tell the truth, that that's actually a strategy?

GOLDMAN: I think that's a pretty disastrous strategy. More politically perhaps than legally because what Giuliani says is not going to impact whether or not recall there's evidence of a particular crime. The evidence has to come from the individuals who will testify or the documents, et cetera. What a lawyer says is not evidence.

Giuliani is sort of weaving an odd path that may be the defense that they have discussed as far as I can glean from this. He's not critical clear about this, and he meanders around and ignores some critical facts, but there is a theory where they are trying to take the heat off of Michael Cohen that Michael Cohen expected to be reimbursed and was reimbursed and, therefore, would get him out of campaign violation land as it relates to Stormy Daniels.

And then as to Trump he reimbursed him after the election. And so, therefore, he didn't have a disclosure obligation prior to the election so maybe then it's not a campaign finance violation. He has not crystallized the argument in that way, but if you read between the lines a little bit, it seems like that may be where they are trying to go, but then he'll say things like I don't know when the President knew about Stormy Daniels payment.

And that doesn't pass the laugh test. You have obviously spoken to him about this. You are going on a media blitz right now. That's an obvious question that you are just trying not to answer.

And the last thing I will say is by mentioning that there may be other women that's something that he's not going to say in my opinion unless he knows that that's something that will eventually come out. So I take a lot of -- a lot of note of that point because that's just not something that you would admit unless you are thinking that this is something that may materialize here.

CABRERA: You know, the goal here is to get to the truth. We are trying to decipher what is true here because in the chaos of all of this, there are so many different stories. Kellyanne Conway, the counsellor to the White House, was asked about the White House's credibility cries irregularities. And listen to her response.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KELLYANNE CONWAY, WHITE HOUSE COUNSELOR: I'm going to relay to you what the President has told me which is the best can I do. He didn't know it at the time the payment occurred. The President has said that he did this to save his family the embarrassment. I will tell you as the campaign manager for the winning part of the campaign, I was not made aware of this whatsoever.


CABRERA: Tim, does the White House have a credibility crisis?

NAFTALI: Well, it certainly does. And, you know, there was a time when if the press secretary lost credibility in a room, lost the room, lost the support of the D.C. press corps, that he or she would resign or be fired.

This administration doesn't care about the credibility of its spokes people. I think they are making a mistake here is that that Stormy Daniels matter is becoming more and more perilous. But it's not the big issue in front of this administration. Collusion, money laundering, what have you, and perhaps an agreement with Korea and maybe a non-agreement with Iran.

All of those issues are going to require a credible statement from the White House. The oval matter. When it's a matter of war & peace, of course, but when we talk about collusion, it's about the sanctity and security of our election process.

If this administration loses his credibility on something like Stormy Daniels, it's throwing it away for really, really key issues and that's a shame. They do not understand the big play. They don't see the big picture which is that the White House needs to be credible, not simple police for the base, not simple police for most importance but for the world because when the United States talks, it's talking to the world and at the moment this is a White House without credibility.

[19:15:24] CABRERA: Ryan, your final thought.

LIZZA: Well, just one thing I agree -- I agree with that sentiment completely, the issue of credibility is goes beyond just any single staffer. Think about in a crisis how important it is for us to be able to trust what the White House says, and we have a President whose relationship with the truth is tenuous at best.

The one thing I would say about what Daniel was trying to -- Daniel was sort of making the best argument for what Giuliani might be trying to do here, but if that was indeed what he was trying to do. My understanding of campaign finance law the Cohen payment would then be considered a loan, right, Daniel, and they would have had to disclose that. So, you know, out of the frying pan and into the fryer if that is what Giuliani was trying to do here, to try and to get it to say it wasn't this kind of campaign finance violation but they may have opened themselves up to a different campaign violation. But, again, we don't have a clear understanding of what the heck they are arguing.

CABRERA: Got to leave it there, guys. Thanks so much, Dan Goldman, Ryan Lizza and Tim Naftali.

Coming up. Breaking news, source telling CNN Trump's pick to head CIA wanted out before she was even in. The last-ditch effort to save her nomination. Stay right there.


[19:20:44] CABRERA: More breaking news this hour. The President's pick for CIA director Gina Haspel nearly walking away from the job. Haspel trying to withdraw her nomination Friday over questions about her role in the CIA's controversial interrogation of terror suspects. Haspel is the first woman taut to head the CIA and she is due to face Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday.

Let's get right to Michelle Kosinski, our senior diplomatic correspondent.

Michelle, how did all of this go down and what's the potential impact on this upcoming hearing?


We knew that these questions on Wednesday for her hearing were going to be extremely difficult, questions over her more than 30 year long tenure at CIA, her support for torture programs that came about after 9/11, the fact that she ran the secret U.S. detention camp in Thailand, the fact that somebody was water-boarded there under her watch and so on and so on.

But apparently this reached a point on Friday after Haspel had met with members of the White House, after she participated in what is called a murder board, a practice session for her hearing on Wednesday, so that happened on Friday at the CIA. And at some point she reached a point in the process where she decided, you know, I'm going to withdraw my nomination if this is going to be too difficult.

So the concerns were not only there with the White House but also with her that she was willing to step away from this. The "Washington Post" first reported the story and said she had concerns normally about how this hearing would go on Wednesday but how the reputation of the CIA would come out of this.

So after that, we know that she met for hours with two people on the White House team, including White House spokesperson Sarah Sanders. And it ended up that she will continue on with her nomination.

But you know, we know she is questions will be very difficult, but now we know that there was such concerns there that show was willing to say, you know, I -- I won't do this if it's going to be too much of a problem and if it looks like I'm not going to be nominated.

The White House though has consistently said that they believe her nomination will go through. And in a White House statement today we hear her saying acting director Gina Haspel is a qualified nominee who dedicated over three years of service over her country. Her nomination won't be derailed by partisan critics who side with ye ACLU over the CIA on how to keep America people safe.

Now that is an interesting thing to say considering that we have heard the President himself criticize the U.S. intel community on several occasions before. And also in this White House statement, we don't hear them denying that she was willing to withdraw her nomination over this -- Ana.

CABRERA: You are right. An important distinction.

Thank you, Michelle Kosinski, for that.

Coming up, the woman who you might say is in the eye of the storm goes on "Saturday Night Live."


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just tell me what do you need for all of this to go away?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, right. Being President is like doing porn, once you do it it's hard to do anything else.




[19:28:14] STORMY DANIELS, ADULT FILM STAR: Hello, Donald.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Come on, Stormy. Stop making such a big deal over this. Everyone knows it's such an act.

DANIELS: I work in adult films. We are not really known for our acting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just tell me what do you need for this to all go away?

DANIELS: A resignation.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, right. like doing porn. Once you do it it's hard to do anything. I solved north and South Korea. Why can't I solve us?

DANIELS: Sorry, Donald. It's too late for that. I know you don't believe in climate change, but a storm is a-coming, baby.


CABRERA: And that was Stormy Daniels herself sending a warning to President Trump on a cameo on "Saturday Night Live." the storms are coming. But you could argue it has already arrived. Confusion over how Stormy Daniels was really paid off. And whether the President lied point blank to the American people have dominated the headlines, and this story is showing no signs of letting up.

I want to bring in CNN media correspondent and host of "RELIABLE SOURCES" Brian Stelter.

So Brian, is Stormy Daniels essentially beating the President at his own game?

BRIAN STELTER, CNN SENIOR MEDIA CORRESPONDENT: So far she certainly is. And I know some people think with her "SNL" appearance she has jumped the shark, but most of the support I saw, most of the comments on all of that were praiseworthy, people saying it was funny. May not have been the best actress in the world but she was owning her moment in the spotlight and make the most of it.

CABRERA: Let's listen to what her attorney said in relation to those comments or criticisms for her being on "SNL."


GIULIANI: Michael Avenatti is going to say what he has to say to collect his money. I know he's coming on later. And people can judge, why the heck he go on "Saturday Night Live" when he ran for president. So I don't think he didn't if this is a serious case and not a comedy.

Did a very good job. Very, very funny. Donald Trump was on "Saturday night live" when he ran for President. I don't think it did any harm for the case whatsoever.


[19:30:007] CABRERA: What is your take, Brian?

STELTER: You know, certainly following up with Dana Bash earlier, Avenatti -- sorry, Giuliani said same thing. Giuliani was saying this just proves she is just in it for the money and the fame and the comedy. It's another way of saying, you know, she is a stripper. She is just trying to get paid. But I thought Avenatti's response was real interesting. He has been defending this decision all day long. He said on twitter earlier today not all cases are the same nor is the winning PR strategy the same. In this case he thinks the winning strategy is maximum pressure, maximum PR, constant media. That's why Avenatti is a regular on CNN and MSNBC. Seems like he says yes to every TV request even though he says no to most of them.

Anyway. I think his point is that by keeping Stormy out in the public spotlight and by keeping his own profile very visible he is trying to apply maximum pressure during this lawsuit that's ongoing.

But looking at this, just watching as a viewer, you have to say it is working. He has got Rudy Giuliani talking about him. He got President Trump filing countersuits. This maximum pressure campaign seems to be working.

CABRERA: Let's talk a little bit more about Rudy Giuliani and all these controversial things that he has been saying. STELTER: Yes.

CABRERA: It's interesting to note that he and the President really kind of mirror each other's words.


CABRERA: They seem to be almost in lock step in the way they are messaging. Let's watch.


TRUMP: He'll get his facts straight.

GIULIANI: The facts I'm still learning.

TRUMP: He started yesterday.

GIULIANI: I have been in the case for two weeks. Virtually one day in comparison to other people.

TRUMP: There was no collusion with the Russians.

GIULIANI: There is no evidence of collusion with the Russians.

TRUMP: There was no obstruction.

GIULIANI: There's no evidence of obstruction of justice.

TRUMP: What they should do is look at the other side where terribly bad things have happened.

GIULIANI: Poor little Hillary, we got to be nice to her. We have to -- no under oath.


GIULIANI: We'll take that now. No under oath, no Q&A. Just notes.

TRUMP: He knows it's a witch-hunt.

CABRERA: The judge in sum and substance said this is a witch-hunt.


CABRERA: Brian, is this Giuliani getting his talking points from the President?

STELTER: Or vice versa. Goes back and forth in a game of Ping-Pong and you see the two men reflecting each other's comments and their point of view. That's why Rudy is so effective in the President's mind as a surrogate. I think what we are seeing from Rudy is playing a spokesman role or surrogate role, really more than a lawyer role, so far at least so far publicly. It is almost as if President Trump can't go on TV shows and defend himself. He would like to but his aides always tell not to. So instead, he has Rudy out there saying all the same things for him.

Rudy is playing the same game at Sean Hannity of the world play. They say look over there. They say the real crooks are the Democrats. The real crooks are Trump's opponents. And, of course, they constantly blast Robert Mueller's probe.

They are two peas in a pod, right? Two brass New Yorkers who grew up in the same era, who have the same points of view, the same talking, the same mannerisms. They are kind of made for each other, aren't they?

CABRERA: Will it work? That's the big question.


CABRERA: Thanks so much, Brian Stelter, always good to see you. Don't forget "RELIABLE SOURCES" always on Sunday at 11:00 a.m. eastern.

Coming up, Senator John McCain still feisty and still at odds with President Trump as he writes the script for his final farewell.


[19:37:39] CABRERA: Senator John McCain feisty as he battles an aggressive form of brain cancer, releasing a book and telling family and friends he doesn't want Trump at his funeral.

I want to bring in CNN's Polo Sandoval.

And Polo, what can you tell us about John McCain and plans for funeral?

POLO SANDOVAL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you know, since he receive that very grim diagnosis last year, the senator has been very aware this would be a very difficult uphill battle. And he continues to give that treatment everything he's got. At the same time when you read his memoir and he says he doesn't know how much longer he has left. So he is going through with the funeral plans. And we are now learning through sources that there's one person who is expected not to attend when that happens, the President.


SEN. JOHN MCCAIN (R), ARIZONA: Maybe I'll have another five years, maybe with the advances in oncology, they will find new treatments for my cancer that will extend my life. Maybe I will be gone before you hear this. My predicament is well, rather, unpredictable.

SANDOVAL (voice-over): Senator John McCain reflecting on his difficult battle with cancer and state of the country. The "New York Times" is reporting he recently shared a host concerns with former vice President Joe Biden. According to the "Times," the Republican senator urged his Democratic friend to quote "not walk away from politics." Biden declined to discuss the possibility of a 2020 bid with the newspaper. He did, however, underscore his friend's fragile state of health and a concern that the country's reputation is being tarnished amid the political discord.

This weekend although he didn't mention McCain by name, President Trump revisited his grudge against the Arizona senator for his thumbs down vote to end Obamacare last year.

TRUMP: We are decimating Obamacare. We have got a bad vote the evening -- we got a bad vote the evening that we were going to terminate Obamacare. We got a bad vote, you know about that, right? That was not a nice thing.

SANDOVAL: The relationship between Trump and McCain has been contentious. A source close to the senator tells CNN McCain is making his own funeral plans and President Trump will not be invited. Instead, former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama are being asked to deliver eulogies.

Senator John McCain reflecting on the country's grow and divide in his memoirs, expected to be released later week. Excerpts of it were aired by NPR last week.

[19:40:02] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Whether we think each other right or wrong in our views on the issues of the day, we owe each other respect.

SANDOVAL: In his book, Senator McCain makes a last stand for civility.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Before I leave you would like to see our politics begin to return to the purposes and practices that distinguish our history from the history of other nations. I would like to see us recover from our sense that we are more alive than different.

SANDOVAL: Ben Domenech, McCain's son-in-law, gave CBS' "FACE THE NATION" an update as his wife, Megan, visited her father this weekend.

BEN DOMENECH, SEN. MCCAIN'S SON-IN-LAW: In his case he has lived the life over and over again I think enough for five or ten different people. He had a pretty amazing run. The fact is he is very grateful for the chances and the fortune that he has experienced in life. He's reflecting at end on a lot of different things. And we just appreciate the fact that we have had such a good time to be able to spend with him in this moment. And we appreciate, again, all of the support.


SANDOVAL: And the "New York Times" also reporting the same, that in the event of a funeral that President Trump would likely not attend that, Ana, they are adding that Mike Pence, the vice President, would likely be the one to represent the administration here. Of course, everybody certainly hoping for the best but Senator McCain is certainly preparing for any outcome.

CABRERA: Polo Sandoval, thank you.

SANDOVAL: Thank you. CABRERA: Coming, North Korea setback. North Korea accuses the U.S.

of deliberately provoking Kim Jong-un. Could it ruin the mood ahead of his summit with Trump, and what does it mean for the three Americans still waiting to be released?


[19:46:01] CABRERA: Tonight, North Korea is accusing the U.S. of ruining the mood ahead of a much anticipated summit between President Trump and Kim Jong-un. North Korean officials say the Trump administration is deliberately provoking them by claiming they were fearful of both U.S. military strength and sanctions.

Now the tensions come amid negotiations for the release of three Americans held prisoner by the north. President Trump suggesting in a tweet they could be freed soon saying quote "stay tuned."

That brings us to your weekend Presidential brief, a segment we bring you every Sunday night, highlighting some of the most pressing national security information the President will need when he wakes up tomorrow.

And here to bring it to you, CNN national security analyst and former national security council adviser Sam Vinograd. She spent two years helping prep the president's daily brief in the Obama administration.

So Sam, what should we expect on North Korea this week?

SAMANTHA VINOGRAD, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: There are a lot of North Korean balls in the air right now. As you mentioned, Ana, what we are waiting to hear about the saddest of these three hostages that President Trump told us to stay tuned on, we are awaiting to hear at the logistical details of the summit, when and where it is happening?

And we are also trying to mitigate confusion after conflicting reports about whether the United States is withdrawing troops from South Korea, for example. This is all happening while we have to substantively prepare for a summit.

And it's interesting. North Korea changed their rhetoric this morning. They explicitly said that the United States sanctions and pressure campaign is not why Kim agreed to denuclearize. They actually credited Kim and talked about his patriotism as a reasoning behind this breakthrough.

I think they are trying to get under President Trump's skin. I think they are trying to steal his thunder and goad him into some kind of public response, but he has to be really careful not to take the bait. If he loses focus and gets into some kind of back and forth with the North Koreans publicly, it could distract him and the administration, and the North Koreans will get the upper hand in the negotiation.

CABRERA: And we have North Korea and Russia with sort of an interesting alliance of sorts. So what do you think are Russia's priorities? VINOGRAD: I think that Putin is hoping that his four time is a charm.

He has his fourth Presidential inauguration tomorrow. He is looking out over another six years in power. And I think he is going to double down on his domestic agenda. An even year of democracy in Russia is really gone at this point. He guaranteed his election win. He has curtailed the freedom to protest.

Just yesterday Russian police arrested 1,600 people that were protesting against Putin. He only allows protests when they are in support of something that he believes in. And he is also completely curtailed the freedom of expression. It looks like there's free speech in Russia because there's newspapers and magazines and television stations, but they are controlled by the state. And so Putin doesn't just like to push fake news and propaganda in the U.S. He also does so in Russia because he is so focused on at least appearing loved that he wants to cultivate an image of popularity.

CABRERA: Let's talk a little bit about the Middle East because we know Putin also has been doing some traveling. He has an interesting relationship as well as far as his power plays there. What do you expect in terms of the dynamics at play?

VINOGRAD: I think that Putin is really waiting to see what President Trump does on the Iran deal like the rest of the world. We are waiting to see if he recertifies it by next Saturday, and if he doesn't, there may be immediate security implications. I think Iran if the United States does pull out could immediately retaliate against U.S. assets and personnel in the region. So we may want to be rethinking our security posture in light of that.

And I also think that Israel may be preparing for some additional steps against Iran in the near term. There was a bill that passed the Israeli Knesset or parliament last week that gave the prime minister the authority to go to war or to launch a massive military operation in extreme circumstances with just the approval of his minister of defense. So Bebe Netanyahu has a little bit more freedom to maneuver.

And it's interesting because Putin is meeting Netanyahu this week. And so I think that they are probably going to discuss everything from the Iran deal and whether Israel is going to take more action against Iran in the near future.

[19:50:013] CABRERA: Sam Vinograd, thank you so much.

Coming up, Anthony Bourdain visits a meat lover's paradise. Preview of brand new "PARTS UNKNOWN" is next.


[19:54:48] CABRERA: We are less than two weeks away from the royal wedding. But today all the attention is on the littlest royal. Kensington palace has released the first official pictures of Prince Louis, the youngest child of the duke and duchess of Cambridge. In the first here, you see Prince Louis is cuddling with his little sister or his big sister, I should say, Princess Charlotte, also little though. And here's the other photo showing Prince Louis when he was just three days old. He is now the fifth in line for the throne.

On tonight's brand new "PARTS UNKNOWN," Anthony Bourdain returns the Uruguay, the tiny South American country known for its beautiful beaches and laid back vibes.

I recently sat down with Anthony Bourdain to learn more about tonight's episode.


[19:55:32] ANTHONY BOURDAIN, CNN HOST, PARTS UNKNOWN: Uruguay is a tiny little country that's often overlooked and often -- I'm often asked, what off the grid or less visited destinations would you recommend for your vacation? I would overwhelmingly pick Uruguay as a really great place to go. It's underpopulated, meaning no crowds. Montevideo, their capital city is beautiful and atmospheric. The people are awesome. The food is incredible, unless you are a vegetarian because they are like chicken is considered a vegetable. That would be --

CABRERA: Lot of meat.

BOURDAIN: Even I was begging for a salad after a few days there. The coastline is incredible. Beautiful beaches. But it is also a country with an amazing history. I had one of the, you know, really most terrible and brutal dictatorships for many, many years and maybe the highest percentage of their population not just imprisoned, many disappeared, but tortured. Horribly tortured. Often individually designed tortures. So that would be imprisoned, tortured, meet with a psychologist, sympathetic psychologist and designing their incarceration for them to make it as uncomfortable as possible. So it was an effort to at this point essentially destroy the personalities of a significant portion of the population and they emerged from this through largely through strikes and protests elected a democratic government and are now one of the most passionate and I would say enlightened democracies around and a spectacularly high number of Uruguayans vote. I think it is 80 -- in the high 80 percent or maybe even 90 percent.

CABRERA: Wow. So, incredibly politically active and maybe considered a very liberal democracy now even though you talk about its past and this is recently.


CABRERA: What do you think about how politics influenced this culture there now?

BOURDAIN: I think, you know, when you have lived through without freedom, in an oppressive, oppressive military regime, a surveillance state, when you do get it and it is hard won, you cling to it dearly and you appreciate it and you really see that and feel that there.

I follow Ignacio Matas. He is a great Uruguay chef from New York back in Uruguay. So lot of show seen through his eyes. And it is curious because I think Uruguay is more surprised. I tell them, I love your country. I love it here. They are like, really? Very humble about the -- you know, the country.

CABRERA: Do you think they realize how special their country is? Or is it just the norm for them?

BOURDAIN: Next door to Argentina, who are sort of the, you know, bigger soccer team, bigger country, bigger military. They tend to be overshadowed by Argentina.

CABRERA: So they are the underdogs?

BOURDAIN: They are definitely underdog. And they are very passionate about soccer, of course, because their little team is, you know, kind of a long shot. So I think perfect happiness for most of the Uruguayans as I understand would be it if their team beat Argentina. That would be the greatest day in Uruguay.

CABRERA: What is cuisine like there?

BOURDAIN: Meat, meat, more meat. Incredible sausages. All grilled over, you know, these monstrous plates of essentially a big grill with lots of roaring hot smoking coals underneath. They are really good at it. Really, really tasty food. But definitely meat centric and this is me talking.

CABRERA: And yet, you don't ever gain a pound. You come back from these trips.

BOURDAIN: Clean living.



CABRERA: It is a big night of premiers here on CNN. At 9:00 Anthony Bourdain falls hard for the South American country of Uruguay in a brand new episode of "PARTS UNKNOWN." And then AT 10:00 W. Kamau Bell goes inside America's Sikh communities for "UNITED SHADES OF AMERICA."

That is going to do it for me tonight. I'm Ana Cabrera. Thanks for being with me. Have a great night.