Return to Transcripts main page
White House Attacks Canada on the Eve of North Korea Summit; Germany and France Defend Canada; Trump to Meet Kim Jong-un After Fractious Weekend with G7 Allies; CNN's Anthony Bourdain Remembered; Wounded Police Officer Sues, Claiming Handgun Goes Off On Its Own. Aired 6-7p ET
Aired June 10, 2018 - 18:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[18:00:00] LAURIE SEGALL, CNN SENIOR TECHNOLOGY CORRESPONDENT: But this year we heard more, we heard more about privacy, we heard about tech addiction. Because as we see it tech has a much larger scope and it impacts us in a very personal way which we're beginning to have that conversation -- Ana.
ANA CABRERA, CNN ANCHOR: Laurie Segall, thanks for sharing that.
Here on the NEWSROOM, I'm Ana Cabrera in New York. Great to have you with us on this Sunday. President Trump is on the world stage about to become the first sitting U.S. president to shake hands with any North Korean leader. And right now we have no way to predict what will happen. And that's because there is absolutely no precedent for what we just witnessed over the last 24 hours.
The economic world order being upended. And what you're about to watch is two top White House advisers attacking one of the U.S.'s closest allies, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, this morning.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LARRY KUDLOW, TRUMP'S CHIEF ECONOMIC ADVISER: He really kind of stabbed us in the back. He really actually, you know what, he did a great disservice to the whole G7. He betrayed --
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Trudeau did?
KUDLOW: Yes, he did, because they were united in the G7. They came together.
PETER NAVARRO, TRUMP'S TRADE ADVISER: There is a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. And that's what bad faith Justin Trudeau did with that stunt press conference. That's what weak, dishonest Justin Trudeau did and that comes right from Air Force One.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: You're probably wondering how we got here. Let's start from the beginning, yesterday. The next clip is President Trump shortly before he left the G7 summit denying reports that his relationship with U.S. allies is anything less than perfect.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The relationship that I've had with the people, the leaders of these countries has been, I would really rate it on a scale of zero to 10. I would rate it a 10.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Minutes later trump hopped on his plane and headed to Singapore and then Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau came out and said this about retaliatory tariffs.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JUSTIN TRUDEAU, CANADIAN PRIME MINISTER: I have made it very clear to the president that it is not something we relish doing, but it is something that we absolutely will do, because Canadians, we're polite, we're reasonable, but we also will not be pushed around.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: And again the president who just earlier said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: On a scale of zero to 10, I would rate it a 10.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Began furiously tweeting from Air Force One. "Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada acted so meek and mild during our G7 meetings only to give a news conference after I left saying that U.S. tariffs were kind of insulting and he will not be pushed around? Very dishonest and weak. Our tariffs are in response to his 270 percent on dairy."
So in retrospect, this picture of negotiation seems to have been a lot more telling about the state of our relationship with allies than the president originally led on. The president, too, again has advisers reinforcing his attacks on Canada.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NAVARRO: There's a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with President Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Again these unprecedented attacks on a U.S. ally are happening on the eve of a historic meeting that could be the difference between nuclear war and peace.
Right now President Trump and Kim Jong-un are both in Singapore, putting these two leaders who just a few months ago were calling each over little rocket man and a dotard, just a couple of blocks apart as we speak.
Take a look. These are their hotels just half a mile from each other. CNN senior White House correspondent Jeff Zeleny is live in Singapore and CNN senior diplomatic correspondent Michelle Kosinski is live in our nation's capital.
Jeff, let's start with you. Is the White House worried this diplomatic firestorm between President Trump and Trudeau could have a negative impact?
JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ana, there's no question that the relationships here of the president certainly everything seems sort of out of the normal order. What's up is down, what's down is up. The relationship with allies, longstanding, loyal allies of the United States certainly so frayed but the White House is trying to turn the page beyond the G7 and focus on the matter at hand here. To get the president to focus on the matter at hand here.
And you have to wonder, Ana, is this all part of a strategy to try and send a message to Kim Jong-un that the president is willing to be hard handed with allies, willing to be -- you know, to treat everyone with that hard hand or is he simply blowing off steam. He certainly was doing that as he was flying from Air Force One from that G7 summit here to Canada. Had so many hours to stew on that.
[18:05:02] But then of course the president's top chief economic adviser fueled the flames even more on "STATE OF THE UNION" this morning when he said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KUDLOW: POTUS is not going to let a Canadian prime minister push him around, push him, POTUS, around, President Trump, on the eve of this. He is not going to permit any show of weakness on the trip to negotiate with North Korea, nor should he.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: So this was about North Korea?
KUDLOW: Of course it was in large part.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZELENY: So if you listen to Larry Kudlow there, he presents this as all being strategy, about the meeting to come. It seems to be it's a mix of both but there is no question they are trying to get the president's head in the game here about that historic summit that's happening in less than 36 hours. But the president was asked at the G7 summit how he plans to size up Kim Jong-un. This is what he said.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I think within the first minute, I'll know.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: How? TRUMP: Just my touch, my feel. That's what I do.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ZELENY: So it's less about the relationship and less about sizing him up than the actual commitment here that North Korea is willing to do. Are they willing to go toward abandoning the nuclear program? Are they willing to denuclearize? That is something that is going to be front and center. So relationships aside, leave behind all the ally relationships. Those problems and challenges will still be there.
The White House is trying to focus the president here. He'll be meeting with the Singapore prime minister here in a few hours and then spending more time preparing for that meeting on Tuesday with Kim Jong-un -- Ana.
CABRERA: OK. Jeff, stand by.
Michelle, we can't emphasize enough, attacks like this, though, against an ally, as close to the U.S. as Canada, are unprecedented. How are the other G7 allies reacting?
MICHELLE KOSINSKI, CNN SENIOR DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENT: They were stunned by this and wondering why this is even necessary. I mean, the government of France just put out a statement today saying that, "International cooperation can't depend on anger and small words. Let's be serious and worthy of our people."
I think that kind of says it all. And there were a lot of questions raised in the things that not only President Trump said but also members of his administration in relation to this weird spat with the Canadian prime minister. I mean, first of all some of this language that there's a special place in hell for him, calling him personally weak and dishonest.
This administration hasn't used language like that about Vladimir Putin, for example, or that kind of name calling, and for Larry Kudlow to say that, you know, the U.S. won't be pushed around or there won't be a show of American weakness, not really clear how these words on the part of the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau would show American weakness. I mean, he really didn't say much different than what he has said before regarding the U.S. tariffs.
He simply said that they won't be pushed around by the U.S. on this. So it seems like what President Trump is conveying to the world is how easy it is for him to get worked up over some of these things. I mean, in some of the statements today it was said that the president only showed up at the G7 as a favor to Justin Trudeau and that he has bigger things on his plate. Well, if that's the case, why is he going on and on attacking the Canadian prime minister? Why is he so worked up over just a few statements, for the most part that we've heard before in this press conference?
They called that press conference by the Canadian prime minister a stunt and a sophomoric play. And then they're emphasizing free trade but remember it was President Trump who imposed tariffs on the first place. And lastly, he's going into this pivotal meeting with a dictator where he said he would bring up human rights but in the last 24 hours he has attacked the American press and called something fake news that is now demonstrably true.
So just -- I think from the outside looking in on this and U.S. allies looking at what has just transpired, it's quite head spinning and it makes you question, you know, to what end is all of this. The name calling and the pulling out of being a part of the joint statement from the G7. What message does this really send not just to Kim Jong- un who he's about to meet with but the world? Is any of this productive? It's tough to see how it would be at this point, Ana.
CABRERA: That is the big question. Michelle Kosinski, Jeff Zeleny, thank you both.
I want to get to Robin Wright. She is a senior fellow at the U.S. Institute of Peace. She's also a longtime contributing writer for the "New Yorker."
Robin, I'm so glad you're with us.
[18:10:01] We heard what Larry Kudlow, Peter Navarro said today. Did you ever think you would hear something like this from a U.S. administration talking about not an adversary but their neighbor and ally, Canada?
ROBIN WRIGHT, SENIOR FELLOW, U.S. INSTITUTE OF PEACE: it's clear that there has never been a G7 that has been as disruptive as this one. The president likes to think of himself as the great disrupter. But the danger is that he's also derailing what is a core alliance. Seven major powers on which we rely for security. They account for almost half of the global economy. They're at the core of Western civilization and so the stakes are really much greater than either the G7 alliance or even the talks with North Korea.
This is a president who is attacking allies with whom we share geographic space and long-term political goals. And so there's a graver danger long term that our allies don't turn to us and don't go along with us when we make request of them. The stakes as I said are just enormous.
CABRERA: President Trump is on this potential history making trip. But he is still hammering Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Twitter. His most recent tweets, the ones that are calling him meek and mild and dishonest.
Here is how the German Foreign minister responded today, I'm going to quote him. "In a matter of seconds you can destroy trust with 280 Twitter characters. To build that up again will take much longer."
Robin, what do you think is the lasting impact of the president's tweets this weekend?
WRIGHT: Well, the challenge is going to be for the United States to prove that it really shares goals with some of our fundamental allies. This is a time that as we globalize we really need each other even if we put America first. We can't be America alone, we have to be collegial, collaborative in all of our major, you know, efforts. And the danger is that someone like Justin Trudeau or French president Emmanuel Macron who have tried so hard to deal with President Trump will feel alienated.
And, you know, the United States does need our allies for other things. And we will need their support even in dealing with North Korea, in trying to create if the diplomacy works a different political or economic reality for the North.
CABRERA: The president also going against allies calling for Russia to be readmitted to the G8 alliance. Why would President Trump make that case?
WRIGHT: This is the most extraordinary event I think over the weekend that the president seems undeterred by the intelligence community that reports Russia has been involved in meddling in the election, that a report last month by prosecutors that the Russian military was responsible for providing the weaponry that shot down a Malaysian passenger plane in 2014. That Russia intervened in not only in Crimea but also in Syria.
That as Larry Kudlow said today, so be it. You know, Russia is an actor on the world stage. Well, so are Canada, so are France, Germany, Italy and the countries that were at the G7. And to try to treat Russia with priority I think is very curious historically or today.
CABRERA: I want to put up this photo that went viral yesterday. The G7 leaders gathered around President Trump. Many people have been adding their own captions to this photo. The Belgian Foreign minister wrote this, he imagines the conversation, quote, "Tell us what Vladimir has on you. Maybe we can help?" What's your reaction to that?
WRIGHT: Well, what was interesting was the rival photographs that were released by the German government and the White House. The Germans released this photo of Angela Merkel looming over President Bush -- I mean, President Trump with the allies surrounding her and he with his arms folded staring back at her in was a -- it showed a kind of hostility. Then the White House released more than a dozen photographers showing the various G7 leaders surrounding President Trump. So there was this rival interpretation of the atmospherics at the G7.
CABRERA: What has this spat in terms of messaging -- what is the message that's been sent to Kim Jong-un as he prepares to sit down with President Trump?
WRIGHT: Well, I think President Trump was clearly trying to show that he's the tough guy and he's the alpha dog in this negotiation that he's the one who's going to get his demands met. And --- as he said Saturday in Canada, you'll know within the first minute whether he's going to get something that's doable out of this historic summit in Singapore. Of course there are a lot of questions about just what
denuclearization means. I was at the DMZ, the demilitarized zone in Korea, last month and there's a very different interpretation for the United States.
[18:15:05] That means Kim Jong-un has to give up every ballistic missile, every nuclear weapon, and it's estimated they have anywhere from 20 to 60. All his missile material, all his biological and chemical weapons. And of course Kim Jong-un interprets it as the United States potentially leaving South Korea, where it has 28,000 troops, lifting its nuclear umbrella that protects South Korea, and ending joint military operations with South Korea that target the North.
So there's a lot at stake here. And just defining that one word is going to be tough and of course both sides are kind of vying to shape the tenor and the definition of these negotiations.
CABRERA: I think we are all just really ready for this to happen so we could then talk about and discuss what has come out of the meeting. And so I hope you'll come back with me and be part of that discussion on the other side.
Robin Wright, thank you for joining us.
WRIGHT: Thank you.
CABRERA: With the White House adviser now saying there's a special place in hell for leaders like the Canadian prime minister, Senator John McCain has this message. "Americans stand with you," but why aren't more Republicans saying the same? We'll discuss.
And as the U.S. and North Korean leaders prepare for this historic summit, we're live outside the hotel where Kim Jong-un is staying less than a mile from President Trump.
[18:20:33] CABRERA: The president's attack on a longtime and loyal U.S. ally now generating plenty of political pushback at home. Even from Republican Senator John McCain and yet some wonder if President Trump's attack on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau might be part of his strategy for upcoming negotiations with North Korea.
I asked Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell if Trump's clash with allies might be strategic aimed at making Trump appear unafraid to back down. Here is his reply.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ERIC SWALWELL (D), CALIFORNIA: No. I don't see it beneficial to alienate traditional allies. We saw this last year also with Australia. You know, the people that have fought and -- you know, the longest conflicts our country's ever been in, who have shed blood alongside our soldiers, are the ones that we should continue to stand with. And if we have trade issues, you know, we should resolve them in dignified firm way but not in a way where you leave town while you're at 35,000 feet tweeting insults at a neighbor to the north who we're going to need in struggles ahead.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Let's talk it over with Ken Cuccinelli, former Virginia attorney general, now president of the Senate Conservative Fund, and David Drucker, senior political correspondent for the "Washington Examiner."
Guys, I want to read you what Senator McCain tweeted in response to the -- President Trump Twitter attack on Canada's prime minister Justin Trudeau. I quote, "To our allies, bipartisan majorities of Americans remain pro-free trade, pro-globalization and supportive of alliances based on 70 years of shared values. Americans stand with you even if our president doesn't."
David, do you think Senator McCain speaks for the majority of his colleagues?
DAVID DRUCKER, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think he probably speaks for the majority of his colleagues in the Senate on the Republican side and for that matter on the Democratic side of the aisle when we're talking about this. He probably speaks for the majority of Congress. But I do think it's a little bit more complicated politically when you're talking about voters.
I mean, don't forget in the 2016 election both Democratic voters and Republican voters were suspicious of the Transpacific Partnership that President Trump pulled the U.S. out of after President Obama had spent so many years negotiating that. Hillary Clinton felt compelled to disavow her support for the TPP, concerned that she would lose Democratic support.
So I think that, although there is a lot of -- there are a lot of problems with how the president has dealt with our allies, same as the last president who wasn't always that friendly to our allies, this president at times more unfriendly. There are problems for that. There could be consequences for that. It's not always a slam dunk that every cross section of the American electorate is going to find what the president is doing disagreeable.
CABRERA: I'm just thinking about this there, Ken, with the comments like special place in hell, calling out back stabbing and saying things like we were betrayed. Are you surprised that other Republican leaders besides John McCain aren't speaking out?
KEN CUCCINELLI, CNN LEGAL AND POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, it isn't just that others aren't speaking out. Lindsey Graham took to Twitter to disagree with John McCain. And Lindsey Graham is someone who is usually in small factions with John McCain. And so while I do find the language over the top that was used, certainly I don't think that the positions the president is taking, contrary to what John McCain had said, are far from where people outside the beltway are. David's interesting caveat I think is very interesting and that is he
said well among the people in the Senate they may agree with John McCain, which is part of why Lindsey Graham's disagreement with McCain was so interesting. But this is all really going to be overshadowed very quickly as we start the business week when most Americans might pay attention by Singapore and what happens between the president and the North Korean leader Kim.
CUCCINELLI: Who is -- you know, who has really been an enigma. Their whole country has. And we're in a trust but verify situation so I think that Trump's volatility is actually a plus in the North Korean negotiation.
CABRERA: Did he raise the stakes now, though, making this an even bigger deal, this summit with Kim Jong-un and the importance of getting a win out of it?
[18:25:06] CUCCINELLI: No. No. I think this is a big deal regardless. And what's really interesting, and to the credit of both Democrats and Republicans, they have given the president rope on to deal with North Korea. You're not seeing the kind of criticism of either suspicious Republicans or partisan Democrats of the president because they seem to have come together without almost organically and understanding of how rare the opportunities are to actually engage North Korea, and let's put something on the table.
The people need to understand. North Korea may be the most likely place for the United States to have to use, and I use that phrase, to decide that it has to use nuclear weapons since World War II. If North Korea is able to attack the United States and they've said they would, and -- can we sit back and allow them to have that capacity without destroying it. And I don't think we can. And I think that will go unsaid but understood in this negotiation with Kim Jong-un and there it helps to have President Trump viewed by the North Koreans as willing to pull the trigger.
CABRERA: And that kind of brings us to what Lindsey Graham said this morning on one of the Sunday morning shows as well regarding what question he would ask his Democratic colleagues should negotiations take a different path.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KUDLOW: They should have said to him, god speed, you're negotiating with this crazy nuclear tyrant in North Korea and we are behind you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: OK. That obviously wasn't Lindsey Graham. I thought that was going to be a different sound bite. But what Lindsey Graham said is -- you know, he suggested that the president basically be given by Congress the authorization for a use of force against North Korea, David, if the diplomacy doesn't work out with North Korea. I mean, Trump here has been talking peace. So where is this coming from? DRUCKER: Well, look, Lindsey Graham is a hawk. And I think what he's
trying to do is send a message to the North Koreans that there is support for using force if he doesn't back down and stop threatening the United States with nuclear weapons. I also think that he's trying to send a message that at issue here is not just the stopping the threats against the United States but that the United States wants what many Republican senators are referring to as CVID. Complete, verifiable, irreversible denuclearization.
The big question, Ana, in all of this is how is denuclearization defined. And it's not even clear that the president is going to define it as complete, verifiable and irreversible. And I don't think the North Koreans nor the Chinese have any interest or desire to denuclearize in a way that the U.S. has said is necessary for a deal to be done because once they denuclearize, they don't matter. Their regime is under a spotlight. And the last thing China wants who we're depending on so much in all of these talks, the last thing China wants is for the U.S. to bring North Korea to heel which sends a message to every nation in the Asia Pacific that the U.S. is still top dog and that China is committed to supplanting the United States as the pre- imminent power not just in Asia, in the Asia Pacific but around the world.
DRUCKER: And so this is a very tricky thing.
CABRERA: Which brings the conversation full circle because they must be loving seeing America fighting with Western allies as they are now taking a center -- more of a central role.
David Drucker and Ken Cuccinelli, got to leave it there, guys. Thank you very much for joining us.
So how will markets react to threats of retaliatory tariffs from America's closest allies?
Christine Romans has this week's "Before the Bell."
CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Ana. Will trade headlines move the market? Despite retaliatory measures from U.S. allies stocks powered higher last week. We'll see if that continues as investors react to every G7 development. But trade could take a backseat to the Federal Reserve meeting this week.
On Wednesday the Fed is widely expected to raise interest rates. Investors are betting there is a better than 90 percent chance of an interest rate hike. The real question, what does the Fed telegraph going forward? For now the Central Bank has penciled in three rate hikes this year. Three more in 2019. Wall Street is looking for any signs the Fed might change those plans.
Finally watch media stocks on Tuesday. A federal judge is expected to rule on AT&T's $85 billion purchase of Time Warner, the parent company of CNN. The Justice Department insists the deal will hurt consumers by raising prices and limiting choice. AT&T argues it needs the merging to better compete with upstarts like Facebook, Amazon and Netflix. The outcome could change the future of deals in the media industry.
In New York, I'm Christine Romans.
CABRERA: Coming up, Kim Jong-un's entourage arriving in a motorcade of more than 20 cars. Less than a mile from where President Trump is staying. We are outside Kim's hotel in Singapore ahead of his historic face-to-face with President Donald Trump.
[18:35:01] CABRERA: There is a mass of security and media presence in Singapore right now ahead of President Trump's historic meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un.
Singapore is paying for much of the pageantry, and the island city- state designed to match the significance of the event in tone and magnitude. This summit is set to take place at the lavish Capella Hotel. The two leaders right now less than a mile apart. President Trump at the Shangri-La Hotel, Kim at the St. Regis.
CNN's Alexandra Field is there and joins us now.
Alex, what's the mood on the ground?
ALEXANDRA FIELD, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ana, the experience must be simply surreal if you are one of the regular guests who had checked into this luxury property here in Singapore. It means you spent the night with the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong-un, in the same building, not to mention the top brass of North Korean officials.
We know that Kim Jong-un was traveling with Kim Yong-chol, the former spy chief who recently went to the White House to meet with President Trump. We know that he was also traveling with his sister who has taken on a higher-profile role recently.
Kim Jong-un's plane touched down in Singapore on Sunday afternoon. He was attended by heavy security as he made his way through the hotel. North Korean guards with their red loyalty badges were posted inside. And, certainly, we've seen a heavy presence of Singaporean police on the streets.
Kim, himself, was greeted by the Singapore Foreign Minister when he came off that Air China plane. He then went on the meet Singapore's Prime Minister. The two had a bit of a discussion, and Kim said that Singapore really, essentially, have the opportunity to play a historic role by hosting a meeting, the likes of which the world has certainly never seen before, Ana.
The question now is what Kim Jong-un does today. No public schedule. The world's media is posted outside the hotel, certainly, watching for any signs of movement. Perhaps more fascinating will be to see the images that are projected inside of North Korea, what they will see about this moment.
So far, North Korean state news is reporting that this is about improving U.S. and North Korean relations, that it is about the issue of denuclearization. They don't indicate what would make these talks different from failed talks in the past.
And, certainly, Ana, they don't go on to speculate what the North Korean delegation could demand as a concession in exchange. A lot to watch from right here outside the St. Regis, Ana.
CABRERA: But still, the fact they are talking denuclearization, the fact that they are talking about peace as how they're projecting the lead up to this event in North Korea is interesting. Alexandra Field, thank you for that latest.
It has been three days since the world lost Anthony Bourdain. We'll talk to one chef Tony idolized, next.
[18:41:06] CABRERA: It has been three days since we lost our colleague, Anthony Bourdain, and the mood here is still one of great sorrow.
My next, Jeremiah Tower, got to know Tony pretty well. I interviewed him, alongside Bourdain, about six months ago, and it was obvious just how much our celebrity chef looked up to Jeremiah.
Here is the behind the scenes clip of an exchange we had before the interview actually started.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: How long have you guys known each other?
ANTHONY BOURDAIN, FORMER CNN HOST: Since we started working on the project.
JEREMIAH TOWER, ACCLAIMED CHEF AND FRIEND OF ANTHONY BOURDAIN: Yes.
CABRERA: Yes. Does that --
BOURDAIN: I knew of him but -- yes.
CABRERA: Yes, because I know -- I wish -- I don't want to talk too much before we get going, but I would have thought that you guys, like, go way back or something.
BOURDAIN: No, I --
BOURDAIN: I never moved in the same circles or at the same level, frankly.
CABRERA: Yes? BOURDAIN: Yes.
TOWER: Well, thank you.
BOURDAIN: That's the fact of the matter.
TOWER: No, he's number one cool guy.
TOWER: I was never --
CABRERA: Not at all?
TOWER: Never that cool.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CABRERA: Renowned chef Jeremiah Tower is joining me now.
Such fine memory of that conversation we had, Jeremiah. Hard to believe that it was six months ago. And it was clear there, you thought pretty highly of Tony as well. He clearly admired you. What have the last couple of days been like for you?
TOWER: Devastating. I mean, Tony -- it's hard to believe that he's gone because he was such a life force, you know.
I mean, Tony was maybe the most intelligent person I know. I mean, and I admired him not just for the intelligence, but he actually could verbalize, beautifully, everything that was in his head.
And as somebody who -- I have trouble, you know, connecting my brain to my mouth most of the time --
CABRERA: Me too.
TOWER: -- but Tony did a brilliant job of saying what was in his head. And what was in his head was the whole world, all the places he had been, all the things he had thought about, all the things he wanted to say and do. No, I adored being with Tony.
CABRERA: Yes, he was deep, as you point out.
TOWER: Yes. Absolutely.
CABRERA: He had such a depth of knowledge and curiosity. He, obviously, had a real curiosity about your story. What did it mean to you that Anthony Bourdain wanted to tell your story?
TOWER: Well, we had both been bad boys, you know, so I think he --
TOWER: He had a certain sympathy for my past -- or even maybe he thought of me for my present or future, I don't know. But, you know, I -- when I first got to sort of know him, not personally but with reading "Kitchen Confidential."
And anybody in the industry, when you're a chef or a cook working in a restaurant, you know, 80 hours a week, "Kitchen Confidential" just, you know, laid it all out. Like, I can't believe that somebody else went through that, felt like that, and did that amount of drugs and everything all those days ago? And so that's when it all started.
And young chefs. I was working with chefs at the (INAUDIBLE) in New Orleans last night at an event, and they were talking about "Kitchen Confidential." And they were 30 years old. So they're still reading it and still seeing, you know, what it was like in our industry.
[18:45:08] And Tony was an example of how that had been and what wasn't anymore. You know, all of that abuse and craziness is not in our industry anymore. And he was a leader in that.
CABRERA: And I know Tony. I remember him saying when we were getting ready for that interview that he really wanted to tell your story because of the impact --
CABRERA: -- you had on the culinary industry and how you were sort of this, you know, globetrotting, like trendsetter of some sort. And here in America, you brought like fresh food to everybody's palette.
CABRERA: What do you see as his impact now?
TOWER: Well, because he looked at me as a leader and I looked at him as a leader. So that's why we're mutual admiration society.
But he -- what was special about Tony, especially in the last few years, was that he -- all the people talking to me in the last couple of days that I've been here in New Orleans, all the young chefs, all the public, saying he was the one who was free to travel, to do the things he wanted, to speak his mind.
You know, when people said, well, why did you do the documentary? Why did you say yes to him? I said, well, the Libyan government, the Iranian government, couldn't say no to him. How could I say no to Tony?
TOWER: I adored him for the fact that he will say, OK, at this moment, all Americans think, for instance, Libyans are terrorists and monsters. So he flies to Libya, shows, you know, families having dinner just like us at home.
And I said to him -- you know, I said, Tony, you're my hero for doing that. I mean, that is so brave.
You're in a commercial business on CNN selling these movies, these episodes, and you choose to do that. You could have been, you know, showing something in Tuscany, you know, that was safe and wonderful.
But, no, you went to Iran and Libya and said, no, stop feeling these people are, you know, not like us. They really are. They're families.
And I said, Tony, that is so brilliant, so brave, so courageous. So wonderful.
CABRERA: In so many ways, he did change the world through his work.
TOWER: He did. He did. He led the way.
TOWER: Yes, exactly.
CABRERA: Jeremiah Tower. I'm so glad you could join us. Thank you for being here.
TOWER: Thank you. My pleasure. Thank you.
CABRERA: We'll be right back.
TOWER: Thank you, Tony.
CABRERA: Thank you, Tony.
TEXT: ANTHONY BOURDAIN, 1956 - 2018.
[18:52:04] CABRERA: Wounded police officers now suing a major handgun manufacturer over a weapon they say goes off on its own. At least three officers say they were injured when they dropped or rattled the Sig Sauer P320 handgun.
This company denies allegations that this firearm is faulty and insists the gun's safety is one of its biggest assets. CNN's Martin Savidge takes a closer look and uncovers some disturbing findings.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Setting a new standard in fit, safety and trigger performance.
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): When the Sig Sauer P320 came out in 2014, it was a hit with gun enthusiasts and law enforcement. They loved the gun's feel, how it fired, how it made them better shots.
JAMES CALLAWAY, CHIEF OF POLICE, MORROW POLICE DEPARTMENT, GEORGIA: When I've got 75 percent of my officers are shooting 90 percent expert level, that says a lot about the weapon.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Sig Sauer P320 is engineered to a new standard of safety. SAVIDGE (voice-over): Sig Sauer also touted the gun's safety. The
P320 won't fire unless you want it to, boasts the website.
The company also promoted the fact that, in January 2017, the U.S. Army had selected the gun as its new sidearm.
CALLAWAY: The Pentagon. You're talking about the military. They were switching the entire weapons platform over to the Sig P320. That played a big role in my decision.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): In March 2017, Chief Callaway bought every one of his officers the P320. But then --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi, I'm Andrew with Omaha Outdoors.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): -- Callaway saw this internet video, showing P320s being repeatedly dropped onto a hard surface and going off.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All of these, when dropped at the right angle, would result in uncommanded firing of the pistol.
CALLAWAY: I got sick to my stomach. I really did.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): For his officers' safety, Callaway locked up all those brand new P320s and had to buy different guns to replace it.
A police officer in Stamford, Connecticut got a much more dangerous demonstration seven months earlier when, according to his attorney, the officer accidentally dropped his P320 while still in its holster.
JEFF BAGNELL, ATTORNEY FOR INJURED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS: It fired and shot him in his left knee, causing significant harm to him.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): In court documents, a Virginia Deputy Sheriff says that she was wounded seriously in the leg when her P320 accidentally discharged on its own as she was removing her holster from her.
And this March, in Orlando, a police officer was wounded when he dropped his P320 and it went off.
Despite the injuries, the lawsuits, and videos, Sig Sauer maintains the P320 is safe, first posing then answering this question in the FAQ section of its Web site.
Is my P320 safe in its current configuration?
SAVIDGE (on camera): Sig Sauer's executives have ignored CNN's calls and e-mails for weeks. And when we called the company spokesman, he hung up.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): But in August 2017, Sig Sauer started offering customers what-if calls a free voluntary upgrade, replacing the parts gun experts suspect are at the heart of the drop-fire problem. [18:55:03] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The upgraded guns have a much smaller
and lightweight trigger.
SAVIDGE (voice-over): The company never says the upgrade is a fix. Sig Sauer even sent Chief Callaway a whole new batch of those upgraded P320s, leaving him feeling better about the company. Until we showed him military documents and told him information CNN had obtained.
Remember Sig Sauer's big Army contract for the P320? Before the Army received its first shipment of pistols, it told Sig Sauer the company needed to fix a problem the Army had discovered.
During drop testing in which an empty prime cartridge was inserted, the striker struck the primer causing a discharge. In other words, the pistol had also fired when dropped in Army tests.
A Pentagon source tells CNN the Army discovered the problem in 2016.
CALLAWAY: That means to me that there was an issue known before I purchased our Sigs for our department because this pre-dates our purchase. By quite some time.
SAVIDGE (on camera): Sig Sauer fixed the Army's guns but continued to sell the old problematic P320. Up to half a million guns, according to what the company told trade publications last August.
What we don't know now is how many of those guns have been upgraded. And if not, how many of them remain in the hands of the public and the police?
Martin Savidge, CNN, Atlanta.
CABRERA: Still ahead, trust but verify in a new era. If President Trump strikes a deal with Kim Jong-un, how exactly do you make sure the leader of a notoriously secretive regime actually follows through? It's complicated.
You're live in the CNN NEWSROOM.