25/01/2017 100 Days


Similar Content

Browse content similar to 25/01/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



The President promised this would be a big day for US National security.


And good to his word, Donald Trump is pressing ahead


with plans to tighten the borders of the United States.


We're going to build a wall. We have to build a wall. And he promises


Mexico will pay for the ball eventually. There will be a payment,


it will be in perhaps the complicated form and you have to


understand what I'm doing is good for the US and also good for Mexico.


It's reported the President will also ask for a review


of the way terrorist suspects are interrogated.


We'll hear from the CIA Director who closed the black site prisons.


It would be a mistake to go back to that and could be damaging in terms


of our image to the rest of the world.


In other news, some have dismissed as a distraction but the president


He is ordering a major investigation into voter fraud,


still convinced that illegal votes affected the election result.


And gun violence in Chicago - the President says he is considering


sending in the Feds - would it help?


Hello it is Wednesday afternoon here in Washington,


Donald Trump has promised a "big day" in the reform of America's


The President is outlining changes to immigration, visa controls,


and a crack down on gun violence in Chicago.


And of course there is the promise, which he made throughout


that election campaign, to build that wall.


He's also given his first TV interview as President,


here is what he said about that Wall to ABC News...


Ultimately we will start negotiations relatively soon with


Mexico and we will be reimbursed by Mexico. So the American taxpayer


will pay for the ball first. We will be reimbursed at a later date from


whatever transaction we make from Mexico. The Mexican president said


Mexico will not pay and added it goes against their dignity as a


country and as Mexicans. He has to say that. I'm just telling you,


there will be a payment, it will be perhaps in a complicated form, and


you have to understand what I'm doing is good for the US and also


good for Mexico. We want a stable and solid Mexico. When does


construction begin. As soon as we can physically do it. Within months?


I would say within months and certainly planning is starting


immediately. Our North America editor


Jon Sopel is here. He needs to be seen to be moving on


this issue? It was the signature mark of his campaign and whichever


rally Kuwait to it was, build a wall. Then he would ask who is going


to pay and the crowd would say, Mexico. Except of course initially


it will be the US taxpayer. Possibly Mexico, maybe. Because of course the


US taxpayer is going to fund this. He is saying there will be some


payment, it will be complicated. What does any of that mean. He has


got to get going on it but quite what is going to be because during


the campaign will lead to the it would be a 20 foot high wall


stretching 2000 miles. I do not think he is quite envisaging that


corrupt part of it will be offence, part of that reinforced wall, not


quite all but it seems. Maybe that is something got used to when


dealing with Donald Trump. He starts from one position, we end up up


somewhere else. There's the issue of whether the president wants to


review the American policy on black site prisons and interrogation


techniques. Two or three hours ago I felt I was reliving an episode of


Homeland. Extraordinary rendition. Water boarding, black sites. All the


rest of it, enhanced interrogation techniques. He left it open in the


ABC interview and throughout the campaign. He said he would do


tougher stuff than water boarding. So it came to the White House


briefing, which ended 30 minutes ago and the President's spokesman Sean


Spicer was asked about it. Can you shed light on the draft memo going


around about interrogation practices. It is not the White House


document. Those who have reported on it, I think this is the second day


we had a document that was not a White House document reported on as


a factual document. I have no idea where it came from. But it is not a


White House document. Does that clear it up? I would have thought if


it was complete baloney, he would have had huge joy in saying it is


complete baloney. Instead of which he said it is not a White House


document, to my knowledge the president has not seen it. So I


think there is an area of ambiguity is still in there somewhere. It


clearly is not about to be an executive order that is going to be


signed tomorrow. But if you read the document there has been a lot of


careful work gone into drafting it, what it would mean, what it would


not mean, changes to the army manual. So perhaps it is something


on the back burner but not the full force, White House document,


publication tomorrow or the day after. Yesterday we spoke about


special advisers Stephen Bannon who of course was critical of the Obama


attitude towards tackling terror. But we heard from the Defence


Secretary James Mathis who has a more relaxed view on this. So is


there going to be tension? I think there is tension between the


populists and the old guard, I think there are tensions between radicals


and more traditionally conservative elements. James Mathis the Defence


Secretary thought he had convinced Donald Trump that actually the whole


issue of torture, forget the human rights aspect of it, he says it is


simply not working. Much better to give someone you are interrogating a


couple of beers and the cigarette than to start trying to water board


them and hope you will get information that way. So it seems


there is a tension within the administration, but not a White


House document according to Sean Spicer. And has been more news,


about the voter fraud issue. President Trump tweeting again about


this issue. We spoke of it yesterday. Is it now becoming a


political tool with which the president and the Supreme Court will


be able to look at voting rights issues in America? That is leaping a


lot of logical steps down the way but not unreasonable. Let's hear


what the critical voices are saying. It is simple, he is the thin skinned


narcissist and cannot accept that he lost the popular vote to Hillary


Clinton, all driven by that. But other people, what happens if there


is a review and it does not come up with the conclusion saying there was


voter fraud but there is to eliminate any perception that there


is voter fraud, in future elections there should be people having to


produce identity before they are able to vote. That could have the


effect of suppressing voter turnout especially amongst poor


African-American communities, who are most likely to vote Democrat.


That story is dominating American media this morning. Let's get


reaction from former Republican governor of Virginia Jim Gilmore.


You trained on the Arizona border before you went to work in US


intelligence in Europe. Do you think it is actually possible to build


this wall, 1900 miles long, along the US, Mexican border? It is pretty


long and when I was their training as an intelligence agent there is a


lot of vast desert space. The thrust of what the president is saying is


that the days of open borders are over, we must be able to control our


borders and that means he's going to build a wall, at least some barrier,


across the southern border of the US. It is going to control people


just walking across the border either with drugs or dangerous


situations and that is built thrust of what the President is saying.


Technically where the bricks go, where those monitors go, that will


be left to the Department of Homeland Security. And what about


reimbursement, we heard President Trump saying there will be initially


American taxpayers paying for this and then they will get reimbursed by


the Mexicans. How is that going to work in practice, how do we know the


Mexicans had said they're not going to pay for this, are going to say


fine, we will do so? Well first I would say this, the Mexican


government needs to understand it has an obligation to control its


side of the border and prevent people who are dangerous to the


United States from simply walking across the border. They're not doing


that. They do nothing to protect their neighbour to the north.


Therefore we have an obligation to the American people to protect


ourselves up as far as how that is financially going to be handled, the


with our Mexican labourers on trade with our Mexican labourers on trade


issues and a variety of other issues and I'm sure there will be some


horse trading and swapping going on to make sure the American people are


protected as they protect themselves. I spent a lot of time in


the last year on the borders in Europe, we had a migrant crisis for


some time and there is evidence that fences do work. Looking at Hungary


and Bulgaria, migrants have been directed around those countries and


perhaps those governments would say they do work. But you will know all


it really does is to channel people through a different direction and


people take more risks to get to where they want to go. It happens


but the alternative is simply not to have any kind of border control of


any kind. No winning you -- in Europe should really be doing that.


For the UK part of the impetus towards Brexit was to make sure they


had control of their own borders and did not have to live in a regime


where they had to accept anyone from within the EU willy-nilly. So


because of the Middle East crisis and the terrorist war weary and


internationally, there is much more of a move now for civilised


countries to begin to force more protections on behalf of their own


people. So fences can at least bring some control and make a focus on who


is going where and give us a better handle on movement of people. Thank


you. And we will of course bring pictures from the Department of


Homeland Security word Donald Trump is currently, as soon as we get


anything from that. Well there is speculation about the


reopening of black sites centres. And of course Christian it comes


at a time when the President's relationship with the intelligence


community is already The president's feud with the US


intelligence services began before He dismissed the need for a daily


intelligence briefing, He attacked a report by intelligence


agencies that said Russian hackers meddled in the US election


with the aim of getting He wrongly accused US intelligence


of leaking and unverified dossier that alleged the Russians had


compromising material on him, and then in a tweet,


he compared the same intelligence The very first day after his


inauguration, Mr Trump went to Langley in a bid to make amends


with the CIA. I want to say that there


is nobody that feels stronger about the intelligence community


and the CIA than Donald Trump. But even that visit


didn't go so well. Mr Trump used the occasion to brag


about his victory and complain about the press coverage


of the inauguration. John Brennan, the man who led


the CIA until resigning last week, called it a despicable


display of self-aggrandisement. It is not unheard of for the White


House to have a confrontational After all, sometimes a president


might want to do something for his own political reasons that


doesn't really work And that has caused


inherent tensions. President Bush clashed repeatedly


with the agency over Iraq. Once dismissing a report on the


course of the war as just guessing. One of his most controversial


decisions was the sanctioning of so-called black sites,


secret overseas CIA President Obama ended


the practice in 2009. Now according to US media, Mr Trump


is reviewing both that decision I've been speaking to Leon Panetta


who served as both head of the CIA and later the Defense Department


under President Obama In 2009 as director of the CIA you


gave the water to the agency to close the Black sites prisons. Mr


Trump is now reportedly reviewing those black sites and enhanced


interrogation techniques or torture, if you call it that. Do you think


that would be good for national security in America? I think it


would be a serious mistake to take a backward step on those issues. The


reality is we do not really need black sites, we do not need to use


enhanced interrogation in order to get the information that is


required. General matters believes that, I think others in the


intelligence business believe that. The FBI believe that. So I think it


would be a mistake to go back to that and I think it could be


damaging in terms of our image to the rest of the world. In an


interview with ABC News Mr Trump appears to have said that whilst he


was surprised that the new Defence Secretary does not think that


enhanced interrogation techniques, torture, work, he has spoken to


people in the intelligence community in the past 24 hours who have a


different opinion and he's very much living it on the table. What you


make of these differences of opinion? It is hard to know what


exactly is going on. Within the mind of the president right now. He has


talked about going back to torture, but I think a lot of people regard


that as not only a violation of our values in this country but a


violation of the constitution. So I think it would be a mistake in fact


to even raise the possibility that we would go back to those methods.


The reality is that we have been successful at being able to get the


intelligence that we need in order to protect this country. We have not


had another attack since September the 11th. We have been able to


protect this country and do what is necessary in order to deal with


terrorism. And we can do it not only in ways that protect our security,


but that also protect our values. Even you yourself have the time


suggested some of the information that America has got on planned


terrorist activities came from these methods of interrogation. You have


left that door open yourself, that some of these methods may work? The


reality is that in the process of conducting some of these


interrogations there is no question that information was produced, how


valuable it was, how much of an impact it had, whether we could get


from other sources, is a question. My view is when President Obama in


his executive order said we would not continue enhanced procedures,


that we would not engage in torture, that that was a very important step


for this country to take. Because it was a symbol to the rest of the


world that we're going to adhere to our values and to what we believe in


and so I think that is the proper course for the United States to take


it up to go back on that, to resurrect all those procedures


again, I think would be damaging not only to our image in the world, I do


not think it would be effective in terms of our ability to protect the


security of our country. You raised the constitutionality of this


process, Senator McCain said this morning that the law is the law.


What position would this put CIA officers in potentially, if the


president were to ask them to use these techniques? We are going back


to a process that we went through in the period after September the 11th.


And in order to justify what they would do, they would need to have a


legal opinion from the Justice Department that in fact came to the


conclusion that is doing these kinds of procedures would be


constitutional and would be legal. If that does not happen, there's no


way in the world that an intelligence officer is going to


proceed with those procedures knowing that it could violate our


law. It is just not going to happen. But you know what lawyers are like


and presumably if you want to find a lawyer who says this is


constitutional, President Trump would do that. It is not that simple


to say that if you can find a lawyer in some basement who can come to


that conclusion, that that would be sufficient for the CIA and other


intelligence agencies to act upon. The reality is this would have to be


an opinion that a number of lawyers at the Justice Department would have


to agree to. The Attorney General would have to agree to. And I think


legal scholars in this country would have to look at it and make a


determination whether it is a valid opinion or not. So there are a lot


of steps that would have to be taken before any of this would be put into


action. Are you worried about the direction in which Donald Trump is


taking the United States? I worry that the president needs to


understand that as president of the United States he should stay focused


on the most important issue which is protecting our country. And


protecting our values as a country. I think it is a little dangerous


when he starts to imply that we're going to things that we have


recognised where wrong steps to take in the past. And to suddenly engage


in that kind of controversy when we have to deal with threats in the


world, we have to deal with terrorism, we have to deal with


Russia, with China, with North Korea, with cyber attacks, there are


a lot of threats facing the United States. It seems to me to be a huge


waste of time to divert attention to some of this effort is talking about


when frankly his attention ought to be devoted to how do we counter our


adversaries in the world. Thank you very much for joining us. He said it


would be a mistake to go back on some of the things appearing in this


report today. And very damaging to the United States image. I would


think a lot of people in Europe are nervous about the idea of rendition


again and these black cop sites around the world. This is going to


be controversial if indeed President Trump really is thinking of reviving


either the black sites or enhanced interrogation techniques. You heard


Mr Panetta there, and there is a big split in the administration because


you have the new director of the CIA Mike Pompeo and the Secretary of


they do not think torture works and they do not think torture works and


this is the way America should go. So how is Donald Trump going to


square those things? We are still waiting for Donald Trump to speak at


the Department of Homeland Security. There is the audience waiting. Let's


just talk a bit about executive orders. We spoke a lot about them in


the past 23 days. He is finding a number of them. What can force do


they have, are they typed typed in terms of law? -- tight. As president


you can either get Congress to go along with you and get congressional


approval which then becomes law, or you have the power of the pen and


you can sign an executive order or executive action. Every president


does this, you can see Donald Trump putting his signature on the bottom


of an executive order. He has been doing that all week. But for a


present the problem is an executive order is not as broad as a law


passed by Congress and can be overturned by a future president. So


all these executive orders that Donald Trump has signed this week


will go into force for the duration of his presidency. If the Democrat


is elected next, they will be reversed. And that is some


signature! Three Trump Towers in that signature! I was looking back


today at how many presidential orders had been ordered in the past.


Barack Obama, 277 presidential orders, but not as many as Franklin


Roosevelt, who issued 3721. Before we go just some pictures of Donald


Trump randomly and the North Korean leader in Hong Kong together. Not


really, of course. A couple of impersonators entertaining the


crowds outside the US Consulate. Both leaders have said they would be


open to a meeting. Not sure they would get on just quite as well as


this. Not perhaps the picture at the White House would like anyone to see


either. I think Donald Trump has been a very good character.


Just a reminder that every evening after this show,


One of us will be spending 10 or 15 minutes on Facebook Live each night


talking about the issues we have covered.


And today it will be me - if you want to get involved then


You are watching 100 days on BBC News.


Coming up, Donald Trump tweeted he will send in the feds of Chicago


does not end gun violence. And this bison is part of an internal protest


by the National Park Service. Part of its message on climate change.


That is all still to come here on BBC News.


Good evening. Across the South and east it has been a cold and foggy


day. Even some grains of snow out there at the moment. But for other


areas it was a lovely day. This is how it looked underneath the blanket


of cloud further south and east. That is now causing an issue with


some fog which is quite extensive. Some sunshine also for Scotland and


Northern Ireland. Through the evening and overnight the cloud in


the south just further north and west. And the wind is strengthening


as it does so. So with the increased breeze especially for the north and


west that should not be such a cold night. For many parts of Scotland


and Northern Ireland especially towns and cities, it Frost levels


but not in the South even with more cloud, which is unusual. So it will


feel quite bitter and the cloud gives us some drizzle and grains of


snow falling onto frozen surfaces and so it could be quite treacherous


first thing in the morning on untreated roads and pavements. So


did take extra care. So quite a grey start again for the bulk of England


and Wales with that blanket of cloud. Hill fog for the Peak


District and Pennines and the worlds -- the Welsh Marches. Cloudy for


Northern Ireland. But probably some sunshine coming through. Some


brightness in the south of the day goes on, but adding on the wind


chill and temperatures will be feeling much lower than freezing.


That is because we have a stronger wind. On Friday we pull in more of a


southerly wind. There could be some snow across eastern areas initially


and then showers of rain coming in later. But again we are going to


start to see a bit of a change taking place through Friday. Not


quite as cold and this area of showers denotes an area of low


pressure which is likely to cross the whole of the UK through


Saturday. Srebrenica some showers. So not raining all the time but some


heavy showers around and quite cloudy. A cooler day again on


Sunday. Welcome back to 100 Days


with Katty Kay in Washington. President Trump says his


administration will start building a wall on the US border with Mexico


within months and America will be Coming up, Gun violence in Chicago -


President Trump says he could send I think I check Donald Trump's


twitter feed at least three There's 14 million


others already signed up to the POTUS Twitter


handle - why? Because it is an open window


into what the President is thinking. And last night, the President


was at it again. He sent out this tweet about gun


violence in Chicago... There were 762 homicides


last year in Chicago. President Trump seems to have


picked up on a report in the Chicago Tribune,


which suggest shootings are already up compared


to the same period last year - figures disputed by


the Chicago Police Department. It's unclear exactly


what intervention the President is proposing, but the problems


in the city are well known. In fact our correspondent


Ian Pannell spent a good deal of time there last year,


reporting on gang violence. In a moment we'll talk to him,


but first here's clip Odile is a rapper from


the West side, now the most He is a member of the Vice Lords


gang, he has been in prison, and even he is shocked


by what is happening. It is like somebody dropped off


crazy guns in everybody's hood. It seemed like it was designed


but I think a lot of guys need I think some of these need to get


killed to get them out of the way. So we have been stood


here for five minutes. I have seen two police cars,


one ambulance go by. Suddenly we were told


to leave the area, as Odile Hey, what just happened,


why did we have to leave so quickly? There is like a war around,


two gangs and that is why so many Somebody just got shot


a couple of blocks up. What do you make of President


Trump's tweet about sending in the fads. What would it mean, is it


possible? You are asking me what President Trump is thinking? The


feds are already there. The mayor of Chicago has been holding a press


conference in the last hour and has made the point, the feds, the drug


enforcement agency, the FBI, they are already there. He would like


more assistance, more help and more resorts is. He is putting the ball


back in President Trump's court saying, if you want me to deal with


gun crime, these are the resources we need. The other alternative is,


you send in the National Guard. The mayor made it clear, it wasn't their


job to enforce public safety. Would the National Guard on the streets


you were covering in Chicago, stop gun violence there? Certainly might


limit the amount of inter-gang gun violence. They would have this day?


They would. I have never seen so many guns in civilian hands outside


of a war zone, many people say Chicago is. You have covered a lot


of war zones. This would only lead to escalation. The question is, what


is the solution, do you think? Very good question. A lot of those issues


have been raised by President Trump in terms of education, housing and


jobs. I met a lot of people doing two or three jobs, just to make ends


meet. The reason there are so many drugs, guns and violence, those


three things feed off each other. Lack of jobs, so people turn to


other ways of making money. I was watching the film today, and one of


the people you interviewed said the problem got worse when they took the


gang leaders out of the picture? Yes, that is something I heard


repeatedly. And it ties into what Katty had to say, how do you deal


with this? If you go after the gang leaders and the gangs, it leads to


this fracturing, you lose a sense of control, sons of the hierarchy that


does exist, which means those larger gangs, which is something we saw in


Mexico and their drug war. You take out the cartel, and you'll end up


with more gangs, less control and the rules that were in force are


diminished. But historically, the violence has been worse in Chicago,


it is not just Chicago that has this problem. President Trump has made it


clear this is at the forefront of his agenda. He and the mayor will


have to do something about it. The figures last year were terrible, but


the figures this year are even worse. Thank you, for the moment.


Well for more on this let's speak to Maze Jackson,


a Chicago resident and broadcaster, who's lived in one of


You grew up in Chicago, how different is it now and why have you


had to move out of the suburbs in the last year? Let me correct you, I


was born in Chicago, moved to the suburbs and then came back to


Chicago. When I came back, I decided I wanted to be part of the solution


and not part of the brain drain. Often when black people become


successful, we tend to move out of our neighbourhoods, depriving the


black kids in those communities the opportunity to see examples of


success. I decided with my wife, to move back into one of our more


challenging neighbourhoods. I also had to face the fact I was raising a


16-year-old daughter. As I was trying to give back and live in a


certain community, there was a shoot out on my daughter, I wind up


telling her to stay out later because I didn't want her to be a


victim of the violence occurring in our neighbourhood. What does that


mean when you are moving around your neighbourhood, do you have two plan


where you go and which direction you take around the city? I would say,


the people in our neighbourhood, we often, you know where to go and


where not to go. You know certain communities to stay out of. The


violence in Chicago is probably limited to a couple of zip codes.


But those zip codes spill out into the city as a whole and it affects


the complete numbers. Hello, I want to ask you about Donald Trump's


tweet and his idea of sending in the fads, do you think the situation has


got so bad in Chicago, but some residents were the gun violence is


worse, they might welcome the feds coming in, what ever that means?


There is mixed opinion. For a person like myself, I couldn't imagine


wanting to welcome the federal government in to deal with the


crime. But I have talked to those people in those communities, there


is a sense of, we will take whatever resources we get to make sure we


stop this violence that is occurring. OK, are are also people


in Chicago who might welcome President Trump's tough stand on


illegal immigration. I know it in Chicago there are tensions between


African Americans and members of the Hispanic community? I think there


are a few, particularly in the black community, are in a competition for


resources. A lot of black Americans, even though we have talked about the


recovery and how great things are, unemployment is growing. In Chicago


we have the highest unemployment for black men under the age of 18. It


seems to be a competition for resources. We are experiencing


record violence, the mayor, when he has an opportunity to address the


president of the United States, the most powerful man in the world,


talks about a sanctuary city. Where is the sanctuary cities


African-Americans who live in these cities, who are being terrorised by


the violence? Thank you very much for joining us.


The statistics are terrifying, more people died in Chicago than died in


Afghanistan. It proves Chicago is a war zone and so many people dying,


over 1000 people. We are just keeping our eye on the podium at the


Department of Homeland Security. As soon as President Trump comes out to


speak, we will bring it to you. In a meantime, let's look at some of the


other developments today. Some of the other key developments


today, Russia says it has "no illusions" that relations


with the US will improve quickly Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said


he had no "naive expectations" You might remember that same term


was used by Obama's administration to describe their drive for closer


ties between the two countries. Protesters have climbed


a construction site crane a few Activists from Greenpeace


unfurled a 70 foot banner The demonstrators say this


is an "all-encompassing message" against the new President


and his policies on the environment, The man tipped to be Donald Trump's


ambassador to the EU, Ted Malloch, says that Britain could agree


a "mutually beneficial" free trade But the EU has made it clear that


Britain can't negotiate free trade deals with other countries until it


has left the bloc. Prime Minister Theresa May


will travel to Washington We'll speak to Ted Malloch


tomorrow on the programme. We should know in just over a week


what the full make up of the US Supreme Court will look like under


President Trump. In one of his other tweets


earlier, he wrote... "I will be making my Supreme Court


pick on Thursday of next week. The court has had only eight


justices since the death last year We want to show you a picture we


have been looking at. It is a bison. It has been put out by the National


Park service in place of pictures they put up at the weekend of the


inauguration and those smaller crowds, which didn't please the


White House. So they put out this message with the bison saying we


regret the mistake and re-tweets from our account yesterday. This


comes back to the White House reportedly cracking down on the


communications from federal agencies, including...


Although, the White House is saying they didn't crack down, they say the


Department is standing by protocol. Thanks for being with us today. This


is 100 Days on BBC News. Goodbye.


Download Subtitles