04/04/2017 100 Days

At least 58 people have been gassed to death and 300 are in hospital

in one of the worst autrocities of the Syrian War.

The White House calls it a "reprehensible" act

but also blames the weakness of the Obama administration.

The attack happened in a rebel-held town.

Reports suggest military jets also fired rockets at clinics where

The UN Security Council has called an emergency meeting.

What we understood, it was a chemical attack

The Syrian and Russian governments deny any involvement in what's

A top member of President Obama's team comes under fire, accused

The claims, she says, are absolutely false.

Republicans say they are ready to "go nuclear" if that's what it

takes to confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.

Also today, re-forging an old alliance...

As Brexit negotiations begin, the UK government travels to India

to begin the early work on a future trade deal.

What Melania Trump's first official portrait tells us

I'm Katty Kay in Washington, Christian Fraser is in London.

The pictures are appalling, the pattern all too familiar,

and the international response predictable.

Civilians in a rebel-held area of Syria have been

It has happened before, with red lines crossed -

Today, in the seventh year of the Syrian civil war,

it seems President Assad's regime can do what it wants.

So far, at least 58 people are known to have died in this latest attack.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said the air

strikes in Khan Sheikhoun, in the north west of the country,

came early in the morning while many were still sleeping.

Our correspondent James Robbins has the report.

He is alive but he is struggling to breathe.

Around him, other children are already on oxygen,

Other pictures, too graphic to broadcast, show fire crews

in the streets of Khan Sheikhoun spraying adults and children

where they fell, many of them clearly among the dead.

TRANSLATION: I lost my son, my children,

TRANSLATION: All are wounded, some are dead, there

We couldn't enter Khan Sheikhoun city because of

Then, as a Syrian activist was filming in one hospital treating

This whole rebel-held area in north-west Syria,

a last opposition stronghold, has been under heavy bombardment

There is a history of chemical attacks in Syria's six

President Assad's government had known stocks and was widely accused

That appeared to cross a red line which had been drawn

by President Obama but Britain and the US pulled back

Instead, the Assad regime, under pressure, agreed

to surrender its known stocks by the middle of 2014.

But later, a UN commission found evidence of chemical weapons

being used in attacks in Idlib, both in 2014 and 2015.

Government supporters are blaming today's poisoning on the rebels,

accusing them of storing gas in a factory which exploded

But the UN's Syria envoy, while cautious, did not appear

What we have understood, it was a chemical attack

We have been and we will be stimulating all those

who have the capacity of finding out technically what happened.

Efforts are already being made to gather forensic evidence

in the hospitals where today's victims are being treated

but it seems clear a war crime has been committed.

The use of chemical weapons is completely banned

under international law, a law which appears to have been

Our Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen is fresh back from Mosul in Iraq.

He has also spent a lot of time in Syria.

I suppose when a red line has been crossed it can be crossed again and

again. Just, 2013, similar scenes in terms of the video that came out of

Damascus. It was a chemical attack and President Obama said that there

was a red line, use chemical weapons and you will feel my rough. It

didn't happen. America actually blinked. We don't know whether

President Trump has red lines about this. We don't do what they will do

if they do anything if it is from that division was behind it. The

Russian and Syrian Government are denying involvement in this attack.

You know the country well. Is that what it possible? It depends if the

reports are true. That it came from an air bombing attack. The last

couple of days, that town has been hit heavily by regime and by Russian

jets. If it did come from an error attack, did someone else have

crafted the ever? At the moment, there be no reports of that. This is

also in social evidence this point. The fact is that the regime, the

world consensus is that this has be done before. What is in it for

President Assad? Maybe he wants to deliver a blow to the rebels in

Idlib. If he has got away with it once, perhaps because he can get

away with it again. It was said that the future of Syria is a decision

for the Syria people. Yesterday, the Egyptian president, criticised for

its human rights abuses, welcomed as a friend. Does this sort of attitude

towards autocrats in Middle East open the door to this paper? I think

it probably does. Burke until the Arab uprisings of 2011 it was

commonplace for the west to have its favourite dictators who they could

call. They liked the idea of having just one address. One person you

could call to sort things out. Many people argue that one of the great

problems the Middle East has and why we see so much violence is that the

reign of these dictators from the 1950s onwards destroyed any chance

of civil society and political action and the growth of parties and

different countries, so when there was pressure for a change, it was

expressed violently. Thanks for those dots. There has been

confirmation of the attack. The White House Press Secretary

Sean Spicer has been This chemical attack in Syria

against innocent people, including women and children,

is reprehensible and cannot be This heinous actions by the Bashar

al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration's

weakness and irresolution - period. So, what should, and more

importantly what will, Former Deputy Secretary of State

PJ Crowley is with us. He is the author of Red Line,

a critique of US foreign President Obama, he worked for, when

you at the State Department said the red line and then didn't cross it.

When you talk to the members of the Obama administration about the

record on Syria, they will say that they got the chemical weapons out

and that did their job. It looks that that is not true. I think the

Obama administration did mismanage the red line in 2013. Why do they

got all of the non-stocks on whether Syria has been resupplied is a

question to be answered. The Trump White House can say that the

situation in Syria went from bad to worse during the banner

administration. It doesn't mean that it is confronting better policy

options into that and 70 in Thanet Obama into dust and 13. In fact, it

confronts the same political restraints. Donald Trump was elected

to fix America, not Syria. Do you think there will be any substantive

difference between Donald Trump's policies towards Syria and Barack

Obama's? The Trump administration is largely following the banner

administration policy. It defines its interest in Syria in terms of

Islamic State. -- following the Obama administration. Islamic State

will be defeated at some point, sooner rather than later hopefully.

The Trump magician has actually done itself a disservice. The dilemma for

the Trump administration is that you cannot reduce the level of political

extremism until you have a solution to Syria. And we don't at the

present time. It's Kristina Mladenovic Theresa May has said that

need an investigation in Syria. What are the chances of ever bringing

some of the book from it. The Russian and Syria governments are

doing in 2017 precisely what they did in 2013, to my involvement and

saying that it was the rebels. -- denying involvement. In 2013 the

resolver DA UN investigation team there that was able to at least

validate that a chemical weapons attack it did occur. In the US, that

intelligence is linked that the specific Syria units that dealt with

chemical weapons. It is optimal for us to have another investigation to

be able to identify whether it was an air attack or an indirect result

on and marketing attack on a facility with chemical gas. Do you

think that President Assad is sitting in the back this -- in

Damascus listening to the United Nations and looking at the Trump

administration thinking, the world is not going to intervene, all bets

are off and taken to retire once. -- and I can do what I want? Syria,

Iran and Russia have calculated that the policies come with risk. We must

focus on the sad reality in Syria that the regime backed by Russia are

going to do what they can and use whichever tool at their disposal to

defeat the Syria opposition. Thank you for joining us. Senator John

McCain was quick out of the blocks on this.

He called for a different policy. He wants to support the free civilian

army with more arms. He was simply condemn it generally the abuses much

more loudly. I wondered when I was listening to that. Does Donald

Trump's based went to focus on -- base, who clearly want to focus on

smashing IIS, to the look at this and shift public opinion? It would

be nice to think so. But we've been here before with previous chemical

attacks, previous images of children in distress in Syria and there is a

day or two of public outrage and John McCain 's songs at the

forefront. He is the Republican hawk on capital Hill anti-sets out with

indignation. -- and he set out. Maybe there will be a different

outcome now and this will lead to something. I suspect that what we

have heard about the President Assad regime feeling it has some immunity

is the realistic situation. These images will horrify Donald Trump's

base for the next 24 hours and then we will move on. That is the sadness

of this war. The has-been much reaction. Nothing so far on the

twitter feed of Donald Trump. Today, he has been diverting attention from

the Russia investigation. Ms Rice has been accused

of "unmasking" members of Donald Trump's transition team

that were named in confidential The name of any US citizen

incidentally caught up in surveillance of foreign officials

is usually redacted - In certain cases, intelligence

agencies can request the person's But Mr Trump's team says the Obama

administration wanted to unmask high when to put it in context. In

December, Susan Rice is sitting there when Obama gets rid of some

diplomats. She is getting intelligence on how the Russians are

responding. Up pops some American names that is incidentally

collected. It seems to me that she surely has to ask, it is her job, to

ask these Americans are good talking to the Russians. If that is how it

happened. We are to be incredibly careful there is no evidence that

the Trump administration was colluding with the Russian

Government to affect the vote. We cannot speculate too much. Was Susan

Rice asking for these names to be unmasked for intelligence reasons,

legitimate as you're suggesting, or for political reasons? Because she

wanted political information about the Trump transmission team. That

would not look very good. I think they were and lots more questions

about this and it puts the onus on the Obama team to answer questions

for once and not Russia. That is probably -- frequent about Russia.

On Friday the US Senate will vote on whether or not to confirm

Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.

They got to decide whether or not voting through.

The Democrats have enough votes to stage a filibuster, potentially

The photo of the judicial branch goes

Jane O'Brien explains why this vote matters.

He's got mad with the media, riled by Russia and been given

But it's the federal courts that have really made

Just a short time ago attacking the legal system...

We're going to fight this terrible ruling.

And now he has the chance to shake them up.

It's conceivable that President Trump could replace one third

The Republican-controlled Senate was loathe to confirm

President Obama's nominees, therefore you got a big backlog

and there are over 100 vacancies on the court.

So he has greater potential to impact our federal judiciary

While all eyes are on Mr Trump's for the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch,

the President's power to appoint judges will ripple through

When you think of the American judicial system, think

Only a handful of cases get to the Supreme Court.

Then you have the intermediate courts and then the big

base of that pyramid, they are the Federal District Court.

That's the face of justice in America.

Interaction with the American people and the judiciary,

That's why they're all so incredibly important.

Federal courts rule on a whole range of issues including guns

They also have the power to thwart the best laid plans

The federal courts actually have the last word on whether something

Giving President Trump the power to appoint these judges,

Let's speak now to our resident commentator, former advisor

to President George W Bush, and Republican political

talk to me about the political strategy of this because Neil

Gorsuch is going to be a Supreme Court judge. We are the Democrats

deciding to fight this as much as they are when it could be causing

them problems in one election campaign? It's simple. The Democrats

feel that they have to the base. They have to play to play to those

that but that Hillary Clinton will be the next president. They are

really disappointed by the fact that the justice that President Obama had

pointed out to get a hearing. This is payback time. It is about to miss

jetting to the base that they are fighting and that they will stop

Donald Trump anywhere possible. This is really all about politics and not

about how good of a judge Neil Gorsuch might be? Yes, some people

say he's qualified. He might be qualified but they might not like

his positions. Some of these Democrats might disapprove of what

you would do with America. This is about ideology. Of course it is very

conservative. He is an original list, wants to hold to the original

wording of the Constitution. But Democrats say that they should have

a modern take on the constitution. I'm looking from afar. I'm going to

win a tour resumes. I've read something the other day that Thomas

Jefferson told George Washington, how do you explain the relationship

between the house and the Senate? He said that the house is the teacup

and the Senate is about cooling down BT. Nichols done the infighting in

the house but now it sounds like they are just as partisan as the

house. It is true. What you have seen in the last 12 years or so is

that the Senate used to be the delivered body. They called

themselves the upper chamber. In the last 10-12 years they have become as

partisan and angry and divisive as the House of Representatives. What

you have seen here with this supreme court nominee and the fight where

the Democratic leader is leading the fight for the filibuster. It's all

about politics. I wonder what it does to the institution. Are we now

going to have the advice and consent for the Senate now changed to

whichever the ruling majority of 51 members of the United States Senate

says? That's not how we do things. You can always trust a bridge to get

it back to the! OK, let's go to 50,000 future and put this in

context. It's kind of insight Deulofeu. Lots of internal politics.

How critical is the decision that the Senate will make Neil Gorsuch?

It is historic. Never in our history have we had a filibuster on a united

state Supreme Court justice. For the first time, we got from a 50 fold

threshold to go to a 51 foot threshold. This suggests that there

will be a partisan part. I am very concerned about this new

development. The Seychelles markets itself

as a remote paradise where business and pleasure can be carried out away

from prying eyes. It's now been alleged the chain

of islands was used for a secret meeting in January to foster

back-channel communication between Russia and then

President-elect Donald Trump. A report in the Washington Post

quotes anonymous officials from the US, Europe and the Middle

East. They say the meeting took place

about a week before Trump's inauguration and was set up

by the United Arab Emirates. Erik Prince is the founder of US

security firm Blackwater. We don't do who he met but only that

the person is said to be close to the Russian President Vladimir

Putin. The White House press

secretary Sean Spicer says, "We are not aware of any meetings

and Erik Prince had no A spokesman for Erik Prince told

the Post, "Erik had no role The meeting had nothing to do

with President Trump." He is the problem, they do have

deniability. He had no formal role in the transition but very few

people have the formal role. Erik Prince did advise President Trump

elect and gave quarter of $1 million to the campaign and was close to the

Trump transition team. I think that makes them part of the... And his

sister is Betty gave us. She is. That makes him call staff. We were

talking earlier about Susan Rice. That was in a way, a good news

moment. If you are looking at this story, this is the kind of stories

that the Trump transition team does not want coming out because it makes

it look like something nefarious is going on. I was with a bunch of

senators and people from the intelligence committee last night in

Washington and the material is increasingly, this Russia stuff has

to be investigated. Maybe there is actually something there in the idea

of collusion. I should surely this, Christian. The Pennsylvania senator

having a bit of fun with this idea. I'm sure you go to the Seychelles

often for your business meetings. It comes as nothing new to you. It's a

good gift that. It is a sit up and take notice kind of story. The

Democrats make the point that isn't in suspicion is that everybody

seemed to the meeting Russians and then they take it back to when they

were joining the Obama Administration. They said, we were

reading any Russians at all. Yet these meetings suddenly appear. --

they said, we were not meeting any Russians. You are a sceptic? Yes.

You're watching 100 Days from BBC News.

Still to come for viewers on the BBC News Channel and BBC World News,

It can't officially start trade negotiations, but the UK is already

courting other countries, and India is in its sights.

And it's the official Melania Trump White House portrait.

But it's been released to a somewhat mixed reaction.

That's still to come on 100 Days, from BBC News.

Things are settling down nicely with the few days. We will get rid of the

high pressure. That will bring some fine and settled weather. Question

marks about cloud amounts. Underneath the week weather front,

skies were pretty grey. Got a great deal of rain. Some are cross-legged

and the south-east. A good bit of sunshine. Club for Northern Ireland

and Scotland. Sharon was in the north of Scotland. It will be really

windy as well. The showers will be rattling through on the wind.

Increasing cloud coming from the north. In the south-west and morals

-- and rural sports, clear skies. Windy into the morning in Scotland.

Still some showers coming through. In Northern Ireland, the odd light

showers. Most places dry, particularly to the east. The

Pennines might see something a bit brighter any money. A lovely bright

start in the south. Some chill to the. Some sunshine towards the

south-west. Clarke demands slowly increasing. Cloud drifting from the

north. Some styles of sunshine in the eastern side of Scotland. In

spite of cloud, most places dry and fine in the afternoon. Good evening

-- through the evening, some rain. Most places, however, will be dry.

50 and Friday, pretty similar days. Might be a bit cold and some styles

of sunshine. The weather system will flip towards the continent through

the weekend. Then we will have some fairly warm air. Temperatures

getting back up particularly across England and Wales in the high teens,

low 20s. At least 58 people have been gassed

to death and 300 are in hospital in one of the worst

atrocities of the Syrian War. The White House has called it

reprehensible. These heinous actions are a consequence of the past

administration's weakness. Scotland's First Minister is about

to mount a strong defence for immigration, trade, and her

country's place in the world. The Brexit negotiations began last

week, and already the UK Government is looking to the future,

this week they are in India, The two countries already

have deep trade links. In 2014 the value

of all goods and services sold between India and the UK was around

24 billion dollars. The relationship works

in India's favour. They export a lot more goods

to the UK than the other way around. than one trillion dollars

for infrastructure projects over the next decade

and the UK wants a piece Officially the UK can't

agree trade deals until it leaves the EU,

but Chancellor Philip Hammond is making it clear that he already

sees India as an India's economy is opening and

growing in a way that would have seemed unimaginable just a few years

ago and the UK has made the historic decision to leave the European Union

and to re-forged its historic links and ties with partners, allies and

friends around the world. Great Britain and India have a huge amount

in common. We already have very significant trade and investment

relationships. I'm joined in the studio

by the former head of the Department of UK Trade and Industry,

Sir Andrew Cahn. You were saying earlier that it has

taken the European Union years to try to get a trade deal with India

and they failed, and some on the Brexit side in Britain would say

that is precisely the point. It is so difficult when you have so many

countries to agree a trade deal, we will be much more nimble. The

European Union has managed to negotiate 54 trade deals, and they

are tough negotiators, but it is true it has taken nine years to fail

to reach an agreement. I suspect Britain can reach an agreement with

India. There is an opportunity for Britain to do a useful trade deal.

Do we come cap in hand because we bring quite a bit of the table? We

need trade deals at the moment because we are leaving the European

Union. The whole world knows that we are leaving the trade bloc, the

single market, which takes 45% of our exports at the moment. Clearly

whatever happens, it won't be as good as the status quo so we will

lose some access to that market, so we need access to other markets.

That's why you have Theresa May in Saudi Arabia as we speak. Lynn Fox,

the trade Secretary, is in Malaysia -- Liam Fox. Ministers are spreading

out across the world, trying to find places to do their deals to replace

the lost trade opportunities in the European Union single market.

Obviously in trade negotiations there was always a quid for the

pro-quote. One of the things Indians would like is more access to UK

visas for their skilled workers, is that something the UK will have to

give India if it wants some kind of trade deal? Absolutely, what the

Indians want is not just access for their skilled workers, also they are

very conscious that people of Indian ethnic origin are the largest

non-British-born group in this country. They want to bring in their

dependents, so they also want easy of visas to get. At the moment it is

quite an expensive process and they are saying why can't we have ready

access to visas, ready access to get into the UK? That is quite difficult

for a government who has omitted itself to reducing immigration by a

huge amount, and who knows that one of the reasons for the vote to leave

the EU was a feeling we didn't have control of our borders. I'm an

optimist, I will save down the road we seal a deal with India, how long

does it take from that point on to -- for the riches to start flowing?

That's a good point, people are speaking as if you do the deal and

the following day the goods start flowing, but that's not how it is at

all. I like to think of it as a door which is half open already. In 1947

when they were independent, a third of all Indian trade was with the UK,

but nevertheless we do have trade, the door is a little bit open, a

trade deal would open it quite a long way further. It would give our

accountants, lawyers, finance people, ranks it gives those people

more access to the market but of course they don't get there

immediately. Companies need to decide, the Indian market is

available, we will open an office there. They need help to do that.

Theresa May has set up the Department for International Trade

to do just that, and it is expanding, but there is a huge task

involved in helping British business go through those doors which are

open for trade agreements. There's going to be lots more on this, I

hope you will come back and talk to us. Very happy to do so, thank you.

In less than half an hour, Scotland's First Minister,

will give a speech at Stanford University.

The topic? Scotland's place in the world.

Earlier today Ms Sturgeon signed a joint agreement with the governor

of California agreeing to work together on climate change.

James, we have just been talking about the British government going

to India, so they are going east and the Scottish Government is going

west! Yes, this is Stanford University in Northern California,

where Nicola Sturgeon is expected to speak very soon and I think she's

trying to do a couple of things on this visit. Firstly she insists it

is about trade and investment and forging and indeed nurturing links

between Scottish companies and the Scottish Government, and American

firms here, and in that regard yesterday she met the chief

executive of Apple and discussed pioneering medical research with

him, and also met executives from the company Tesla, and discussed

with them the idea of using batteries to store renewable energy

which would be useful to Scotland, which has quite a lot of renewable

energy, particularly in offshore wind farms. But there is a second

aim here as well, perhaps not as over but it is pretty clear, and

that is that Nicola Sturgeon hopes to show that Scotland is and can be

a player on the world stage. What we are trying to do in Scotland, and

it's why I'm coming to meet companies like Apple, we are trying

to not only lead the world in doing the right thing but also get the

economic advantage of that in terms of investment for Scotland as well.

How do you respond to the accusations made in Scotland by the

Conservatives who say you are grandstanding abroad and talking too

much about independence? This trip is fundamentally about business

links and trade, and that is all the more important now in light of

Brexit that Scotland sells the message about what an attractive

place we are to do business. Nicola Sturgeon is expected in her speech

to mount a staunch defence of globalisation, saying that

immigration and free trade are necessary and that people, to defend

and further them, need to understand they have caused disillusionment and

unhappiness. Her argument will basically be that those people need

to be looked after. In essence I think she is saying that from her

point of view the rise of Donald Trump in the United States and

Brexit in Europe are symptoms rather than solutions to a problem. I'm

just not sure the people of California are that focused on the

Scottish economy at the moment. The 11 candidates in the French

presidential election will take part in a televised debate,

due to start in The campaign is now into its final

stages ahead of the first Let's go live now to Paris and our

correspondent Hugh Schofield. I'm always a bit wary of these

things where this 11 candidates on the stage. Do we get very much from

them? I think there's a real danger of this collapsing into farce

because we have 11 candidates. If you remember those debates in which

the five front runners took part that was the successful event but

there was a cry from the minority candidates who said with some

legitimacy that they were being cut out of this democratic process and

they demanded to debate in which they can take heart, but the problem

is there are 11 people who reached this threshold of getting 500

signatures of the great and good around the country, so for this

debate we will have three and a half hours in which they get quarter of

an hour to speak, and among those speaking will be people

like Emanuel Curtis Luck, likely to be the next president. I don't think

it will be -- Emanuel Macron. Have we ever shown our viewers the

promotion photo for One Hundred Days? I thought that was a pretty

good photograph until I saw the photograph of the first lady,

Melania Trump. We need her agent to do work on our photograph, what do

you think? It is very 1930s clamorous, and with an awful lot of

airbrushing. Why don't we have this on our programme? We could have the

programme entirely in soft focus. She also looks remarkably young. You

said earlier when we were practising this that you can't believe... How

many years younger than you is she? OK, we are not talking about that. I

told you earlier we are not talking about it! Seriously, the first lady,

here she is. Absolutely gorgeous photo but the speculation is on,

will she ever move into the White House? Because she seems much more

happy in New York City. She says at least not until the end of her

child's school year. That's all from One Hundred Days, if you would like

to get in touch you can do so using