05/04/2017 100 Days

Hello and welcome to One Hundred Days.

President Trump says his view of Bashar al Assad and the situation

in Syria has changed after yesterday's chemical attack.

At least 70 people have been gassed to death in what's been described

Angry words at a crisis meeting of the UN Security Council

as members reject Russia's claims that rebels were behind the attack.

How many more children have to die before Russia cares? The situation

in Syria is just one of the issues from address by posting King

Abdullah of Jordan. Reports out of Washington that

President Trump's chief strategist Steve Bannon has been removed

from his position on the Also, the Egalite

of a French election. A four hour televised

debate with 11 candidates, so what did we learn three weeks

from the vote? Bringing back a classic,

cinemas across the United States screen an adaptation

of George Orwell's 1984 I'm Katty Kay in Washington,

Christian Fraser's in London. We've seen more video today

from the gas attack in Syria, Rescue workers hosing down

the lifeless bodies of children Trump said he is the basher al-Assad

has changed. He said the attacks across a lot of lines but he didn't

say what he was going to do about it and he didn't condemn Russia. We

will show you what doctors say is evidence that sarin gas was used.

His patients have those pupils which do not react to the flashlight and

that would be a common symptom of a sarin gas attack. Syria admits

attacking a rabble target in the town of Khan Sheikhoun, but they say

the bomb hit a rabble factory manufacturing gas. Western sources

said that is not likely. There is no information of such a factory

existing and the casualties were over a wide area indicating the

chemicals came from Big Brother. Let me say a few words about recent

events. Yesterday, a chemical attack, a chemical attack which was

so horrific in Syria against innocent people, including women,

small children and even a beautiful little baby, their deaths were an

affront to humanity. These heinous actions by the Assad regime cannot

be tolerated. The United States stands with our allies across the

globe to condemn this horrific attack and all other horrific

attacks, for that matter. There were strong words exchanged

earlier at the UN Security Council. Members called on Russia

to stop its support for President Assad's regime,

including Nikki Haley, How many more children have to die

before Russia cares? The United States sees yesterday's attack is a

disgrace of the highest level and assurance that humanity means

nothing to the Syrian government. The question members of this council

must ask themselves is this, if we are not able to enforce resolutions

preventing the use of chemical weapons, what does that say for our

chances of ending the broader conflict in Syria?

Niki Daly sounding a lot like her predecessor. Questions about what

this all means. Let's go live now to New York

and our United Nations What does she mean when she talks

about the idea that the United States might act unilaterally and

Syria if the United Nations does not? I don't think we have got any

more clarity on that than we had after listening to present tramp in

the Rose Garden talking about red lines being transgressed. I think

administration policy on Syria is still being formulated and they do

not know what they will do next and how they will respond. It does seem

that the administration has decided to take a much tougher stance toward

Bashar al-Assad as a result of this latest chemical weapons attack. The

evidence, Rex Tillerson was in Turkey last week saying the fate of

Assad should be determined by the Syrian people. Niki Daly had a sit

down with reporters here in Europe. She said that removing Assad was no

longer the number one priority, it was fighting Islamic State. The

Syrian opposition claims that that contributed to the attack yesterday

because it created the sense of impunity. We have seen a change.

Evidence of that, the British and French came forward with the draft

resolution condemning the attack. When the Americans got involved in

drafting a resolution, they wanted it to be much tougher. They inserted

what one UN diplomat called operational teeth into that

resolution. Among which is the demand that the Syrian military has

to hand over its flight logs from yesterday and give access to

international inspectors looking for chemical weapons. A clear sign that

the American administration, the Trump administration, is tough and

stance toward the Assad regime. We have been listening to President

tramp and it was interesting he didn't make any mention of Russia.

His focus was on Syria. The last major attack in 2013, when gas was

used, it did bring Washington, albeit not for very long, it brought

them closer together. Could that happen this time? No, not at the

moment, the opposite in fact. Niki Daly did condemn Russia. She give it

to them with both barrels. It was similar to listening to some of the

power. Indeed, arguably, she gave a more powerful and theatrical

performances at the United Nations, because not only did she use those

condemning words against the Russians that you play earlier,

before that she actually stood up from her seat, which is very rare at

the United Nations Security Council. She got up from the horseshoe table

and she brandished focus of the children killed in the attack

yesterday. We have grown used to seeing some on the power, her

predecessor, deliver some very powerful speeches, but that was

equally powerful and what was noticeable was that she was not only

pointing the finger at the Assad regime, she pointed the finger

strongly at Russia and that was key. Thank you. This is the location when

reality comes up against Mr Trump's stated policies. He wanted the

Syrian people to decide on Assad. We want to reset the relationship with

Russia but facts come along and this is his big test. I think the

question is exactly the one that Nick Bryant has just laid out. To

what extent is this White House, in the light of the chemical attack,

the horrific images that Niki Daly displayed at the end, that his

daughter Ivanka Trump tweeted about yesterday, to what extent as Donald

Trump turned and said I cannot tolerate the Assad regime and,

therefore, I will also look at the relationship with Russia? We don't

know. They love. We don't know what these lines are worth what it means

when he says many, many lines have been crossed the sub what does that

mean? I will policy change toward Syria because of this attack? I

think it will be interesting to watch the development in terms of

the relationship with Russia and whether Donald Trump has decided he

will take some kind of action in Syria that he wasn't prepared to

take before. He also talks tough and one issue in the past has been that

when the United States talks tough it doesn't back it up with military

action and he says I will not given advance warning of what I wanted

militarily defeat this and some teeth behind it doesn't mean very

much, does it? And did didn't mean much during the Obama administration

either. He will look to the world to join in and we will look at the

global reaction. Plenty of reaction to the attack

in the United States. The White House not particularly

quick in its condemnation, maybe we will talk about that

in a second, but here is a tweet from the Democrat Senator

Richard Blumenthal who sits on the Armed Services

Committee in the Senate. "The world must come together to end

the horrific evil in Syria, an atrocious crime taking world back

to blackest chapter in history." Senator Blumenthal joins

us from Capitol Hill. When you talk about the world taking

action, it has taken action for six years. Here we are again, another

chemical attack. It didn't take much action under President Obama. What

will happen this time around? I know what I hope will happen, that we

will have more than just tough talk. There are opportunities here for

real action against not only the Assad regime and Bashar al-Assad

must go, that has been policy, but against Russia. Sanctions are

possible and that ought to be pursued, much as we did against Iran

and those sanctions from Iran to the table to reach an agreement on

ending the weapon development and there should be action at the United

Nations in every form where we can take it because the Russians and the

Iranians, as the world knows, are aiders and developers of this kind

of Yanez, absolutely unacceptable war crime. Let's call it what it is,

it is criminal in moral terms and a violation of international law and

Assad should be pursued for war crimes. We are introducing

legislation this week. The war crimes accountability act 2017 that

will allow better collection of evidence and we should insist on

access to the crime scene so we can take more of this evidence. We are

sitting here again trying to figure out what the message from the White

House is. We have had clarity from President tramp in the last few

minutes but time and again they do not send out very clear signals on

the big issues and no one is really sure who is speaking for the

president, his Rex Tillerson, is Varga, said Steve Bannon? Until he

sat it out, we didn't know what the American policy was. What is unclear

is who is saying what the president, but also what the president is

saying to the world. That is where there needs to be much more clarity

of the kind Ambassador Saili provided and, quite honestly, the

Trump cosiness with Russia has actually very likely contributed to

the license that Assad fields, through Russia, to do this kind of

heinous act. The fact the president has been so cosy with Russia gives

them additional sense of freedom. To stay with this, we want to talk to

you about the row over President Trump's Supreme Court. The Senate

will vote on Friday, the Democrats have enough votes to hold his

nomination through a tactic known as the filibuster.

Republicans can get Neil Gorsuch confirmed but they'll have to change

And in the future that could lead to Supreme Court candidates

So why are Democrats refusing to compromise on a candidate

who many say is well qualified for the job?

Senator Richard Blumenthal is also on the Judiciary committee

Let me ask you a political question, President Trump's approval ratings

are at 35%. If his approval ratings for hire, would you be voting to

confirm Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court? I would be opposed to this

nominee regardless of the Trump approval ratings and, regardless of

the absolutely intolerable treatment of Meric Garland, the nominee of

President Obama, almost a year ago. He was not accorded a jury or a

vote. Both are being provided to Neil Gorsuch. The reason I frozen is

that he has evaded, very specific questions on fundamental principles

and Presidents of the United States Supreme Court. Whether he agrees

with them, he refused to answer again and again, which leaves us

with the inescapable conclusion that he has agreed to the Trump litmus

test. He would automatically overturn provisions on gun violence

and abortion. You know that President tramp might get another

pic with the Supreme Court. He might get a second justice during his

term. If it only takes the Republicans 50 films, he could also

do the mainstream and choose some of my Conservative, doesn't worry you?

I am worried about the next potential nominee, but I'm more

worried about this one. As a matter of principle and conviction this

nominee is outside the mainstream and every phone and the Supreme

Court there are nine justices, has equal weight. Everyone is

potentially a swing vote. The Gorsuch is also and he is

potentially a sway vote. He can persuade others to go his way and

rather than fighting the next fight, I am focusing on this one because

the majority are any justice to be a bipartisan consensus. There is still

a possibility for that agreement here. I want to quote a quite

separate. They call it the nuclear option, the tactic Republicans might

imply, because there is followed and this followed would be dangerously,

perhaps disastrously, radioactive for the Senate for years to come.

What did you mean? It could well effect the ruins, but also personal

feelings among senators. I hope its repercussions will be limited, but

it could be radioactive in terms of the ability to move things forward,

legislation, and other matters and it will affect future appointments.

I sincerely hope that we will get beyond this. It is good to have you

with this. Thank you for coming on the programme today.

One of President Trump's closest advisers, his chief

strategist Steve Bannon, has been removed from his position

on the National Security Council, the main group advising

the President on security and foreign affairs.

A White House aide has told US media the reshuffle is 'not

I have to save the whole fuss about Steve Bannon being on the national

Security Council in the first place was that he is a political figure.

He is the political adviser to the president. He fix it campaign issues

and election issues and re-election issues and intelligence on the

national Security Council is meant to be pure intelligence that is not

subject to political interpretation. That was what people in the national

security world were upset about him being put on the national Security

Council and that is why in being removed from the National Security

Council is being seen as a victory for the people who are supporting

national security. We talk about power struggles in the inner circle.

Does this tell us that JP McMaster, the national security and fast --

adviser, is getting a grip and discovered his power base? When I

heard this news I tweeted that it looks like the ship is being rated a

bit in the White House and swinging back in favour of national security,

which would be McMaster and away from politics, which would be

Bannon. The White House spin is there is no big deal, he was happy

to come of the National Security Council and he was only there to

look over the shoulder of Michael Flynn the national security adviser

who was demoted. That is their spin on it. I think this is the forces of

McMaster asserting themselves in the photos.

Let s go back to President Trump's press conference a little earlier.

He has been holding talks with King Abdullah of Jordan.

It's the second Arab leader he has met this week,

ahead of that crucial meeting with the Chinese President

Let s have a listen to what else he had to say.

The king has been a leader in calling for a plan to defeat Islamic

State once and for all and I am with you on that. We are both leaders on

that, believe me. That is what we speak about the date and that is

what we are going to do. It will be a shorter fight than a lot of people

are thinking about, believe me. We have made tremendous strides as we

have discussed. I don't want to sound too sceptical

that we are in this position became President Trump has said, as he did

during the campaign, I have a secret plan and it will work marvellously

and I'm not quite tell you what it is because that would undermine the

efficacy of the plan, but at some point that plan has to be put into

action. He says if we told you what the plan was we would have a

disaster as opposed to the fight against most of which has been hard

and taking a long time and that shows you how difficult it defeat

Islamic State. At some point we have to know what the president is saying

when he says he will fix everything. I saw between the US entered last

night about the State Department comment on this missile being fired

from North Korea and it was short. It was 40 words long and it said we

have spoken enough about North Korea, we don't need to say any

more. He talks tough and he says time is running out for North Korea.

Their time will come, there is a point when you have to either quite

serious diplomacy behind it or some military teeth. That tweeted about

11 o'clock Washington time, you should be in bed. I am attentive.

There have been some testy exchanges in the European Parliament

today over the future of the Brexit negotiation.

The Parliament in Strasbourg has been setting down its red

Guy Verhofstadt, the parliament's chief negotiator, had his say.

So too did Nigel Farage, who, rather undiplomatically,

compared his fellow MEP's to gangsters.

You are behaving like the mafia. You think we are a hostage, we are not.

We are free to go. We are free to go. This... I know. I know. I do

understand. I am convinced and 100% sure about one thing, that there

will be one day another young man or young woman who will try again. Who

will lead Britain again into the European family once again.

That suggests the tone will be combative over the next two years.

But the European Commission's chief negotiator Michel Barnier,

who is the main figure in these talks, was a bit more considered.

To succeed we need to devote the first phase of negotiations

exclusively to reaching an agreement on the principles of the exit. We

are not proposing to be tactical or create difficulties for the UK. On

the contrary, it is an essential condition to maximise our chances to

reach an agreement together within two years. He is clearly not a

populist. Mr Farage is more of a populist. They all played their

part. If you had seen before the debate began, how they work each

other, Nigel Farage comes down the steps and he shakes the hand of

Jean-Claude Younger, his nemesis, and he shakes the hand of Mr Barnier

and they are pleased to see him. You know what you will get from them.

Look at this. Hello, how lovely to see you. You are not suggesting it

is an act, are you? It is a performance? There is a very bizarre

relationship that goes on behind the grandstanding in that parliament, I

have seen it first hand and they get on a lot better than you might think

when you play some of the stuff they say. I think it was all planned out,

the whole thing is a show. If you were go into the bookshops

here in Washington this afternoon Christian,

you might find that one or two have sold out

of George Orwell's book 1984. In what's become known

as the Trump bump , sales of Orwell's 1984 increased

by 9,500% since The novel shot to the top

of Amazon's bestseller list. The last sales spike was in 2013

following the Edward Snowden Today across the United States two

hundred cinemas are screening This week on Tuesday at more than

200 community cinemas, crows can add to see 1984. This film, made in the

1980s, is an adaptation of George Orwell's novel detailing the

experiences of a man who exists in a dystopian future, in a big

totalitarian state. Among the crowd was a sense of anticipation. I

haven't seen it in a few years, I am curious to go back and see what

resonates now. The man who co-organised these 1984

international screenings believes the film is timely in the age of

Trump. Which was making 84 because it is a work that is really

resonating with a lot of people at this moment in the United States and

even around the world. The truth in 1984 is manufactured, it isn't

rooted in reality. Many commentators were startled when Trump president

David Kelly and Conway used the phrase alternative facts in

referring to a true event. John Spicer, our press secretary, give

alternative facts to that. Using a controversial film from 30 years ago

as it applies to treat the Trump administration might appeal to

opponents of the president but to his supporters might come across as

facile, unfair and meddling with the truth. After all, the United States

doesn't have anything like the totalitarian government depicted in

1984. The film-maker was on a panel to discuss 1984. She warns against

drunk to close comparisons between the Trump administration and the

film. I grew up in a totalitarian regime in communist East Germany

which certainly is closer to what we see in 1984 and what we see right

now. Right now we live in a democracy and we should be aware

that we actually have influence of the things that are happening. It is

not a totalitarian regime. The war is waged at the Reading group

against its own subjects. When people might interpret 1984

differently, no one can deny the ongoing currency of Orwell's work,

which many say is being helped by the Trump presidency. The novel is

back on the bestseller lists and in a few weeks a stage version of the

will open on Broadway. It has also been talk of another big screen

adaptation. The film and the book. The have 20

seconds to say something profound and George Orwell. When I was in

France they used to go to the barricades to protest against their

leaders. In American's America they grab the popcorn. What happened to

militant demonstrations? You're watching One Hundred

Days from BBC News. Stay with us, still to come

for viewers on the BBC News Channel and BBC World News:

The gloves are off. The second French presidential

descends into a slanging match. And a new First Lady,

with a new approach. She's chosen to stay in New York

rather than move to the White House and she's kept her official role

to a minimum. We find out more about Melania Trump

and how she compares so far That's still to come

on One Hundred Days, from BBC News. Good evening. Very interesting

weather as we head into the weekend. Before then the next few days will

probably be dry or rather cloudy as we start to get more sunshine over

the weekend, especially in England and Wales, it will warm up

considerably. For many this we will have sky is a bit like this over the

next couple of days. This picture was taken in train and the thin

cloud was built southward across many parts of England and Wales.

They would-be breaks here and there. They are more likely in eastern

Scotland and North East England. It could be chilly but with club we

will sit around 7 degrees or so. The cloud, due to this area of high

pressure for many parts of the UK, the wind will be light. Further

north we have differences across Scotland because we will have this

Atlantic went around the top of the high pressure. That will drag more

moisture, cloud and drizzle for western Scotland eastern Scotland

will get some sunshine, helped by the mountains and the wind breaking

up the cloud. A similar story for north-east imminent. Northern

Ireland will be cloudy on Thursday and, as you can see, there is a lot

of talent for inland and Wales. Difficult to pick up where the

sunshine for the record will be the incident with the brightness at

times. The bridge is about 14 degrees or so where we do get

sunshine. Friday is d j vu again. Generally dry and party. The best of

the sunshine for eastern Scotland and north-east England. That is

because the position of the eye. Into the weekend, this is where it

gets interesting. Beehive moves into the near continent. The weather

fronts from the north-west of the UK. We will draw up a southerly wind

that will pick up more sunshine and bring some air across inland and

Wales. This is the picture for Saturday. A fine day. More sunshine

away from the far north-west. That will see temperatures rising higher,

perhaps 16 or 17 degrees. It is on Sunday, across England and Wales,

when we will have sunshine. Eastern Scotland will get some sun.

Elsewhere the weather front will approach to bring some rain later in

the day. In this corner of the UK temperatures will not be quite so

high. Moving to England and Wales and it gets warmer and warmer and we

could hit 23 Celsius on Sunday in the south-east.

Welcome back to One Hundred Days with Katty Kay in Washington,

President Trump firmly blames Bashar al Assad for yesterday's

At least 70 people were gassed to death in what's been described

And it wasn't a debate - it was a marathon.

The French presidential candidates took to the stage for four hours.

Did anyone actually watch the whole thing?

The US President, Donald Trump, has condemned a deadly

chemical attack in Syria as an affront to humanity.

At least 70 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

The attack happened as leaders gathered in Brussels

The images we've seen yesterday from Syria remind us all that

here we have a responsibility to unite for real with a serious

engagement the international community, the regional players,

but also the Syrian parties to make this.

All the evidence I have seen suggests that this was the Assad

regime who did it in the full knowledge that they were using

illegal weapons in a barbaric attack on the own people.

The use of chemical weapons is a crime against humanity.

Those responsible must be held accountable and brought to justice.

Let's speak now to Mark Malloch Brown, the former

Deputy Secretary General at the United Nations.

He's also served as a Foreign Office minister in the UK government.

When you listen to those reactions, my heart sinks because I think we

been here before and nothing changes but will it this time? I very much

doubt it. Before we had the Obama administration which was too dense

did and did not show enough resolve when Assad crossed that red line

with chemical weapons and now the Trump administration has so

prioritised the fight against Isis that it leaves it with no room to

pressure Assad and its new Russian ally in terms of the fight against

Isis. We have struggled from one bad policy on Syria to apparently new

and equally bad one. We did here Nikki Haley ticking on the Russians

this morning but we don't know if that will be repeated by the White

House. You have suggested that President Assad thinks he has more

wiggle room with Trump than he did with Obama but the whole point of

the Trump administration if it wants to project strength and he is the

man people will not cross. He wants to do that but very much where

American national interests are directly engaged. As far as his

definition of national interests, that is the fight against Isis, the

rest is secondary and almost redundant. While I'm sure he will be

frustrated and, like any of us, shocked and dismayed by the human

casualties, it isn't strategically his priority, or at least it hasn't

been until now. And along the way, his attacks on the UN sharply

undermine its authority to intervene and try to get some state on this

kind of action. The trouble is that these pictures will be beamed into

Muslim homes around the world. Can there be a greater rallying cry for

Islamist terrorism than this kind of crime going unpunished? I suspect

not. It is a first and sadly predictable step in terms of where

we are headed in terms of Middle East policy. What President Trump

must be quickly discovering is that it is a lot more complicated than it

seemed from the campaign trail. This kind of stuff is a great recruiter

to Muslim or any other kind of extremism for that point. This is a

very bad moment for the people who have died and been injured but much

more broadly for the region and international affairs. There will be

this renewed debate about safe zones and no-fly zones but if you have

those, and it might be easier with Turkey now involved in the northern

part of the country, but you also have to have the appetite for

policing them which possibly means bringing down Syrian or even Russian

aircraft. That's right. The reason there is so much certainty that this

was an official government action was that it was apparently delivered

from the air and the only people who have the capacity to put planes in

the air at the moment and go unchallenged is the Syrian

government. Indeed, if we move to a solution like no-fly zones, almost

certainly it will lead to some kind of combat and it is not quite clear

that it could not draw, at the worst extreme, America and Russia into

some direct military exchanges. This is very delicate stuff, we are

walking on broken glass here. It was something Donald Trump spoke about

in the campaign, that he supported the idea of no-fly zones. You say

that is not necessarily the easiest option. In simple language, what

could the world do right now to stop these kind of atrocities? The reason

it is not the easiest option is because you need agreement among the

principal parties that they will respect it and not get drawn into

conflict over the maintenance of the no-fly zones so if you can get a

diplomatic deal it is still doable but the more fundamental issue

remained getting, turning a ceasefire into a proper peace

process with a movement toward a transitional government in Damascus.

That has been set back by the fact that this administration has

declared it is not such a priority for them and they are the Assad as

likely to state which undermined the prospect of negotiation. Mark

Malloch Brown, thank you for joining us.

The second French presidential debate was held last night

At time the debate descended into a slanging match,

with 11 candidates, yes, 11, all making their pitch

I like to think you watched the whole thing! I dipped in to it. It

was a bit like one of those seven course French meals but less

appetising! The centre right candidate,

Francois Fillon, was accused of having his hand in the public

purse, over that alleged "jobs for family" scandal

that refuses to go away. While the Front National leader,

Marine Le Pen, also came This was the moment

when she was challenged by centrist frontrunner,

Emmanuel Macron. I come from a region which is full

of its cemeteries and I do not want to go back to that

time in history. So don't ever forget

where we've come from. You shouldn't present yourself

as new if you trot out the old fossils which are at least

50 years old. I'm sorry to tell you, Ms Le Pen,

but you trot out lies we've heard for 40 years and which we heard

in the mouth of your father. Those were the highlights! Not the

whole four hours. It seemed that it was Marine Le Pen who was getting

the most flak from the others. Using the analogy of the boxing max, the

frontrunners are so far ahead of the others, Macron and Le Pen, they just

need to keep going around the ring. But the others came into the ring

like this guy Philippe Poutou who is a factory worker from the South of

France, a militant anti-capitalist. Not even in a shirt and tie, he

turned up in his pyjamas! The start landing these punches on Fillon who

threatened to sue him at one stage! When the police come knocking on my

door, I have to respond, saying that blue-collar workers had to respond

but you lot don't have too Le Pen started to weigh in and she

suffered at his hands. His surname, Poulou, means kiss. We're going from

pyjamas to a high fashion. The First Lady of the United States

is one of the most well-known Melania Trump is very different

to Michelle Obama and immediately she set people talking

with her decision to remain She is doing what she needs

to do as First Lady. In the past hour she's been visiting

a school with Queen Rania of Jordan, but she's kept her official role

to a minimum. The President and First Lady

of the United States Beautiful, always

immaculately turned out. A few things you didn't

know about Mrs Trump. She's 24 years younger

than her husband. She is the first American First Lady

to be born and raised She speaks five languages

but is said to be self-conscious Our father, who art in heaven,

hallowed by thy name. And a homebody who is reluctant

to move from New York They are so lucky that they don't

have to do this every night, right! If Melania is happy in this new job,

she doesn't always show it. Perhaps it's only fitting that this

unusual president should have such Let's speak now Andrew Och,

a journalist who spent a year travelling around America

researching First Ladies for a book He is known as "The

First Ladies Man". Welcome to the programme. I'm going

to play the bad cop here but she is in this hotel in New York, very

different to Michelle Obama we hardly see her and it is costing the

taxpayer a fortune for her to be there. Could you not be doing more?

She could and her approach to first lady is unusual but not

unprecedented. There were a number of others that did not spend much

time in Washington or come to Washington at all and even more that

were not married to the president and served as home test -- hostess

duties. We have not seen this in America since 1914 when Eleanor

Wilson died and the President's sister had to sit in and be the

stand-in first lady. We are not used to it in modern times. For the last

hundred years we have had more active first ladies, particularly

the last three or four. Is it not time we gave up on this notion that

we had to have a first lady who was there to cut ribbons and shake hands

and look wonderful and smile at the cameras? If she wants to stay in New

York, good for her. There is an angle to that. This is a non-elected

and nonpaid role, the woman just happens to be married to the

president. And various first ladies have taken more of a traditional

role and more of an active role and what Melania is doing in protecting

the sun and keeping him where he is for the time being, a lot of first

ladies and first families, the Clinton and Obama and Kennedy and

Roosevelt families went to great lengths to keep their children out

of the public eye and give them a normal childhood as much as

possible. The role is changing and the Trump ministration is an unusual

one. You can say that again! Andrew Och, thank you for joining the

programme. In all seriousness that has to be a re-evaluation of what a

woman who happens to be married to the president is expected to do. If

she wants to stay in New York, good for her. Yes, she is very different

to Michelle Obama. I wonder if she might shine in that role and do him

some good. We will