11/01/2018 Beyond 100 Days

You're watching Beyond 100 Days.

President Trump keeps the world

waiting on the Iran nuclear deal.

Ahead is an important deadline

tomorrow and we still

don't know if he plans

to reimpose US sanctions.

Mr Trump is under pressure

from Europeans and his own national

security team to stick

with the nuclear deal.

He also faces pressure

from the Russia investigation

but insists, repeatedly

there was never any collusion.

Also on the programme...

Searching for survivors -

eight people are still missing

after the mudslides and flash floods

in southern California

that left 17 dead.

The New York Times was barred

from publishing any more classified

documents about the Vietnam war.

The Pentagon, a newspaper and power

- we sit down with Steven Spielberg

to hear about his

latest film, The Post.

Get in touch with us

using the hashtag #Beyond100Days.

Hello and welcome -

I'm Katty Kay in Washington

and Christian Fraser is in London.

The clock is ticking

and President Trump has just one day

to make an important decision

on the Iran deal.

The trouble is that even at this

late stage, no one knows

whether he's going to bring back US

sanctions against Tehran

tomorrow or not.

In a deliberate display of unity,

Britain, France, Germany

and the European Union today

all urged him not

to blow up the deal.

It's known as the JCPOA.

British foreign secretary

Boris Johnson went so far

as to challenge Mr Trump to prove

there was something better

than the current Iran deal.

The EU's foreign policy chief also

stressed that the deal is working

and Iran is in compliance.

The European Union remains committed

to support the full and effective

implementation of the agreement is,

including to make sure that the

lifting of nuclear related sanctions

has a positive impact on trade and

economic relations with Iran,

including benefits for the uranium

people. -- for the Iranians are

people. The agreement has allowed

for continuous dialogue with Iran on

all issues.

I don't think anybody

has so far produced a better

alternative to the JCPOA. As a way

of preventing the Iranians from

going ahead with the acquisition of

military nuclear capability. I don't

think anybody has come up with a

better idea. I think it is incumbent

on those who oppose the JCPOA to

come up with a better solution,

because we haven't seen it so far.

We know that it is absolutely

necessary to have the signal that it

is possible, by the dramatic

approaches, to prevent the

development of nuclear weapons, in a

time when other parts of the world

are discussing how to get nuclear

weapons, and it would send a very

dangerous signal to the rest of the

world if the only agreement which

prevents us from the proliferation

of nuclear weapons would be negative

effect. We very much agree on this

point.

They are all asking what

America is going to do.

And a brief time ago

we got reaction from

Democratic Senator Chris Coons,

who sits on the Foreign

Relations Committee.

What are the chances, realistically,

that the President is going to defy

all of the European expertise on

this, as well as his own national

security team, and actually reimpose

American sanctions on Iran?

That is

one of the challenges we face with

our President. When he was a

candidate, he promised he would be

unconventional and unpredictable. He

certainly outperformed in that Tata

Group, so far as President. I am

hopeful he will take seriously the

advice of his National Security

Adviser, his secretary of defence

and state, and the concerns and

interests of our vital European

allies, and that he will recertify

our continued participation in the

JCPOA. I am also hopeful he will

announce new sanctions on Iran that

we can impose on their ballistic

missile programme, on human rights

violations, or on their support for

terrorism in the region.

Boris

Johnson, the British Foreign

Secretary, has challenged the White

House to come up with something

better than the existing deal. Is

there something?

There is nothing we

are going to have enacted in the

next few days. We need to continue

this journey with our European

partners of constraining Iran's

nuclear weapon programme through the

JCPOA. But we can and should work

together to address some of the

future challenges we will face

because of sunsets in the JCPOA.

Some diplomats have suggested that

they are hearing that Iran is

seriously considering walking away

from this deal. If the President

reimpose sanctions, is that they

risk?

Yes, if he were to reimpose

nuclear related sanctions, they

would be justified in walking away

from JCPOA, because we would be

breaking one of the core principles

of the deal. If the President

imposes sanctions that are

specifically targeted at the

ballistic missile programme, for

example, that is clearly permitted

under the JCPOA and clearly

justified by Iran's ongoing

aggressive behaviour and violation

of UN Security Council resolutions.

You and your colleagues on the

foreign relations committee, your

Democrat colleagues, have gathered

evidence from European allies about

Russian interference in democracies.

You put out a report this week, 200

pages long, an extraordinary read.

You documented evidence of Russian

operations in 19 European countries.

That's right. A stunning moment in

our history as a nation. We have

such a clear and well documented

assault, not just on America's

democracy, but on the democracies

and the electoral systems of so many

of our allies across Europe and the

West in the democratic world. Our

President is failing to call this

clearly for what it is. And

organised Russian campaign of

aggression to undermine democracy.

He is failing to step up and prepare

the United States for its next

election, and to come to the aid and

support of vital allies in Europe,

as your elections continue to be

threatened and undermined by this

behaviour by Russia, it is

flabbergasting. It is a failure of

leadership to protect not just the

United States and our homeland, but

what makes us a democracy and our

vital allies.

What about the

investigations? You also sit on the

Judiciary Committee, the

intelligence committee and the house

intelligence committee, they all

have investigation is ongoing. You

came out of the Judiciary Committee

and you said you are at an impasse,

the politics is now getting in the

way of the investigations. Explain?

Unfortunately, the Republican

chairman of the Senate Judiciary

Committee has been trying to move

into a different direction, to

investigate different things, either

far past actions or actions somehow

related to Hillary Clinton and her

campaign, rather than working with

the minority leader and focusing on

supporting an ongoing investigation

into Russia's meddling and oversight

of the obstruction of justice

allegations, where the firing of

former FBI director Jim Comey is one

of the core issues. The Senate

Judiciary Committee is responsible

for the oversight of the American

Department of Justice and the

Federal bureau of investigation. It

is in our jurisdiction to bring in

witnesses, hold testimony. Sadly, on

a partisan basis, the investigation

has ground to a halt.

Thank you for

joining us.

If you are trying to bring North

Korea to the table, it sets a

dangerous precedent if you walk away

from a deal you have already signed

with Iran, particularly when you're

trying to get Korea to unilaterally

disarm. When you're trying to prop

up the moderates, there are

investors that want to go there, but

they are nervous. Every time we get

a rhetorical flourish from Trump,

they think, should we invest or

might we lose money? You have heard

there that they might be justified

to walk away from a deal?

I think

that is part of the reason why

people in Iran have been frustrated,

they say that they were promised so

much from the sanctions relief, it

did not come because there have not

been foreign investors. Iran is the

the reason that European diplomats

feel that they have to find a way to

work with this unusual

administration. I spoke to a top

European diplomat just this week

that was saying that we don't know,

so close to this deadline on the

sanctions waver, we just don't know

which way the White House is going

to go. That is a problem, when they

are trying to craft their own

policies. Iran is a huge factor in

America's relations with its

European allies at the moment.

As we have just heard Donald Trump

has repeatedly insisted

there was no collusion

between his campaign and Russia.

He accuses Democrats of carrying out

a witch hunt and suggests

Republicans should take charge

of the investigations.

He also says it is Hillary Clinton

who should be investigated not him.

At a press conference yesterday,

the President used the phrase

"no collusion" seven

times in just one answer.

There has been no collusion between

the Trump campaign and Russians, or

Trump and Russians. No collusion.

There is no pollution, there is no

collusion. There was absolutely no

pollution. But it has been

determined there is no pollution.

They have no collusion and nobody

has found any collusion.

No

collusion.

We can speak to the CEO of news Max.

Clearly, the President is frustrated

by this investigation. You speak to

Donald Trump on a regular basis.

What does he tell you about it and

what he feels about the

investigation?

He tells me there is

no collusion! I think he is exactly

right in that. You know, they say,

the President repeats himself a lot,

there must be something wrong in the

President, Donald Trump is a bit

theatrical. He has a theatrical

flair and he thinks that this is a

way of reinforcing his message. He

has been doing this for years where

he repeats himself. There is nothing

unusual. It is funny how I take it

as normal and somebody else says it

is strange that he keeps... He has a

mantra, no collusion, because this

President has been very cooperative,

I think a lot more cooperative than

I would ever advise them to be,

certainly any other President under

investigation, turning over

documents, not exerting executive

privilege, allowing key aides to be

interviewed, opening himself up to

questions, which I think he will be

answering soon. I was not involved

in the campaign, because I run

Newsmax and we are independent. I

have always been a friend of the

President, I know a lot of people

involved, and I don't think there is

any evidence whatsoever of collusion

between the Trump campaign and the

Russians.

You're right that it is

effective, we picked that up and ran

that for him several times in a row.

Does he feel that this

investigation, from Capitol Hill or

the FBI, is overshadowing his

presidency?

Yes, I think he thinks

it is being used as a blunt

instrument against him, and

certainly the media focus on it. You

go on certain networks, which I will

not name, cable news channels, all

they do is talk about this. What I

think is frustrating to him and his

close friends and supporters is they

have taken nothing and created it

into something. Let me give you an

example. If you look at this, this

whole story, there is no evidence

that there has been collusion with

the Russians. We have two

indictments and two plea agreements

from Robert Mueller, and there is no

evidence there. A lot of it starts

with the so-called dossier, which

comes to Britain, because all

hearsay, it was a a lot of garbage.

We have Ikea: going to

Czechoslovakia, to Prague, for a

secret meeting with the Russians,

and he testified he has never been

to Czechoslovakia and have no

dealings with this people. It was

just a lot of hearsay and gossip in

a report. To have a major

investigation come out of gossip, it

is very bizarre.

Of course, Chris,

if we believe what is in Michael

Wolff's group, Steve Bannon thinks

the meetings between Donald Junior

and the Russians was treasonous.

That aside, is it easier, with

Bannon out of the way, for the

President to reach across the aisle

and start to do some deals?

Well, I

disagree with Steve's treasonous, I

don't think was not the way the

meeting went down, but I think most

campaigns would have taken the

meeting in some shape or form. I

don't think it was treasonous. I

think Bannon was a weight on the

President and was preventing him

from moving to the centre. I believe

the President's success and

importance for the United States is

that he moved to the centre of

things like immigration,

infrastructure, education, even

national security issues. I think

the Donald Trump I have known, I met

him 20 years ago, will do that in

short order. We are seeing signs of

it. We are living through a very

polarising period here. But I think

he is the guy that can break

through.

When you say you have known

him for 20 years, do you think

sometimes he is conflicted in the

way that he has to appeal to his

base? Sometimes, I suspect that his

instincts are Democrat?

Well, I

think he is more of a centrist. When

I first knew him, he was a Democrat.

I would say a conservative business

Democrat, but a Democrat. He is a

unifying guy. He is not an

ideologue, that is the important

thing you have to know about Donald

Trump, Steve Bannon is and was an

ideologue. He is not rigid, he likes

getting deals done, he is very

pragmatic. He will look at an issue

and say, we need infrastructure, the

country needs this modernisation and

we need to be competitive around the

world, a conservative might say we

don't have the money, the Liberals

say that the project should go for

different things, Trump is more

about, let's get this done for the

good of the country.

Chris, when did

you last speak to the President and

what is his mood?

I saw him about

ten days ago, I guess, when he was

down in Florida. He was down here

for that period of time over the

holidays. He was happy, very

gregarious. He had just gotten the

tax bill through and he was looking

forward to... In fact, he told me he

thought he could do a lot of

bipartisan legislation this year and

that the Democrats, he thought, were

very open to working with him.

OK,

thank you very much for joining us,

always good to have you on the

programme, please come back again

soon.

Thank you so much.

It is nice and sunny in Florida,

always interesting to get his

thoughts, he is one of the people

that has been close to the President

for a long time. He downplayed it a

little bit, but I know he speaks to

him on a regular basis. You know, to

try to get a sense of how the

President is feeling, sometimes we

get the perception between the

Michael Wolff book, the tweets about

nuclear buttons, that there is a lot

of stress being pent up in the White

House. Interesting to see whether

that is being felt by his friends,

and the degree to which they will

tell us that.

The thing for me, he

talks about no collusion, I wonder

if Robert Mueller has moved past

that, he is looking at

money-laundering, he has two guilty

pleas, he is looking at obstruction

of justice, not just solely about

collusion. He has brought in a cyber

expert we have heard. You wonder how

ready Donald Trump to sit down with

Robert Mueller. He said he was 100%

ready to do it in summer, I am not

sure he is 100% now.

He kind of

urged that and so yesterday. -- he

kind of fudged that answer.

In California, rescue teams

are searching for eight people

who are still missing

after the flash floods

and mudslides on Tuesday.

17 people are known to have died

when a torrent of mud carrying

boulders the size of small cars

smashed through the

town of Montecito.

65 homes have been destroyed -

the area in Santa Barbara county

was only just recovering

from the recent

devastating wildfires.

Our correspondent

James Cook is there.

Turn around!

The flash flood is right there!

Get out of here, go!

This is the moment it began.

Oh, my God!

And then panic.

Close the door!

It was a million miles

an hour in slow motion,

if that makes sense.

I clicked in survival

gear, survival mode.

Every second, it is just roaring

and banging against the house

and the most vicious and violent

sounds you have ever heard.

Montecito has only just grasped

the scale of the disaster

which will bear its name.

For this idyllic little town

of just 9000 people,

recovery will be long and hard.

This was somebody's driveway.

There are three cars destroyed.

Buried inside that rubble.

Looking at this house,

it is difficult to believe anyone

on this street survived,

but many did and their

stories are remarkable.

People walked the dogs through here,

there are trails, my kids have grown

up riding their bikes.

Noelle fled with her three children

just before the storm.

But many of her neighbours did not.

Two young boys were swept

out of their home,

along with their mother.

In the middle of the night.

And the dog is gone.

And they are lucky to be fine.

It is like a war zone here.

There are homes that

are just missing.

And I walk down the street and I see

balls, and toys, and bicycles

and shoes and socks.

And knives and hammers.

It looks like people's lives

are just washed to the ocean.

Much of the wreckage ended up

clogging the main coastal motorway.

The mountains above are scarred

by rivers of debris.

Southern California was once famed

for its agreeable climate.

These days, it reels

from drought, fire and flood.

James Cook, BBC News, Montecito.

Steven Spielberg believes the Trump

administration is using the same

tactics as President Nixon used to

try to silence the press.

The Oscar-winning director

was speaking to our arts editor,

Will Gompertz, ahead of the release

of his latest film The Post,

starring Tom Hanks

and Meryl Streep.

This is a devastating security

breach that was leaked

out of the Pentagon.

Before the Watergate Scandal,

there were the Pentagon Papers.

The first expose a of a cover-up

in the Nixon government

by the Washington Post,

led by its legendary editor Ben

Bradlee and publisher Kay Graham.

Do you have the papers?

Set in 1971.

Yes.

But you have described

it as a timely movie.

Well, obviously if you flip the 1

and the 7, or the 7 and the 1,

you really get to see the great arc

of the pendulum that has brought us

right back to the same tactics

that Richard Nixon used

to try to silence the press.

I'm talking about the current

administration and their absolute

broadsiding of media,

social media, news,

anybody that offends.

You know, there is a label

that is immediately attached

to them, well, that can't be true,

because they're all fake news.

I mean, it's a lot more

insidious today, by the way,

than it was in 1971.

If you publish, we'll be

in the Supreme Court next week.

Meaning?

We could all go to prison.

There's been another massive press

expose the last six months,

it looks like the endemic sexual

harassment and exploitation

of women in Hollywood.

I mean, you're a really senior

figure in Hollywood and you've

been around a long time.

Do you ever think, you know

what, I think I could

have done a bit more to stop this?

Well, you know, I can only basically

react to that question

within my own workplace environment.

Within my organisation,

there weren't incidences,

except for a couple of years

and years ago, that I would say

gave me the experiences

to be the authority

on that question you ask.

What happened in those incidences?

Just a couple of incidences, I don't

want to go into detail on them,

but they happened years and years

ago, where we had

to let somebody go.

People are concerned about having

a woman in charge of the paper.

Think she doesn't have the resolve

to make the tough choices.

Thank you for your frankness.

My prediction is that this

watershed moment for women,

in extolling the courage of women

who, like Katherine Graham,

with the Pentagon Papers,

with her decision to publish or not

to publish, so many women have

found their voices and they have

been given so much support.

Not just by other women,

but also by certain men.

I think this is not just

another news cycle.

I think this is a permanent

change in the culture.

Maybe.

But as Kay Graham showed

with her courageous leadership

of the Washington Post,

exposing deeply rooted corrupt

behaviour is one thing -

changing it is quite another.

Will Gompertz, BBC News.

I can't wait to see that movie. Have

you seen it?

Not yet, looking

forward to it.

Apparently it is

really good, she is meant to be

great as Kay Graham.

We've talked this week about

the buzz surrounding Oprah Winfrey -

I think it's Christian's favourite

story - and whether she's planning

to run for President after giving

a rousing speech at the Golden

Globes.

Well she got a bit

more backing today.

In an interview with the BBC's

Andrew Marr Show, both Meryl Streep

and Tom Hanks were asked

whether they thought

Oprah Winfrey is running -

here's their glowing endorsement.

Well, I don't know if she was

thinking that specifically, although

I do here now that she is really

considering it. But she certainly

set the bar pretty high for anybody

else that decides to run, because no

one can speak in less lofty terms

and adhere to principle and passion

in a legal campaign, because we have

seen it as possible. That is how you

rouse people. That was the voice of

a leader. You know, I pity whoever

does try to run.

I believe Oprah is

some other kind of social force, one

of the kind that has never existed

before, quite attractive. I believe

she wakes up in the morning, both

personally and professionally,

wonders what she can do,

specifically, in order to make the

world a better place. Maybe it is a

very local event, maybe it is going

out and giving voice to something

that needs to be given voice to. We

had proven, I think, in the last few

years, that if you want to be

President of the United States,

guess what, there is a way that can

happen, because...

That is one thing

Trump has shown.

Indeed.

Here is

where I see the problem for Oprah

Winfrey. When we talk about Donald

Trump, there is a tweet for every

occasion, you can go back to 2009,

and find one to fit the occasion.

Imagine if you did that with Oprah

Winfrey. She has been a chat show

host for 25 years. People could go

back and find out her thoughts on

everything, right across the social

spectrum. How would she survived

that sort of scrutiny?

I have two

words for you, Access Hollywood.

Donald Trump survived revelations we

never thought he would do. We

thought his campaign was totally

sunk by those comments he made about

women on tape. And he is now

President of the United States. Here

is the interesting thing for me,

watching two liberal media stars,

Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep saying it

would be great if she won, she has

set the bar high. Those are the same

people who said Donald Trump should

never run for office, he has no

experience, does not know how to be

President and has never been elected

to anything. If they apply that

standard to Donald Trump, I am not

sure how they can't apply it to

Oprah Winfrey, which I think is the

fear of some Democrats, that this

builds momentum and she is not

qualified, that she cannot make it

to the election process.

2020 is so

far away, isn't it?

It will come in

a nanosecond!

Who will come out of

the Democrat would work? The one

thing in her favour is that she has

the star factor, something the

Democrats are desperately looking

for.

This is Beyond 100

Days from the BBC.

Coming up for viewers on the BBC

News Channel and BBC World News -

why countries around the world

are lining up to condemn Myanmar

over the arrest of two journalists

who the government wants to charge

with breaking the

Official Secrets Act.

And a freedom of speech issue

or a question of tone?

The online vlogger who's fallen out

of favour with YouTube

after posting the body

of a suicide victim.

That's still to come.

Hello. If the truth were known, it

has been something of a mishmash of

a day across the British Isles, at

its very best. There was pledge of

sunshine on offer in Wales and spots

elsewhere. The truth of the matter

is that there was a lot of clout to

be had and some mist and fog

lingered through the course of the

day. One of those lead in January

days. There you can see on the

satellite imagery that there were

some decent islands of sunshine.

Through the evening and overnight,

we will find that the cloud will

part in one or two locations, and

that will lead to some fog, a death

like we had last night. Where the

skies stay clear, particularly so in

the West, there could be a touch of

frost around proceedings and

especially so in the countryside,

just that fraction milder towards

the east. Friday morning, I think

there are no great issues with fog

across the north-western quarter of

Scotland. As soon as you drift a

little further east down into the

Borders, there could be a little bit

of an issue. Northern Ireland, not

such an issue. If there was any fog

overnight, I think it will be blown

away, the commute of the morning.

Quite a chilly start across western

parts. I think this is where we will

see the densest of the fog, through

the East, East Anglia, parts of the

south-east, I don't think it will be

much of an issue. A lot of cloud and

dry whether to be had on Friday. The

best of the sunshine through western

parts, cross high ground as well,

helping to break up some of the

cloud. Again, it will be Aprilia

leaden sort of day. Friday into

Saturday, we freshen up those winds,

which will help with the fog

situation we have had over the last

couple of nights. It is freshening

up, the wind, head of a said of

weather fronts, bringing a wet day

into Northern Ireland. Gradually

easing further east, the weather

front, taking the prospect of rain

into western Scotland, western

England, through Wales. Dry

conditions to finish the day in

Northern Ireland. From Saturday into

Sunday, join the dots, that is the

old weather front. A new one showing

at hand across the western quarter

of the British Isles. Not the

coldest days by any means at all.

Make the most of it because once the

weather front comes through during

the course of Monday, the rest of

the week is much colder and a tad

more wintry.

This is Beyond 100 Days,

with me Katty Kay in Washington -

Christian Fraser's in London.

Our top stories -

European powers call

on President Trump to uphold a deal

on Iran's nuclear programme -

struck by his predecessor

Barack Obama in 2015.

When he was a candidate he promised

that he would be unconventional and

unpredictable. He

that he would be unconventional and

unpredictable. He certainly

outperformed in that category so far

as president.

Some incredible pictures to share

with you from California,

the moment a car was caught

in the devastating mudslides

which have killed 17 people -

eight others are still missing.

Coming up in the next half hour -

He was the Brexiteer-in-chief,

so why is Nigel Farage

warming to the idea

of another EU referendum?

And raiding the Ritz -

two robbers remain on the run

after stealing millions of dollars

worth of jewels, from

the glitzy hotel in Paris.

Let us know your thoughts

by using the hashtag.

'Beyond-One-Hundred-Days'.

Earlier this week we had

Nigel Farage on the programme,

the Brexiteer in chief,

talking about his trip to Brussels

and his meeting with the EU chief

negotiator Michel Barnier.

Today Mr Farage said he is close

to backing a second EU referendum

in order to end the "whinging

and whining" of

anti-Brexit campaigners.

It's probably the first time

the former UK Independence Party

leader and the Pro-EU campaigners

have seen eye to eye.

"Bring it on" said

the Remainers today.

Maybe, just maybe, I've reached a

point in thinking that we should

have a second referendum...

On what?

On EU membership.

The whole thing?

Of course!

Let's bring in our chief political

correspondent Vicki Young

who's in Westminster.

He's been doing his radio programme

on LBC radio this evening, he said

he was meeting Michel Barnier on

Monday, and he is now convinced that

Michel Barnier will not "Give us a

good deal". I'm saying this to

Leavers, do not be complacent.

He is

elaborating on comments he made

earlier. There has been a backlash

for Nigel Farage, the man getting

that referendum and who has long

advocated the UK's departure from

the EU, suggesting that he welcomed

a second referendum. A lot of

leading Brexiteers have said that is

the wrong thing to do, even members

of Ukip, of which Nigel Farage the

former leader is still a member of,

they say that is not part of the

policy. On his radio programme

tonight, he has said that he does

not want there to be a second

referendum but after his meeting

with Michel Barnier, as you say, he

came away thinking that UK wasn't

going to get a good deal and in that

eventuality he thought the British

parliament would say rather than

walk away from the EU that there

should be a second vote. He suggests

that Leavers, those who want the UK

to depart from the EU should not be

complacent but gear up for the

possibility of another referendum,

he said that there could be another

dramatic battle go to come.

Alex,

talk about political odd couples,

this puts Labour Nigel Farage in the

same bracket with Remainer, Tony

Blair. I cannot believe either of

them have a lot of time for one

another but they seem convinced if

there was a second referendum that

their side would win?

That is what

is interesting about this, not just

Tony Blair but other Labour MPs,

Liberal Democrats in the UK say that

they welcomed the idea of another

referendum. Looking at opinion

polls, broadly speaking they are not

clear, it depends on the question

they are asked. You can summarise

that there has been a shift towards

people wanting to get on with

Brexit, including people who wanted

the UK to remain before. There a

rise in the number of people who

thought the outcome of the

referendum was wrong. We don't know

the result but as you say both sides

are convinced that their side would

win if it were to be rerun and a

strange combination of Nigel Farage,

cheap Brexiteer, the bedfellow of

some hard remainders, albeit with

others for different reasons.

There

was Nigel Farage on his radio

programme saying that he wanted to

send Tony Blair into outer space,

this would decide it once and for

all. But if there were to be a

second referendum, he's proposing

the same as before, but if it goes

the other way, would this be the

best-of-3?

Brexiteers would say that

it was close last time, let's have a

best-of-5.

Like kids playing Rock

paper scissors? What is interesting,

Arron Banks, one of the finances

behind the league campaign, he is

also behind the idea of having a

second referendum, he said that Tony

Blair and the likes of Lord Adonis

and Nick Clegg, all of the Remainers

out in force in the last few

weeks... You have to wonder what

they make of this in Brussels! It

does not really play to their

chances of getting a good deal if

everyone is talking about a second

referendum but that's another

debate!

President Trump's national security

team is reportedly advising him not

to re-impose US sanctions on Iran.

The European partners to the nuclear

deal came together in Brussels today

to urge the President to maintain

the waiver on sanctions.

But what if he doesn't?

A short while ago he was asked on

this.

Thank you.

On Iran...

You will

be finding out soon. Thank you.

Finding out very soon, he likes to

keep us on tenterhooks!

Karim Sadjapour is an Iran expert

with the Carnegie Endowment.

I spoke to him a short while ago.

Why is President Trump prevaricating

over the sanctions and the waiver?

He made it clear he hates the deal

and he wants to rip it up? That's

right, he's always been sceptical of

the deal, he called it the worst

deal in history. The other thing

about President Trump is that he is

sceptical of what he calls "Expert

opinion and conventional wisdom". He

likes to think he's thought of these

on a few occasions and the blowback

hasn't been what people expected but

in this case, almost all of his

senior national security advisers

have advised him not to blow up the

nuclear deal. In some ways, he is

doing this against his own instincts

quite reluctantly.

If the sanctions

were reimposed, would it indeed blow

up the deal?

If you sanction around

because you say they are not in

compliance with the nuclear deal,

which according to them, they are

still in compliance, that would be

because the US has reneged on its

end of the deal and therefore it

will reconstitute nuclear

activities. Therefore, nuclear

related sanctions against Iran could

unravel the nuclear deal.

You phrase

it interestingly, the president,

basically, the problem is America

faces a choice where if it isolates

Iran further, you drive it in the

direction of North Korea and then it

becomes more like South Korea,

embracing it and engaging it, is

that message getting through to the

White House?

It's a very compact

challenge for the White House and

the US Congress, in that, again, if

you want to present agriculture

event the regime that has required

economic isolation, the US

government has done that well

against Iran but if you try and help

Iranians society become like South

Korea it requires more political and

economic reintegration and in some

ways, these policies are at

loggerheads, they contradict one

another and I would argue that the

nuclear deal is one way of checking

both boxes. The deal keeps Iran

tethered to its nuclear obligations,

to greater transparency. But at the

same time, it helps Iran's economy,

certainly not reintegrate with the

United States but with other parts

of the world that are interested in

doing business with Iran, whether it

is Europe or Asia.

And briefly, what

about the recent riots playing into

the US's calculations?

He feels that

a time when the Iranian regime is

using overwhelming force to harm

citizens aspirations for a greater

economy and more pluralism, why

should we be agreeing to economic

sanctions and lifting economic

sanctions against Iran which simply

provide the regime with more

resources to be oppressive?

OK,

thank you.

Myanmar is in the spotlight again

after sentencing two Reuters

journalists to prison for 14 years.

The pair were charged

with offences under

the Official Secrets Act in Myanmar.

Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo

were arrested last month

after meeting police.

They were covering the situation

in Rakhine state where more

'S

than half a million Muslims have

fled a deadly military crackdown.

Steven Butler is the Asia programme

coordinator for the Committee

to Protect Journalists

and joins me now.

thank you for coming in. What more

do we know on the circumstances of

these journalists, how they are

being held and what they are accused

of doing?

They are accused of

holding documents the government

deems to be secret. They are being

held in prison and so far as we know

they've not been mistreated, they've

told their families that and their

lawyer. They should be out of jail,

they shouldn't be in there in the

first place.

That 14 year sentence,

it's fixed,

could it be lifted?

They haven't

been sentenced, they've been charged

under the official secrets act and

if they are convicted they face

potentially 14 years in prison. We

don't know what will happen. There's

another hearing on the 23rd, the

lawyers have asked for bail and the

trial is yet to take place.

The aim

is to intimidate foreign press, or

the press more generally?

Yes, to

prevent journalists from covering

the tragedy unfolding in the racking

state with the range of people.

And

you have suggested that there is

some evidence that perhaps this was

a setup?

Absolutely, if you look at

what they told their families, they

were invited to meet police and

given documents before they left,

told that they could read the

documents when they arrived home but

immediately as soon as they left

they were arrested. With the

documents that form the basis of the

charges.

It is always tricky, in

this situation, do you speak out

publicly or do interviews? What's

the best way to operate? You want to

do the best for those in custody?

I

think first of all, you provide them

with legal help, that is happening

and secondly, you work with other

organisations like the committee to

protect journalists and other

groups, mobilising governments to

put pressure on the Myanmar regime.

That is happening, there's a

unanimous voice. That this is

unfair.

How far can bemoan my

government to sustain that kind of

international opprobrium at the

moment? Wouldn't it add to

condemnation?

We don't know the

answer to that, we have seen Myanmar

had a military role and survived for

decades from this kind of pressure.

You have to wonder, perhaps they are

getting ready to face that again? We

don't know the answer but I do think

the international pressure is the

only realistic tool in their arsenal

to make changes there.

Steven

Butler, thank you. Thank you for

coming in. Our thoughts go to those

two journalists in Myanmar facing

these long prison sentences. The

crackdown on journalism around the

world, press freedom is under threat

in countries like Myanmar, where

there is a lot of political

pressure. They do have writers

behind them and that puts them in a

slightly stronger position. Reuters

can rally attention and legal

resources, there are many

journalists who are freelancers

without that kind of backing.

It

does make a difference, I have been

there. I used to be a correspondence

in Cairo and I was once arrested

near the border near Gaza. We were

in prison for most of the day and

you think, this will be all right...

Then that is part of you that

thinks, maybe it won't? But it

certainly helps, when the BBC is

involved and the BBC's name around

the world. I'm sure that's the case

for Reuters. Those charges they are

facing and the sentence, in actual

fact, the law they are operating on

is British law. A secret law that

Britain implemented in the country

back in the 1920s when it was Burma.

Let's hope that they are free soon

and can go back to their families.

Let's stay in the country.

Well, still in the country

and the Myanmar military has

admitted for the first time

to killing a group of ten Rohingya

men in Rakhine State

and dumping their bodies

in a mass grave.

The incident took place

in the village of Inn Din.

The army says it was in

the region to fight Rohingya

militants known as ARSA.

This satellite image

here shows what remains

of Inn Din after clashes

with the security forces.

To give you a sense of the scale

of destruction, this picture shows

the village before the clashes.

The ten men found in the mass

grave - had been arrested

as suspected members of ARSA.

The army said they didn't have

trucks to transport them

to the police station -

so they executed them on the spot.

Certainly we need journalists in the

country.

New York is suing five oil

companies, accusing them

of contributing to global warming.

The mayor, Bill de Blasio,

said the city was seeking

damages from BP, Chevron,

ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil

and Royal Dutch Shell ,

to protect residents

from the effects of climate change.

More than 300 people were arrested

in Tunisia during a third night

of anti-government protests.

There were violent clashes

between police and demonstrators

in several cities, including

the capital, Tunis.

The South Korean justice ministry

is preparing a law to ban

the trading of digital

currencies like Bitcoin.

The announcement comes just days

after the country's largest virtual

currency exchanges were raided

for alleged tax evasion.

South Korea is a hub

for crypto-currencies and shares

in Bitcoin have dropped sharply.

The new US ambassador

to the Netherlands has refused

to explain comments he made in 2015

that Muslims had brought chaos

to the country by "burning

cars and politicians".

Ambassador Peter Hoekstra was asked

repeatedly by Dutch reporters

whether he still stood

by the remarks, in which he said

there were 'no-go areas'

in the Netherlands.

But he refused to engage, only

expressing regret at the comments.

Police in France are hunting for two

men who stole millions of euros

worth of jewels in a smash and grab

raid on the Ritz hotel in Paris.

Some of the jewellery but not

all of it has been recovered.

The armed gang -

five of them in all -

burst into the Ritz on Wednesday

evening and smashed the display

windows of jewellery

shops in the hotel.

Three of them were arrested

immediately - two others

are still on the run.

Dan Johnson reports.

A large police response outside

the Paris Ritz after a gang,

armed with axes, carried out

a violent raid.

It isn't just the Christmas

lights that sparkle here.

There are jewels on display to match

the wealth of the guests

at one of the world's

most exclusive hotels.

The robbers arrived in Place Vendome

on scooters at around six

in the evening local time,

smashing windows on the ground

floor of the hotel.

It is estimated they took jewels

worth 4 million euros.

But police officers interrupted

the raid and arrested

three of the five men.

Paris has seen this before.

In October, 2016, US reality TV star

Kim Kardashian had a gun put

to her head as a gang stole

10 million euros-worth

of her jewellery.

Only one piece was ever seen again.

It is not clear how much

was recovered from this latest raid.

Police are still searching for two

of the men involved.

Don Johnson, BBC News.

This is Beyond 100 Days.

Still to come - Putting

a prince on the spot,

why May 19th is turning out to be

a clash of Royal proportions

for Prince William.

Theresa May has pledged to improve

Britain's environment but how

practical is it a they without

plastic? They tried to do that in

Penzance, Cornwall, as John Kay has

been finding out...

A rubbish day at Saint Hilary

school...

Who has straws in their

drinks?

A lesson in pollution and

waste. If Theresa May wants to reach

out to the young with her green

strategy, these kids would be 30

years old at the end of her 25 year

plan... Here in Penzance, they are

trying to be Britain's first plastic

Freetown. -- free town. They are

making some progress. Businesses

like this cafe have signed up and it

is backed by the council... But at

the local supermarket, the challenge

is clear.

Some apples wrapped in

plastic...

John likes the

government's new strategy but

wonders if it will make much

difference.

Plastic, plastic,

plastic... You can't get away from

it.

Most shoppers told us that they

would try plastic free aisles, but

some, like Roxanne, worried that it

may not be practical.

It might not

be the most hygienic route to go

down, maybe? Having the meat next to

the eggs or the cheese, for example?

This is why people around here are

so concerned about the long-term

impact of plastic.

Found on a local

beach, recently, a lollipop stick

from when I was growing up in the

1970s. It hasn't broken down at all.

And a packet of peanuts, test before

1983. -- best before. The Prime

Minister insists her plan has a

wider vision. She says it's about

more than plastic and more than the

coast.

John Kay, BBC News, Cornwall.

This is Beyond 100 Days.

Video bloggers can do big business

online on sites such as YouTube.

Some of the most famous post videos

which are watched by millions

and millions of people around

the world and make millions

for the vloggers themselves.

But now YouTube has cut some

business ties with the video blogger

Logan Paul, after he was heavily

criticised for posting a video

appearing to show the body

of a suicide victim in Japan.

Here's our Media Editor Amol Rajan.

We are going to take a break

from vlogging and each other.

Low-budget, confessional and often

astonishingly popular.

This couple announced

they were breaking up on YouTube

in a video seen 15 million times.

And if I can do it, you can do it...

They are part of a phenomenon called

vlogging or video blogging,

very often on Google-owned YouTube.

This 21st century cottage industry

has created a vast new fleet

of online celebrities.

Many vloggers have a commited

following among those

aged between 18 and 34,

a demographic prized by advertisers.

Vloggers like Logan Paul.

The 22-year-old American

is a YouTube star, or was.

I think this definitely marks

a moment in YouTube history.

This morning YouTube cut

business ties with him

after he naively posted a video

from Japan's Aokigahara Forest,

infamous as a suicide spot.

Paul issued an apology to his 15

million subscribers on YouTube.

I have made a severe and continuous

lapse of my judgment and I don't

expect to be forgiven.

I'm simply here to apologise.

In a statement, YouTube said:

Vlogging is now hugely popular

Vlogging is now hugely popular

business with the likes

of Logan Paul making vast sums

of money in a variety of ways.

They get paid up to £3 per 1000

clicks and can top up their income

through merchandising and deals

with brands, and they do all of that

without the more stringent controls

applied to traditional media.

The boss of Britain's

biggest media agency wants

to see smarter regulation.

I would definitely like to see

vloggers with this much reach

and influence to have the sorts

of regulation traditional

broadcasters have got to adhere to,

particularly around content that can

be dangerous, can be glamorising

or condoning anti-social behaviour,

dangerous behaviour,

that can be copied by children.

I'm going to be the biggest

entertainer on the planet...

Logan Paul and his ilk portend

a new kind of celebrity.

One that it intimate,

incessant and ever more devotional.

For all of the glory of the open

web, the danger is that his kind

of immaturity exposes audiences

to material that is

in nobody's interest.

I'm just getting warmed up.

Amol Rajan, BBC News.

This is interesting, I was speaking

about this to my daughter, Poppy,

very familiar with his work. It was

the only news story that she was

aware of, the whole controversy

surrounding him, unsurprising that

50 million subscribers last year,

last year he made $12.5 million and

now there is criticism of YouTube

and it took them 12 days to respond,

that they did not take the video

down, Logan Paul took it down.

Should they have done something

faster? We are hearing this kind of

criticism about all social media

companies. Do they need more

regulation?

He doesn't work for

YouTube, he posts on a social

platform. When you work for a big

organisation like the BBC there is a

code of ethics and the ethics of

communication. YouTube provide

guidance and puts trust in people

who are quite young and you are

asking them to get it right all the

time. It is a big ask and part of

the problem. The other issue made

today is that very often the

sanctions are not strong enough for

people who digress, and they need to

impose those sanctions more than

they do.

Yes.

A firm that supplied lingerie

to the Queen has lost its royal

warrant after releasing a book,

called 'Storm in a D-Cup',

which revealed details

of royal bra fittings.

The company Rigby & Peller,

had held the royal warrant

for more than 50 years.

It said it was "deeply

saddened" by the decision.

Buckingham Palace has said

it does not "comment

on individual companies".

Nor will I comment on that

particular story!

No, moving along!

We're going to stick

with the royal theme,

and that's because Prince William's

been put on the spot

over his brother, Prince Harry's

wedding on the 19th of May.

Wills, who's second in line

to the throne, was filming

for a mental health charity

with former England football

captain Rio Ferdinand,

and London DJ Roman Kemp -

when this happened.

There is the matter of a small

wedding that will happen this year -

of course, your brother -

we're very happy for him...

It was a big decision.

Are we going to Wembley,

or are we going to...

LAUGHTER

Still working it out.

I'll have to see what I can do.

I think, you know, having that

that, and the skin of

I'm not sure what royal protocol is

that I don't think you can snub the

future King of England as the best

man, can you?

Not without causing a

lot of sibling rivalry and problems!

The fact he's had to go on

television and say that he hasn't

asked me yet, how long has it been

since they announced their

engagement? He's had long enough!

Carrie, get on with it!

I don't

think he realises how much work goes

into planning the stag do, you've

got to get on with it!

I'm sure he's

aware of that! I think he will do a

good job there!

Coming up, Ros

Atkins is here with Outside Source,

and then all of the latest

headlines. We are here on Monday

evening! It has been a long week!

See you then. Have a good weekend.