29/01/2018 Beyond 100 Days

You're watching Beyond 100 Days,

with me, Christian

Fraser, in London.

Our top stories -

the Deputy Director

of the FBI steps down

with immediate effect.

It's believed Andrew

McCabe was forced out.

He had faced repeated criticism

from President Trump.

The EU spells out its

terms and conditions

for the UK's transition

period after Brexit.

Britain will have to obey EU rules,

but will have no say on them.

It will continue to have

all the economic benefits,

therefore it must apply

all the EU rules.

The single market

cannot be a la carte.

Illegal child migrants

who have become the pawns

in the US immigration row.

What does the future

hold for the Dreamers?

Military mapping -

how data from the fitness tracker

Strava has inadvertently revealed

the whereabouts of

American army bases abroad.

Good evening.

I'm Christian Fraser in London.

President Trump is preparing

for his big moment -

his first State of the Union

address.

No doubt there will be plenty

tomorrow night on his successes,

tax reform, deregulation,

the stellar performance

of the American economy.

But hanging over it all

is the Russia investigation led

by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

There have been persistent reports

this past week that President Trump

has tried to interfere with that

investigation, including the news

that he had wanted to fire

Mr Mueller last summer.

In the last hour, it has

emerged that the assistant

director of the FBI,

Andrew McCabe, is stepping down

with immediate effect.

He too had been closely

involved with the Russia

investigation, and has been

a constant target for the President.

Last week, Mr Trump denied he had

put any undue pressure

on the FBI director,

Christopher Wray, to sack McCabe.

President Trump was asked

about the reports Mr McCabe

was leaving his position at the end

of a brief press statement ahead

of a security meeting.

Here's how that exchange went.

Have you been told that Andrew

McCabe has resigned?

Thank you,

thank you.

Christopher Wray said in press

reports in the last week, when he

was asked to get that of McCabe, he

said, you would have to get rid of

me, too. So what has changed?

Ultimately, was McCabe pushed?

The

facts here are that McCabe has been

a frequent target for the President

ever since it emerged that his wife

had received money from a political

action committee when she ran for

state office in Virginia, close to

the former Virginia governor, a

friend of Hillary Clinton. So

McCabe, in his time at the bureau,

was overseeing the probe into

Hillary Clinton's use of the Private

e-mail server. The president has

used his wife's connection with the

Clintons to suggest that McCabe is

biased. Republicans have picked up

on that, and are saying that the

wider rush-hour investigation is

also biased against the president

because of McCabe's role as deputy

director and because of his wife's

political connection to the

Clintons. -- the Russia

investigation. That is why the

president is so furious. There is a

subset to this story as well, which

is that later today the house

intelligence committee will vote on

whether or not they will release a

memo by a Republican on that

committee which is very critical of

the Russia investigation, the FBI's

role in it, suggesting that improper

things have gone on. So you have

already on Twitter, the President's

son saying that there may be a

relationship between these two

events, the Reformation and the vote

and the committee. But this will be

seen in the wider context, the

President fired the director of the

FBI. He then said in a television

interview it was to do with the

Russia probe into him. He has had a

sustained attack against the FBI

which he believes is biased against

him, and now McCabe is leaving ahead

of what is widely expected to be his

resignation date in March.

Good

starter for ten, thank you.

Michael Moore is a former US

attorney, and joins us from Atlanta.

Good to have you here. Can we get

your thoughts on Mr McCabe standing

aside early? He was due to go in

March, but he is going early.

The

fact that he may be leaving a little

bit early is not in and of itself

anything I think it's particularly

suspicious. But when you look at the

context of how he is leaving, he has

been criticised by the president,

his wife has been put under the

microscope and faced skirt and

scrutiny, and now we are here and

there is this memo which is likely

critical both of McCabe, that

probably spurred on his decision.

Remember that this is sort of

classic pot, I guess, classic modus

operandi for what people do when

they are under investigation, they

attack the investigators, they

attack the investigation, and we are

seeing that from Trump, and my guess

is we will probably now see a

concerted effort both from Trump and

his allies in Congress, pressure put

on Rod Rosenstein, and my guess is

that this may be a beginning of the

way for Trump to try to fire Rod

Rosenstein. I know him, I do not

believe he is the type of person who

will do the White House's bidding. I

served with him as a United States

attorney, I served with him on a

number of committees, he is a

principled man of character and he

will not be a puppet for Trump or

any other president he might be

serving under.

Donald Trump Jr has

treated in the last few minutes that

it is local instance that McCabe has

gone just ahead of this meeting at

5pm Eastern Time, when the White

House committee will decide whether

or not to release this memo. We

should explain this to our viewers.

Basically, Nunes is saying about Rod

Rosenstein who was working with

Andrew McCabe, the two of them went

to a court to get a warrant for

further investigation into Carter

Page, who was associated with the

campaign. And he is saying that they

got that one by using the dossier

compiled by Christopher Steele,

which was funded by the Democrats.

So they are alleging that this was a

partisan hack, the Democrats trying

to get intelligence through the

court using improper methods.

I

think what they forget is that the

Steele dossier originated in the

time of the Republican primary, so

you will see... The unusual step

that we are talking about... Things

that are happening in the secret

court. Criticising the actions of

federal law enforcement agencies and

individuals about those applications

and foreign surveillance. They want

to release this memo and put it out

of the public domain just so they

can protect their president. And the

reason they think they will do that

is because they are just tried to

cast doubt on the investigation at

this point. So they attack the

investigators and the investigation,

they have us tax the Steele dossier

-- attacked the Steele dossier. And

much of the information contained in

that dossier has proven true. We

might not be able to prove the

salacious details at the moment, but

other parts of that dossier have

come out.

Just before I let you go,

we've got raw Rosenstein under

pressure and also Andrew McCabe.

Does that have to be special

legislation to protect Robert

Mueller?

There would not have to be

legislation if Congress would step

up and do its job. They would not

need special legislation, they could

bring him in under independent

counsel scenario through the

Congress. So again, I think you are

seeing that the noose is tightening

around the Trump Administration, you

will ultimately see that the

president will need to find a way to

get rid of Rod Rosenstein. We saw it

with the travel ban money brought in

another Attorney General and the rid

of Sally Yates. I think this is what

you will see here. Rod Rosenstein

has not been willing to fire Robert

Mueller, so they will try to get rid

of Rod Rosenstein will actually do

the President's bidding.

Michael

Moore, good to get your thought. No

Katty Kay today, as she has a cold,

but I have Ryan Christie with me. A

former adviser to George W Bush. --

Ron Christie.

This is an area where Congress needs

to be very careful not to overstep

their bounds. Our Constitution gives

the president wide latitude to fire

subordinate officers who work within

the executive branch. The notion

that the Republicans and Democrats

in Congress would pass a statute,

which of course Trump would

ultimately end up the touring, that

would take away his constitutional

power, is ludicrous. The real

question is, whereas Robert Mueller

going with the investigation? We

have is going for over a year, there

are still no signs of collusion. So

I do not think he needs protection,

think Congress is to stay within the

realm of Article one of our

constitution where they have their

power. I pressed you on this last

week.

Is it good for the president

to be using the FBI and the

Department of Justice in this way?

The reputation to law enforcement in

the United States has taken quite a

hit here.

It is. One of the things

we have the director of the FBI is

that we have enshrined a 10-year

term of office for the FBI director.

So in other words, they should be

above political pressure, they

should be independent not only from

the president but also from the

Justice Department, to do their job.

Here you a situation where, as I

have always said, this is where

President Trump gets itself into

trouble. You go on Twitter and make

insulting tweets about the FBI

director, the Department of Justice,

people who are lying, and then of

course people point back to that and

say, Mr President, this could be in

large part by Jeremy special

counsel. So I do not believe the

president should be acting in this

way. -- why you have a special

counsel.

Ron, thank you for your

thoughts.

EU ministers have approved

their negotiating terms

for talks on the transitional period

that will follow

Britain's departure

from the European Union next year.

A senior EU negotiator said that

they'd taken just two minutes

to agree their position.

They are offering the UK

the "status quo from March 2019

"until the end of 2020".

But Britain will lose its voting

rights and will have to obey

the rules of the single market,

including freedom of movement

for all EU citizens.

The transition period is also set

to end in December 2020,

three months earlier than Britain

had originally envisaged.

Michel Barnier, the EU's

chief Brexit negotiator,

delivered this message earlier

today.

Jude in the transition, the UK will

continue to take part in the customs

union. -- during the transition.

It will continue to have

all the economic benefits,

therefore it must apply

all the EU rules.

The single market

cannot be a la carte.

Our Brussels reporter

Adam Fleming joins us now.

In effect, no Brexit until 2020, 20

21.

A controversial thing to say in

the current climate. What the UK

Government would say is that this is

Brexit, because on March 29, 2019,

the UK will no longer be a member of

the European Union. It will be out

of the club, and that is Brexit. So

they are saying, the British

Government, that they are delivering

that. The reason they want this

transition period is to provide

certainty for business so that they

have to make one set of changes, so

rather than changing when the UK

leads and then again when the

transition period is over, they will

have to change at the end of the

transition period. The sticking

point in the discussions going

forward for the Brits is how they

are involved when the EU decides to

pass new legislation or new rules

during the transition period. The

British Government says two things.

First of all, the way that the EU

timetable operates as it takes them

ages to come up with new

legislation, so with the transition

period of nearly two years, it is

likely the EU would be able to

generate any new laws that affect

them in any serious way. That is the

first thing they say. To guard

against it, though, the second thing

they say is their midst of this kind

of process, a mechanism by which the

UK can be involved when it is no

longer a member. Michel Barnier, the

EU's chief negotiator, it is not

keen on that. He said again and

again at his news conference this

afternoon that the UK could at best

be consulted on an exceptional

case-by-case basis if all the other

countries agreed. So that is quite a

long way from a process by which the

UK could be involved in agreeing

those new rules. So I think that is

where the flash point will be, and

if we have learned anything in the

Brexit process, the outcome will

probably be a bit of a feng shui

sites can say that it is happy with

the outcome and we would really know

what is going to happen. -- a bit of

a fudge.

You'll see how that plays

into the debate about Theresa May at

the moment. Thank you.

We've heard a lot about

the American "Dreamers,"

the group of undocumented migrants

who came to the USA illegally

with their parents.

Many of them have grown up in

America, but unless a deal is done,

they face being expelled.

On the table is a proposal

from the President.

He is offering legal status

for two million illegal migrants,

including the Dreamers,

in return for $25 billion

to build his wall,

plus immigration reform.

We will see where that goes.

But how does it feel

to be the bargaining chip

in the increasingly bitter

US immigration debate?

We're joined now my

Melody Klingenfuss, a Daca

recipient from Los Angeles,

who joins me now from Washington.

Tell us a bit about your life. How

did you come to be in the United

States, and what do you do at the

moment?

Thank you for having me. It

is an honour to represent the

document of immigrants from

California. I was born in Guatemala

where I grew up without parents. I

came here when I was nine years old

and received my entire education

here. I work for an organisation

working for human rights. My story

is just one of thousands, so there

are different ways that people came

here, what they have done, and the

different privileges that Daca was

able to give us. I have been a Daca

recipient since 2016. For me to be

here at this time with this

administration, it's just really

goes to show the resilience of the

immigrant spirit.

How has life

changed for you since Mr Trump ended

the Daca programme?

For me, the

reality is that every day since Daca

ended, since September five, 2017,

122 people have lost their status

every day. And we expect about 1400

people to lose their status every

day after March five. So my life has

been focused on tried to educate the

public...

Does that mean you would

have to go back to Guatemala?

That

is not in my mind, and that is not

something we should be thinking

about. What is on the table is this

proposition that could replace Daca

and give a pathway to citizenship to

almost 1.5 million immigrants, and

that is the Dream Act. So we now

need to think about what happens,

and feeding into the fear that this

restriction is trained to bring to

migrant communities. On the

contrary, we need to organise and

mobilise to educate our public about

their rights. Because we still have

rights even though we are

undocumented.

But how long have you

got until you might have to go to

what our? Is your life effectively a

ticking clock at the moment?

No, it

is not a ticking clock. For me, my

life is to keep my immigrant

community together. So I'm not

thinking about how much time have

left. I will still be me even if

Daca ends, and that is the reality

for all of us. So the 800,000

recipients who have Daca, even

though Daca might end, in terms of

the Parliament, -- in terms of the

permit, it still does not change the

fact that we need to rise up against

this administration's racism and

xenophobia and division of our

community. So again for hours, that

is why it is really important to put

all of our energy and passion into

passing the Dream Act by the eighth

of that order. -- for others.

Melody, good to hear you. Let's

bring Ron back in. We will hear

tomorrow in the state of the union

address that there is a deal on the

table, a proposal put forward by the

White House. The overwhelming

majority of Americans are in favour

of the Dream is staying, but it

would seem the White House is not in

to give them what they want. --

without giving them something in

return.

That is the art of

negotiation, and you should not

automatically cave unilaterally to

give one political party or that

they want. The numbers vary between

800,001.8 million people who do not

have documented status who would

benefit from the President's plan.

But I have to tell you, tomorrow is

a very pivotal evening some of these

supporters of Daca. There are

rumours of disruption in the house

chamber, protests, while a majority

of Americans, myself included,

really wants to support these

people, this is not the way to go

about getting what you are looking

for. To say you dream of being a US

citizen living in this country, let

me live the American dream, rather

than high demand, I expect, and you

will give. So it'll be interesting

to see how the present and how the

Democrats deal with this sensitive

issue, not only tomorrow night, but

in the days that come.

Run, thank

you. -- Ron.

The German government has

strongly condemned a series

of car emissions tests,

in which humans and monkeys

were reportedly exposed

to diesel exhaust fumes.

The experiments were

conducted by a research

group funded by three car

companies, including Volkswagen.

Its chairman has described the tests

as "totally incomprehensible".

Paris remains on high alert

after experiencing some

of the heaviest rain for a century.

The River Seine has peaked

at more than four metres

above its normal level.

Around 1,500 people have been

evacuated from their homes

in the greater Paris region,

while a similar number of homes

remain without electricity.

The authorities believe

the city will now be spared

really major flooding.

Still, the waters are six

metres higher than usual,

and the clean up job

will take weeks.

Officials in Cape Town

have opened a

Disaster Operations Centre to put

in place plans to shut down

the city's water supply.

South Africa's second-largest urban

area is in the midst

of a severe drought.

If the taps are turned off,

on a date known as day zero,

and projected to happen in early

April, it will mean Cape Town

is the world's first

major city to run dry.

President Trump's national

security team is looking

to build a nationalised

5G wireless network,

with the intent of trying

to counter the threat

of China spying on US phone calls.

According to axios.com,

officials want to deploy the plans

within three years,

though the proposal won't

land on the President's

desk for consideration

until later in 2018.

America's on the ball with this.

Chinese tech giant Huawei is already

banned from bidding for

US government contracts over

concerns its equipment could be used

for spying by Beijing.

Europe, on the other hand,

seems to have a different approach.

Huawei is an integral part

of technology infrastructure

in the UK, Germany, and Spain.

It's also a key player

in the European Commission's

roll-out of 5G wireless technology.

The US's stance is not

sheer paranoia.

Parliamentary reports both sides

of the pond have shown concern over

Huawei's relationship

with the Chinese state.

So where does that leave us?

Let's bring in Tom Kellermann,

Chief Cybersecurity Officer

at the software firm Carbon Black.

He joins us now from Orlando.

Tell us about five G. This is going

to be a national roll-out. It is

going to be unprecedented for the

state to take over the building and

running of it.

The Chinese have been

influencing the standards of 5G for

the last six, seven years, and they

have made substantial investments in

Carbon Black technology. But the

nature in which companies that are

associated with the people's

liberation Army of China, they

control the future of the structure

of not just more book on occasions,

but all IT communications. This does

create a security risk to both the

US and Europe. This is a fact, there

is a history and an ongoing campaign

of economic espionage that has been

levelled against both the US and her

European allies for over a decade,

beginning with the campaign back in

2001.

So why do you think Europe is

taking a different approach? Because

Huawei as I said is one of the

foremost companies operating in

Europe now, outstripping Ericsson

and Nokia and all the European

mobile phone companies. Is it

dangerous to give a country like

China... ?

I don't believe it is a

question of Huawei and whether or

not is as a righteous organisation.

It is the matter of whether major

corporations having access to Carbon

Black also granting access to the

regime to the country of origin. --

having access to 5G. You can

actually conduct surveillance on

anyone utilising that backbone

infrastructure. There is an import

to having major critical

infrastructure having all forms of

5G delivery, and I think it is a

prescient move by the administration

and by the National Security Council

to make the strategy apparent.

Food

for thought for policymakers in

Europe. While I have you, I want to

ask you about this Strava story. The

US military says it is reviewing the

use of Strava overseas, after it

published a heat map showing the

path.

It's after the fitness app Strava

published a so-called heatmap,

showing the paths its users take

as they jog or cycle.

OK for average Joe

doing his morning run,

less so when it shows the structure

of foreign military bases

in countries like Syria

and Afghanistan as

soldiers move around them.

They look like streets in London,

Paris or New York, but when you are

in the Desert, or on a beach, more

of a problem.

It is the same problem

you have with your phone in your

pocket when you leave Bluetooth and

Wi-Fi turned on. You are basically

giving a beacon on your position,

and many times, nation states and...

I think we have lost Tom. Let's

bring in Ron. This report that the

Government that the Government is

going to nationalise 5G, make EU

policy makers set up. We talk

constantly about Russia, and that

people have taken their eye off

China and the threat they might

pose.

I think you are right. This

will be a critical issue for the

United States over the next couple

of years. You have a lot of internet

service providers here the United

States who are racing, trying to

build this 5G network, they are to

step back and say, witty minute,

this should be our purview. So it

will be addressed to see what

happens in the days to come. -- wait

a minute.

Thanks very much, Ron.

This is Beyond 100

Days from the BBC.

A bit of a mishmash of weather

across the British Isles today.

Pretty miserable generally down

here. But once the weather front

passed by, your weather could have

improved to something as good as

this. And we keep that improvement

going for the rest of the evening

and overnight in many spots. But

underneath the clear skies, next to

this ridge of high pressure behind

that frontal system, the

temperatures will begin to date.

That will not be such an issue

across northern and western parts of

Scotland, because here you have the

combination of cloud and breeze.

That will help to keep the

temperature is relatively speaking.

But further south underneath the

clear skies, particularly in the

countryside, quite a widespread

frost to start the new day. So here

we Tuesday morning, a lot of fine

and settled weather to be heard

across the greater part of England

and Wales. But as I say, it will be

many of the central and southern

parts that see the bulk of the

frost. Go farther north, and you

will find more cloud and a fresh

breeze coming from the south-west.

And rain are plenty across northern

and western parts of Scotland, and a

bit of winter must perhaps on the

highest ground. Through Tuesday, not

much changes across the Midlands,

Lincolnshire, East Anglia and the

south-east, things Clare Bailey

south-east. Some rain flirting with

Pembrokeshire before the edge of the

afternoon. -- end of the afternoon.

20 to 30 millimetres quite widely,

and other vehicles, as much as 50 to

60 millimetres. To frontal system

playing a part in Wednesday's

weather. -- two frontal systems.

Behind this, a good deal of cold air

streaming its way into the British

Isles. So a wet start to Wednesday

across southern England and Wales.

Once that has cleared, a bit

brighter, but further north, plenty

of showers, wintry in the nature

given tips temperatures in the towns

and cities are not much better than

four Celsius. Fresh on Thursday, but

cloudier and wetter for many come

Friday.

Top stories. The deputy director of

the FBI steps down with immediate

effect. Andrew McCabe had been

criticised by President Trump. The

White has said he had nothing to do

with the decision to step down. They

love the president wasn't part of

this process and we would refer you

to the FBI. The EU's chief

negotiator said the UK will have to

obey all EU rules during transition

after Brexit but should not be able

to vote on EU policy matters. 11

soldiers die in an attack on a

military base in Kabul. The third

attack in just over a week in the

capital. We will look at what's

behind the upsurge in violence.

Renaud Maras wins big at the Grammys

on a night that highlighted the time

is up and need to campaigns. --

at least 11 Afghan soldiers were

killed today and 16 wounded in

Kabul. It's the third time in just

over a week that Kaboul has been

targeted. This time it was claimed

by Islamic State but on Saturday it

was the Taliban. A suicide bomber

driving an ambulance full of

explosives into checkpoint killing

over 100 people. What is going on

and why is it seemingly so easy for

the militants to attack the capital

within the supposed ring of steel.

Does get more from the former Afghan

ambassador to Canada and to France

and he joins me from Washington.

Very good to have you on the

programme. We have the Taliban

attack on the Intercontinental, Isis

at Akinde ease, Taliban attack on

this checkpoint killing 100 people

and this attack today which is Isis.

You spot the patent, Taliban, ices,

Taliban, Isis. What's going on?

That

shows there may not be much differed

between the two given that Isis in

Afghanistan, a lot of questions

about its affiliations on routes but

that aside, Afghanistan is going

through a very rough time and part

of that has to do with centuries and

safe havens existing outside of

Afghanistan and Pakistan and the

international community has been

pointing to that as a major problem

that has to be resolved. Part of

that has to do with the reaction to

America's and needle's new strategy

in Afghanistan which has brought

most of the warfare in the role

parts of the country and I think as

a reaction to that, the Taliban or

Isis or whoever you want to refer to

as part of that coalition are aiming

at urban centres. What needs to be

done is to defend the Afghan people,

make sure the Afghan forces are

adequately supplied and helped and

supported. At the same time they

need some diplomatic action to make

sure that countries in the region

are not spoilers and act

constructively.

The president is

committed to Afghanistan, increased

troop numbers from 8500 to 14000 and

is now preparing to send another

1000. I suppose the danger, and this

is what will worry people in the

United States, is that they get

sucked in again after the success in

Syria and Iraq and there is mission

creep.

Remember that the number of

US forces in Afghanistan are

predominantly, if not wholly not

involved in daily combat. They are

mostly support, training, mentoring

and any other type of activity

needed by the Afghan forces. There

are special forces used occasionally

double after specific targets and

there is a poor. The difference we

have seen in the last few months

since the new strategy was announced

that are more forceful air strike

capability is used by the Afghans,

the US and Nato against the Taliban.

That has brought change on the

ground but that it is the beginning

of what I think a long conflict in

the months to

Come.

Come.

It will be a concern for

people in America that the troop

numbers are starting to go up again

and at a time when the government

has a spat with the government in

Pakistan and relations between

Pakistan and the United States at

the moment are pretty weak.

They are

pretty weak and this is the test for

President Trump and his

administration. One year in, a lot

of Americans believe we were finally

going to withdraw troops from

Pakistan and Afghanistan but the

regional threat is very serious and

very significant not only for the

United States but our allies in that

region of the world. The question

becomes is it an increase in troop

levels, is it an increase to the

United States's intelligence and

working with our allies in

Afghanistan and Pakistan and the EU,

we have to find a way to ensure that

we can not only secure the capital

of Afghanistan but we can stem the

violence and terrorism that we see

coming out of this region.

Their

appetite for that? He might be

overreaching, flagging up and will

find out tomorrow the successes in

Syria and Iraq battling Isis but

this is different with the Taliban,

they had been there and they are

getting stronger after 17 years.

This is something that is at risk

for the president because according

to the White House, they do want to

tout his success and dismantling

Isis but what we're seeing in

Afghanistan and Pakistan, these are

conflicts that have gone on for

decades and decades, even longer

than that. The beneficiary would be

wise to acknowledge the third and

the presence of terrorists in this

part of the world but laid forth a

road map on how we will ensure that

those piece peaceful people who want

to live in countries are not head

with the scourge of terrorism that

we have seen for far too long.

Let's

talk more about the state of the

union because politics in the United

States has really been so divided

but there is one thing that all

sides can agree on and that is the

need to improve the nation's

crumbling infrastructure. President

Trump is expected to outline his

plan in the state of the union and

he what has made it clear that he

wants private investors to pay for

it. Democrats say the federal

government has to pay more. Both

parties arguing about the bill but

we have been looking at what has to

be fixed. Brie daybreak on the

nation's capital and already traffic

is grinding to a halt on the busiest

bridges into the city. This bridge

is clearly struggling to deal with

the volume of traffic. Is that

typical?

This is typical of our

entire network. Our transportation

network is failing to meet the needs

of our communities.

Christina

Swallow as president of the American

Society of civil engineers, which

rates the nation's infrastructure

every four years. The current grade

is. If we don't invest in the

Versace label costs the economy the

Mbaye Niang trillion dollars in GDP

by 2025, seven trillion lost in

business sales and 2.5 million lost

jobs. This will hurt our economy and

it hurts as each individually.

President Trump was to focus on

infrastructure this year and in some

areas need urgent attention. A

broken water remain at New York's

JFK International Airport compounded

the effects of the winter storm in

January causing chaos and additional

flight cancellations. US airports

serve more than 2 million passengers

a day but buildings and systems

aren't keeping pace and aviation

gets a capital D. Traffic delays

cost the economy. One in five miles

of highway is in poor condition.

Rhodes also score D. Despite an

increase in demand, chronic

underfunding has left an ageing

infrastructure and $90 billion

improvement backlog. D minus.

The

last thing you want to do is pay for

that roof until water starts coming

in and then you realise that you

have no choice and I think that's

what America has done, we have kept

just putting band aids and temporary

fixes on the infrastructure and we

have done that for decades and we

are now seeing the results.

Washington is doing slightly better

than the US as a whole with a score

of

See minus. The bridge is is in

urgent need of replacement. $441

million is the cost of the new

structure and city planners say that

the project will create 3000 jobs

and boost the economy. President

Trump wants to invest $1 trillion in

the nation's infrastructure and

speed things up by cutting the time

to process permits. Exactly who will

pay remains an open question. The

one thing the president really needs

is already in short supply...

Cooperation from Democrats.

Everybody agrees the problem is

urgent but much like America's

roads, getting from A to B could be

a bumpy ride. What about that

cooperation? We are told by the

White House, you send me some

homework over the weekend, the off

the record briefing to do with the

state of the union and then that

they said there is going to be a

change of tone, we will get a shift

in the rhetoric, more bipartisan,

more collegiate. Do you think

that'll do the trick when it to

infrastructure?

I think it should

and I think it will. We will see a

very different Donald Trump tomorrow

night, so money people are saying he

will be competent and taking it to

the Democrats. This is a unique

opportunity for the president to

say, we can stands shoulder to

shoulder as Americans, he

infrastructure is crumbling, our

bridges, roads, our transportation

network, let's find a way to fix

this and work together to get this

done. The question for me tomorrow

night is during the seat of the

union you see people standing up and

plodding, will the Democrats applaud

or will they said they will not do

anything Donald Trump wants.

I can

see the red lights flashing behind

you, the fire alarm, you better go!

We will speak to you if that ends!

We hope it's a false alarm, I'm sure

it is. Let's move on to Brexit.

There will be a transition or

implementation phase after the UK

leads the EU in March 2019, that

much we know. We don't know is how

exactly it will work on whether it

will be the status quo in all but

name for a few years. EU ministers

have agreed how they want to

approach it as they prepare for the

Brexit round of talks with the UK,

so let's get into a bit of that. The

Brexit editor of the Telegraph. Do

you think this will but then in

Westminster at a time when pretty

fractious already?

To utter the

phrase that's been used a million

times but it holds here, the devil

will be in the detail, I'm afraid.

How it plays back home will depend

to a great extent on how much

confidence people have, various

factions have, in our negotiators

carrying out the negotiations and

also in the government. I've noticed

that when the guidelines were

published today, it is a draft

guideline, we have seen them before

in some way, shape or form.

Everybody knew what it was going to

be, but it shows a sense of unity

among the 27 and they are going for

that. I think I saw that tweet when

it was... The guidelines were

published. Heidi Alan tweeted that

it seems reasonable. It seems like

us got the support of that side.

It's the idea for business, to give

the certainty of an extended period

where they can put their plans in

place the status quo, although it

will be concerned for some Brexit

.

The transition period is going to

last 21 months, that is what they

are saying in the opening gambit.

Some talk of that being longer, we

will see where we get it from there,

so that that of certainty would mean

that during that period, the entire

body of EU legislation is going to

apply to us, that that is certain.

What we don't know is what other new

rules and regulations will be come

into effect after we left during the

two news crime won't have a seat at

the table at all levels will be

passed on to us.

Whether during a

transition period those areas are of

mutual interest, for example in

fishing policy, where they are in

British waters, the government would

push for a say on that.

I would have

thought so, the other as foreign

policy, including sanctions, that is

important. As always, with

negotiating language, it's

intentionally left quite ambiguous.

What Michel Barnier said was that in

limited exceptional cases we might

have some say. It will be on our

side to push for what that means,

clarity on what they would consider

to be exceptional cases.

Clarity on

that but also clarity on the bigger

Brexit project and this is what is

causing the prime ministers so much

trouble at home. Have a look at this

tweet, the ambassador to London for

Denmark.

This is really the problem that the

Prime Minister is facing from both

the remain and Brexit side, both

sides are screaming, pick a course,

any course and stick to it.

I think

that's fair. So far we've seen the

Prime Minister attempting to keep

two sides happy and that's

important. That was a divisive

referendum, the party is divided,

the government is divided, the

opposition are also divided, is

important the Prime Minister pulls

both sides together but in the

process, she's very quickly losing

support and confidence of both

sides. She's not picking one side

and going full steam ahead. We have

seen our side playing a bit of catch

up even last year when all of this

happened and the EU seems to be...

They have a clearer vision than we

do, unfortunately.

Said pig a

course, any course, neither side

would say any course, they want

their own terms but you get my

drift. Two British skiers have

fallen to their deaths while on

holiday in the French Alps, is

believed the 25-year-olds slip

before following several hundred

while off piste. Rescue services

arrived at the scene within minutes

and the two men were pronounced dead

at the scene. David Beckham, the

formatting of captain, has unveiled

details of his new US Major league

soccer team in Miami. Beckham has

Ben four years tried to get the

correct financing structure and

stadium site to be given an MLS

franchise. Although the team name,

logo and new form are announced

today, the manager, team and

cultures follow soon. UK

holiday-makers are to be offered the

chance to choose their sunbed before

they have even left home. Thomas

Cook's trial scheme will allow

customers to pay £22 to book a

specific lounger in advance of their

holiday. This comes after a number

of it were posted online showing

British holiday-makers sprinting

down to get their sunbeds with their

towels early in the morning. How

many of us have done that?

This is beyond 100 days. Still to

come colon accusations of

politicising the Grammys as artists

and a certain politician read

excerpts from the book, fire and

fury.

A loyalist paramilitary turned

supergrass has been jailed for more

than six years after admitting more

than 200 offences, including five

murders. Gary Haggerty was a former

commander in the also volunteer

Force. The judge said under normal

circumstances he would have been

jailed for 25 years. -- 35 years.

Apologies for that. We appear to

have lost that package. We will see

we can get back to it shortly.

Everything following around our

ears. We lost one Christian

Washington and left because of a

fire alarm and the package freezing

as well. Apologies for that! Leisure

time to the story about Brexit. We

will show you Michel Barnier. The

pictures as he came into the room

today. With Hungarian Foreign

Minister, they gave a conference for

about an hour, setting out what they

would like to see from the

negotiations. This is the opening

gambit. David Davis said that he

wants to be able to come back to

Brussels and negotiate the terms for

this transition. There does seem to

be some wiggle room with the later

papers in this proposal which would

allow them to extend the transition,

also, perhaps some wiggle room on

negotiating trade deals while the

transition period is on. There are

areas where the British Government

will be able to negotiate. Clearly

they will be bound by most of the

rules of the single market,

including freedom of movement and

the rules of the European Court of

Justice.

Bredau Maras was the big winner at

the Grammy awards in New York last

night. He took on six riders

including best record, Alan and Song

of the year. Also two awards for Ed

Sheeran -- Bruno Mars. 24 carat

tragic, Bruno Mars. The most

prodigious event in music ended up

being a huge night for Bruno Mars,

who took on six Grammys including

the big three. Record, album and

Song of the year.

The songs are

written with nothing but joy and for

one reason and one reason only and

that is love.

Tonight is about the

glamour, it's a celebration of music

but it's also, inevitably become a

platform to highlight not just one

but many of the issues of the day.

For a start, on the red carpet,

stars wore white roses in solidarity

with the movement to end sexual

misconduct and gender inequality.

There's still a lot to be done, is

in there?

Well, we make up 51% of

the workforce, we don't get equal

pay for equal work, we don't get

equal opportunity and we do not have

a safe workplace, so I think the

time is up.

In the most memorable performance of

the night, Kesha was supported on

stage, she has accused her former

producer of sexual misconduct. A

poignant tribute to those who died

in attacks at a music festival in

Las Vegas and the Ariana Grande

concert in Manchester.

U2 performed by the Statue of

Liberty to draw attention to current

immigration itches in America. --

issues. Things got even more overtly

political with an appearance by

Hillary Clinton. It is already being

criticised by members President

Trump's administration. This was

expected to be the year hip-hop was

recognised in the mainstream awards

but it wasn't. In spite of all the

talk of equality, a few women were

even nominated for the big prizes.

That is once again the question as

to whether the Grammy awards truly

reflect the huge diversity of this

industry.

Plenty of music and politics. Let's

get into some of that with one of

the music industry's biggest events

from Variety magazine. He joins me

from New York. It's going all wrong

here! You saved us that the right

time. Tell us about the awards.

Bruno Mars Won virtually everything

last night and decency that R&B

stars couldn't win the categories

but he cleaned up in every group he

was nominated.

That is true,

technically an R&B artist but really

more of a pop artist. I sort of

think... I mean, the results were

about as conservative as they could

have been. There was so much hip-hop

and R&B in the nominees this year

and I think on the one hand it may

have been a little bit too extreme

for some of the voters, there was a

very left-leaning field of nominees

and tended to push or more towards

the centre and they went with music

that is safe, to be honest with you.

Bredau Maras is an incredible

artist, he's fantastic, he does not

provoke and poke and prod either

lyrically or musically in the way

that Kevin Lemar does and I think

that by opening the show with such a

powerful and confusing performance

from him, they may have scared off

some viewers as well.

Interesting he

pay tribute to Jay-Z because he

didn't do as well as a might have

hoped for, he was completely shut

out of the categories in which she

was nominated. .

I found that

astonishing. Bruno shouted out to

everybody in the best album category

and gave them all very nice tributes

but I do feel that Jay-Z may have

cancelled each other out because

that is almost the toughest choice

you can force a hip-hop fan or

critic to make. What would you

choose bestial mark what about Ed

Sheeran?

He was expected to be

nominated in a lot of categories but

quite a disappointing night for him,

really.

Well, he won both of the

categories he was nominated in which

is more than Jay-Z.

I suppose.

The

shock about him came during the

nominations because he is one of the

two or three biggest and most

popular artists in the world right

now and I think it was partially a

reflection of the Grammy nominating

committee is saying that we want to

diversify this year and

unfortunately that happened at the

expense of a couple of the most

popular artists and also it happened

at the expense of female artists.

There was a very low number of

female artists nominated, which is

why there were so few female wearers

and it's made for a very bad look

for them at a very unfortunate time

and they made it worse. The head

Academy is lovely very cautious and

politically correct in what he says

says that female artists need to

step up and if you look at it in the

context of what he said, I don't

think he meant it as harsh as it

sounded but it didn't come off well

and it happened at an unfortunate

time.

Let's get into some of the

politics. They had artists reading

from Fire and Fury, the book.

Trump

did not enjoy his own inauguration.

He started to get angry and hurt and

the stars were determined to

embarrass him.

There are some of the

artists reading from the book and at

the end of this we get Hillary

Clinton, who comes in to read an

excerpt and some people made the

point today that, too much

politicisation of these awards

ceremonies.

That's a fair point to

make. The audience certainly loved

it and the music industry in general

does tend to lean in that direction,

so they were reflecting the audience

that they knew. How that played in

the rest of the country is open to

debate. The New York and Los

Angeles, that would play very well,

but other parts of the country I

don't think it was as popular.

Really good to get your thoughts,

thanks for being in New York for us.

We hope he will be back with us

tomorrow. We are back at the same

time. Join us for that. See you

tomorrow.