12/07/2017 Outside Source

Hello, I'm Ros Atkins, this is Outside Source.

Donald Trump Junior has defended his meeting

with a Russian lawyer las year, who he believed had incriminating

Again, this is before the Russian mania, before they built it up in

the press. For me, it was opposition research. They had something.

The President is calling the greatest witch hunt

But here's his nominee for FBI Director in his

Is the future FBI director, do you consider this endeavour a witchhunt?

I do not consider direct A Mullen to be on a witchhunt.

Brazil's former president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has been

sentenced to nine-and-a-half years in jail for corruption

In an interview with the BBC, President Erdogan of Turkey has

denied claims that his country has jailed over 150 journalists.

TRANSLATION: Those people inside jail are not titled as journalists.

Some corroborated with terrorist organisations.

And some of the world's biggest tech companies are staging a day

of protest in support of net neutrality.

We'll explain what it is - and why it affects all of us.

Donald Trump Jr has a lot of explaining to do -

Yesterday he released emails which show him setting up a meeting

on the promise of damaging information on Hillary

Clinton that the Russian government wanted to supply.

Now Donald Trump Jr has spoken to Fox News.

Here he is on what his father knew about the meeting.

A lot of people will want to know this about your father. Did you tell

your father anything about this? It was such a nothing, there was

nothing to tell. I wouldn't have even remembered it until you started

scouring through the stuff, it was literally a wasted 20 minutes, which

was a shame. It is hard to imagine how the interview could have been

more gentle. We'll see more of that

interview in a moment. On the 3rd of June 2016

Donald Trump Junior received an email from this man,

Rob Goldstone. He's a music publicist and

acquaintance of Donald Trump Junior. In it, he explains a former Russian

business partner of Donald Trump had been contacted by a Russian

government official - and the offer was of "information

that would incriminate Hillary To which the reply is,

"If it's what you say, I love it". Four days later, Rob

Goldstone emails again - asking Donald Trump Junior

if he would meet with a woman called She was described in the email

as a Russian government attorney. The meeting took place two days

later at Trump Tower in New York. We know as much because here's

Rob Goldstone, on Facebook, checking in at Trump Tower

and announcing that he's there. Donald Trump Jr says no useful

info was handed over. That was much, much later in

proceedings. Here's more of his

interview on Fox News. In retrospect, I probably would have

done things a little differently. Again, this is before Russia mania,

before they built it in the press. For me, it was opposition research,

they may had concrete evidence to the stories that I heard about which

were probably underreported the years, not just during the campaign,

I wanted to hear it out but it went nowhere and it was apparent that was

not what the meeting was actually about.

Let me ask you a hypothetical, maybe you have thought about it since now

that it has become Russia collusion etc. Did you ever meet with any

other person from Russia but you know? I don't know, I have probably

met with the people from Russia but not in the context of a formalised

meeting or anything. Why would I? In the grand scheme of how busy we

were, it was much more important... This was a courtesy to an

acquaintance. Some people ask... Hear him asking

why would I, they look at an e-mail exchange during which he is offered

information about Hillary Clinton from the Russian government and

think, why wouldn't you? Here's the President's

verdict on that interview. "My son Donald did

a good job last night. He was open, transparent

and innocent. This is the greatest Witch Hunt

in political history. Let's see how Anthony Zurcher

describes it. He is live from Washington, DC. Sad as one word, bad

might be another? Absolutely. Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence,

everybody in the administration spent months saying there was no

corroboration or contact between Russian officials and members of the

Trump campaign, now we have actual e-mail correspondence that has

Donald Trump Jr not only meeting with someone that he thought was a

representative of the Russian Government but welcoming and

celebrating that fact, hoping he would be provided information that

was incriminating to Hillary Clinton. He says nothing came of

that meeting but the simple fact that there was an openness to such a

meeting, that Donald Trump Jr was able to get the chair of the

campaign, Paul Manafort, to sit on the meeting, as well as his

brother-in-law Jared Kushner, that undermines much of what we have

heard from the Trump White House over the past few months and shows a

little bit about how members of the Trump campaign were being so

defensive about Russian contacts. People like Jeff Sessions said he

had never met with Russian officials, only to have to

contradict that later. Michael Flynn said he did not talk with Russians

about sanctions, only to have to recant that and ended being fired

about it. It plays into perceptions about a lot of smoke circling the

Trump administration when Russia is the topic of discussion. There are

difficult perceptions, but in terms of the practical politics, has

anything changed for the White House? The White House has dug in,

formed battle lines again. It used to be there was no contact, no

interest in coordination with Russia, now it is a little

different, the contact was meaningless, nothing came of it, it

was before Russia became the big story. They have changed a bit, but

then you see stories in the New York Times and the Washington post about

the chaos going on within the White House. They don't know where these

leaks came from, these e-mails got out, the stories about Donald Trump

Jr all came out into the press and there is a lot of finger-pointing

within the West Wing of the White House, trying to figure out who is

trying to get Hugh, who will benefit and who needs to protect themselves.

That is the main story in Washington, but stay with us,

Anthony. Let's also talk about

Christopher Wray - this is Donald Trump's pick

to become the next FBI Director. His senate confirmation

hearing has begun. No surprises, there have

been a lot of questions And this one was specifically

about Donald Trump Jnr and the meeting we've just been

discussing. Let's see how that went. Here is

what I tell every politician, if you get a call from somebody suggesting

that a foreign Government wants to help you, by disparaging your

opponents, tell us all to call the FBI. To the members of this

committee, any threat or is it to interfere with our elections from

any nation state or any non-state actor is the kind of thing the FBI

would want to know. Google do you believe that in light of the double

junior e-mail and other allegations that this whole thing about the

Trump campaigning in Russia is a witchhunt? -- in light of the Donald

Trump Jr e-mail? I can't speak to the basis for those

comments... I am asking you. As the future FBI director, do you consider

this endeavour a witchhunt? I do not consider the former director to be

an witchhunt. In a normal situation the

President's nominee for director of the FBI directly contradicting the

president might be a story in itself, but it feels a little

overshadowed? This was a fairly routine confirmation hearing for a

nominee who was not all that controversial, but a huge shadow was

being cast over this based on James Comey's firing by Donald Trump, the

ongoing Russia investigation, Wray was asked time and time again would

you pledge loyalty to President Trump the wake only said he was

asked to, and cellar Christopher Wray said that my loyalty is only to

the rule of law and the Constitution. He said he was a

straight shooter, he said he was not going to pull any punches. All other

questions, at least from Democrats in particular, to be to try to make

sure that Wray was independent from Donald Trump that would be a strong

and standing up to pressure from Trump is James Comey was, maybe even

stronger. If anything happens in the next 50 minutes, Anthony, you know

where we are! Let's move a lot further south from Anthony.

He used to be President of Brazil - and he's just been sentenced

to nine-and-a-half years in prison for corruption.

Let's bring in Katy Watson, the BBC's correspondent in Brazil, she

is live from Rio. Could you start by telling us what his crimes? He has

been accused... Sorry, sentence for nine and a half years the corruption

and money laundering, it refers to a beach-front property that he

received in return for the construction company to be able to

get some contracts from a state-run oil company, Petrobras. This is part

of the country's biggest ever corruption operation, Operation Car

Wash, which started in March 20 14. It is a sentence for one of five

cases against him. Earlier you told me he will appeal this, he denies

his guilt? He says this is a primitive -- politically motivated

case, he denies wrongdoing and he will not be going to prison, he has

the right to appeal. In the past he has hinted perhaps wanting to run

for presidency again, so this sentence we have heard today does

not stop him from potentially running for presidency. If he is

convicted, if the sentence is upheld in the Appeal Court, he would not be

able to run, but in the meantime nothing much changes in terms of

that. If you look at the polls, he is the frontrunner for next year's

presidential elections. Even if he can run legally, it seems

astonishing he might have a chance given he has been found guilty of

these crimes? But you tell me he does? This case really divides

Brazilians. Millions of Brazilians see him as the country's saviour. He

was the most well-respected politician in recent history. When

he left power at the end of 2010 he had approval ratings of 80%. Buy a

big part of Brazilian society he is very much still supported, but the

other half feels he has become a symbol of the problems of corruption

in the country. There is still a lot of support if he decided to run for

president. I feel that every time we talk about the trouble of

politicians in Brazil, the accusation that the judiciary is

political comes up time and time again. Is there any evidence that

that is true? I mean... All of this, whether it's is Lula, Dilma, it

divides everybody. When you look at the judge who has brought the

sentence against Lula he is seen as a symbol of exactly that, some

people serious too politically motivated, others see him as a

symbol of cracking down on corruption. Operation Car Wash has

implicated so many politicians and people in power. A third of the

current Cabinet is linked to the corruption investigation. It is very

hard to separate politically and be able to remove it and say that these

judges have their views, people here all have views on whether the judges

are doing this to serve a political purpose or not.

Thank you for explaining it, Katy Watson, live from Rio.

An iceberg four times the size of London and thought to weigh

a trillion tonnes has broken away from Antarctica.

Fire Service advice to residents to stay put inside flats in Grenfell

Tower during the fire lasted nearly two I was, the BBC has learned. A

change in policy recommending residents tried to leave was made

one hour and 53 minutes after the emergency call. Tonight, survivors

confronted the senior investigating police officer looking into the

fire. Some others cannot sleep, because

when we sleep we dream of it! (INAUDIBLE)

. SHOUTING. The test of an investigation is whether it is done

properly, not quickly. An investigation of the skill will not

be quick, but it will be thorough. It will get to the bottom of what

ever happened and hope those two accounts, whether it be an

individual or an organisation -- and hold those two accounts.

This is Outside Source live from the BBC newsroom.

President Trump's eldest son has said he didn't tell his father

about a meeting last year with a Russian lawyer,

who was apparently offering documents that would damage

The main news from BBC World Service.

Scientists are demanding new rules to protect

A report prepared for the UN says nearly two-thirds of open sea falls

outside the jurisdiction of any one country - and that that leaves

ecosystems at risk as natural resources are exploited.

A boost for the Brazilian President Michel Temer -

the senate has approved labour reforms aimed at giving companies

more freedom in employee contract negotiations.

Perhaps only respite for the President -

Police in Berlin have raided homes after a huge solid gold coin

It weighs 100 kilograms, and the suspected robbers

are believed to have used a ladder and a wheelbarrow to

The suspicion is that it's since been melted down and sold.

If you're in the US and you've been to sites like Google,

Facebook and Amazon today, you may have seen pages like this.

Titled this is a battle for the future of the Internet.

The sites are running slowly - and it's on purpose.

It's a protests to changes being made to rules which govern

what's called net neutrality, this is the idea that all internet

Right now all Internet traffic is treated the same, no matter where it

has come from, where it is going or what it is doing. We call that net

neutrality. Without it, campaigners worry that Internet service

providers might be able to intentionally slow down your

Internet connection unless you pay more for things like video

streaming, or they warned there could be some kind of Internet fast

lane where big, rich companies could pay to make sure their site load

quickly but other, smaller sites macro would be stuck in touch with

their politicians to pressure them into supporting net neutrality. Over

70,000 websites will push people towards the NCC to make their voices

heard, we will push people towards the members of Congress. We want the

FCC to hear that net neutrality is widely popular, which it is. But net

neutrality has some very powerful opponents, including companies like

Verizon, AT, IBM, Cisco, Nokia and, crucially, the new head of the

US Federal Communications commission has spoken out against net

neutrality. Those against it say it adds unnecessary new regulation to

the Internet. They say it makes it harder for Internet service

providers to make back the money they invested in building the

infrastructure that gives people high-speed Internet. I have had

plenty of questions on this story. Technology analyst

Tim Mulligan explains. There was research last year which

showed that 35% of all download traffic on

the US Internet systems last year was because of Netflix.

And Netflix is not contributing to that? Yes, and this gets to the hub

of the issue. We are transitioning from an ownership culture to access

to ownership, effectively streaming. Netflix is the leading provider of

video on demand streaming services. In music you have Spotify with music

streaming services. What we are looking at is an increased

significant increase in demand upon existing infrastructure to provide

what the public wants, which is instant access to entertainment. Why

is the discussion not about who should bear the cost of the

infrastructure, rather than at the point where the consumer gets the

experience, whether that should be neutral? The reality, and this is a

painful reality for the streaming services, they are on very tight

margins. Especially if you are an entertainment -based streaming

business. Most of your revenue goes on providing the entertainment,

getting licences, paying for the content. I mentioned Netflix, they

have 6 billion... Is 6 billion content expenditure this year, only

20% of that is going on original content, the rest is to place the

content to serve the expectations of the general public, and that is for

very low competitive pricing compared to traditional pay-TV. What

changes are being proposed in the US that Amazon and Google etc are upset

about? We have already seen attempts to try to test net neutrality. So

look at T Mobile, they have launched a binge on viewing service which

includes major streaming services, so if T Mobile customers pay for a

premium tier of data access they get zero rating on access to streaming

services like Spotify, Netflix. AT have tried a different thing with

preferred advertising partners and they have been chastised by the FCC

because of this. Right now we are in a grey zone where people are testing

the boundaries, there is a recognition that change needs to

become but it is difficult to know where to turn to. Are we likely to

underpin a situation where different regions will have different

approaches to this? Inevitably, yes. If you look at the distinction

between the approach that the EU takes versus the approach that the

US regulators take, there are significant differences of, for want

of a better word, worldviews. The EU is primarily focused on providing a

good consumer level playing field. The US is more of a laissez faire

business friendly environment, which inevitably creates a contrast and

how this will play out going forward. We will keep an eye on that

story. The Royal Bank of Scotland is one

of Britain's biggest banks - and it's agreed to pay a US

regulator $4.7 billion dollars. It's to settle claims that it

mis-sold mortgage-backed securities. Many of these products proved

to be almost worthless, and were a significant factor

in triggering the global The bank still faces action

from the US Department of Justice. Here's what one banking

expert has to say. It's likely that there will be

billions more in fines to come. They'd really like to get it done

quickly, but it has been overhanging the shares. The UK Government

ownership position, for a long time. RBS says they are not sure when such

a settlement etc might occur. It is not a horrible products, the product

was abused and got out of hand. The wrong people got mortgage credits,

the banks did it for all kinds of awful financial incentives, they

were distributed to investors for all the wrong reasons, the wrong

incentives, but the concept but some people's financial records might not

be perfect and they should be banned from getting a mortgage is wrong. It

should be a market open to everyone. To my knowledge the only major

institution that still has to come to terms with this or is fighting it

is Barclays, another big UK bank. Staying with the US, this is Janet

Yellen, the head of the US central bank.

The boss of the US central bank has told Congress that the US economy

is healthy enough to sustain more gradual rises in interest rates.

Janet Yellen was reporting to members of Congress about bank

Let's bring in Michelle Fleury in New York. I feel like if I had a

dollar for every time we considered the possibility rates could go up

but then they don't in the end, I would be a rich man. What has

changed? I think the key thing is she is saying about the economy is

growing, albeit slowly, it continues to add jobs. Much as you point out,

that we have heard from her in recent months. The difference here

is that she said interest rates would not have to go much further to

reach a neutral level. What did she mean? A neutral level does not

encourage or discourage economic activity. The market interpreted

that as a sign that maybe we will see one more rate increase this

year, but generally speaking the pace of rate rises will be slow. As

a result, that boosted stocks, we have seen the Dow hit another record

close, up just over .5%. Why this analysis lead her to think that a

higher point than the one we are rat serves American people better? After

the financial crisis, to try and spur activity in the economy, to get

the economy going and kick-started, interest rates were brought to very

low levels. The question became when would we return to normal and what

with the new normal look like? That is the part, if you like, of the

journey we are on, the return to what the Fed describes as a new

normal, in other words rates are starting to climb back up that they

will not settle at the levels they were at before, in other words they

will be slightly below where they were before. So that period of when

we were used to seeing interest rates of around 5%, 4%, forget that,

we will be much, much lower. I only have 30 seconds, when might we get a

definitive decision from Janet Yellen? This is an evolving process

and monetary policy continues to develop. They have always said they

are watching the data. We have seen American jobs market improves, the

inflation picture remains weak. The other unknown is what happens to

fiscal policy, which is controlled by Congress and the White House.

Thank you for taking as too large, Michelle Fleury, live from New York.

We have been talking about net neutrality with the help of Dave Lee

and other guests, they have been discussing that in the US. We had a

tweet saying somebody needed more information, we will get that for

you later. Before we talk you to, Piazon

monsoons, let's bring an update on the winter storm battering New

Zealand. It looks very