Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Trump Gun Comment Triggers Political Firefight; Olympic Athletes Express Disdain for Cheats; Philippines President Insults U.S. Ambassador; The Legality of Roger Ailes Alleged Spying. Aired 12- 1a ET

Aired August 11, 2016 - 00:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[00:00:12] ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR: This is CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. Ahead this hour:

JOHN VAUSE, CNN ANCHOR: Words matter. Veteran journalist Dan Rather says Donald Trump's dangerous talk has now crossed a line. He joins us live.

SESAY: The President of the Philippines lobs a homophobic insult at a U.S. ambassador and then threatened martial law if anyone tries to stop his war on drugs.

VAUSE: And Olympic athletes sound off about doping and cheaters competing at the Rio games.

SESAY: Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm Isha Sesay.

VAUSE: I'm John Vause. Great to have you with us. NEWSROOM L.A. starts right now.

SESAY: The outcry is not fading though Donald Trump insists he was only trying to rally gun rights supporters. Hillary Clinton isn't buying it.

VAUSE: The Republican presidential nominee suggested Second Amendment defenders might be able to stop his Democratic rival from appointing justices to the Supreme Court. Critics slammed that remark as a veiled threat of violence. And at a campaign stop in Iowa Secretary Clinton said it was proof Donald Trump does not have the temperament to be commander-in-chief.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Words matter, my friends. And if you are running to be president or you are president of the United States words can have tremendous consequences. Yesterday, we witnessed the latest in a long line of casual comments from Donald Trump that crossed the line.

(END VIDEO CLIP) VAUSE: One of America's most experienced and iconic journalists is warning Donald Trump's comments about the Second Amendment are a new low in presidential politics which have crossed the line with dangerous potential.

That newsman is Dan Rather, anchor and managing editor of "CBS Evening News" for more than 20 years. He's the current anchor and managing editor of "Dan Rather Reports" for AXS TV. Dan is with us live from New York.

Mr. Rather -- thanks for being with us. Do you think --

DAN RATHER, ANCHOR/MANAGING EDITOR, "DAN RATHER REPORTS": Delighted to be with you.

VAUSE: -- Donald Trump actually realizes -- thank you, sir. Do you think Donald Trump realizes his words regardless of intention could motivate someone to carry out some kind of act of violence?

RATHER: I do. And I think to believe otherwise is to kid one's self that Donald Trump has demonstrated time and time again that he is so eager to dominate every news cycle that he says things that kind of pop into his mind.

We have gone months and months now with members of his campaign staff saying well, you know, he is going to stop this. He's going to go with the script. He's going to be more a standard candidate.

But I think what's important here and, you know, I've tried to be an objective and fair journalist but it's important that people understand this is not only not normal for an American presidential campaign, this is unprecedented. Nowhere in the modern campaigning for the presidency or for that matter anywhere in our history have we had a campaign and a particular candidate say anything close to what Donald Trump suggested in his statement of, what, about 48 hours ago.

And to believe that, well, he didn't know what he was saying or that he was joking I think most people whether they are Trump supporters or Clinton supporters or don't know what they are at the moment would recognize it for what it was and that was very dangerous talk.

So the reason I wrote on Facebook, this crosses the line. We've never had a candidate lower himself to this standard before. And it's been very hurtful to Donald Trump.

I have said for a long while that Donald Trump has a chance to win this election. If he doesn't win -- I still think he has a chance -- his chances have been damaged very badly but if he doesn't win the turn will be seen from a historical standpoint when he the statement about the Khan family who lost their son in combat. He made that statement and then followed up with the statement that could be read as an incitement to violence. If Donald Trump loses we will look back on this period as the time when the tide really began to turn.

VAUSE: On Facebook you wrote that journalists can no longer cover Donald Trump like a normal candidate. What did you mean by that? How should he be covered?

RATHER: Well, first of all, he should be covered with deep digging investigative reporting. Because he has said things that are demonstrably untrue, which is to say journalist are reluctant to use this word, things that are lies. So deep digging investigative reporting into what Donald Trump has said and what the record shows is number one.

[00:05:00] Number two is tough questioning -- the kind of questioning that ask a tough questions and follows up with a tough question and keeps following up in the questioning. Let's face it. There has been a lot of sweetheart coverage of Donald Trump; there has been some of Hillary Clinton as well.

But that's not what the great tradition of American journalism is about. The role of journalists -- any journalist worthy of the name is to see yourself as one who challenges the candidate. And there have been some exceptions but by and large Donald Trump has not been directly challenged with tough questions and follow up questions and for that matter I don't think Hillary Clinton has been often enough either.

VAUSE: Finally you said, if you look at the cycle here, Donald Trump causes outrage. He dominates the news cycle and then there is some kind of explanation or some kind of denial. In that context, would you say Donald Trump has been the most misunderstood presidential candidate that you have ever seen?

RATHER: No, I don't think he's the most misunderstood candidate. I don't think he is misunderstood at all. I think most people understand completely what he is saying. I have so much confidence in the American public in their ability to separate bull shine from brass tacks. And I think that's been the case with Donald Trump.

I think what is damaging so much these last few days and weeks has been people begin to say, look, these things are not just normal things that are said. They are unprecedented. It's a new low.

We as a people, as a society, we're better than this. We don't want a campaign that's -- doesn't deal with civility, decency and, for that matter, truth telling. And Donald Trump could have helped himself tremendously after, for example, he responded with the remarks about the Khan family and the loss of their son.

If he had -- if he'd come back right away and owned it and said look, I said that, it was my mistake. I own the mistake. I apologize and I hope to do better next time.

And again, after the gun remarks if he had come back and said some version of what I've just said, same thing and owned it. But you know, rhetoric is the candidate. When Donald Trump says these things, he has to own it whether he wants to or not, whether he acknowledges it or not, what he says is what he is and what people could reasonably analyze as the way he will behave when he is president. That is the reason Hillary Clinton is making some yardage in my opinion now, of raising questions about his temperament. VAUSE: Dan Rather, the anchor and managing editor of "Dan Rather

Reports on AXS TV. Thank you very much for being with us, sir. We hope you come back some time.

RATHER: Thank you very much. Appreciate being on.

VAUSE: Thank you.

Well, joining us here now in Los Angeles for the nuts and bolts of the actual campaign today is Howard Kushlan. He's a Democratic political consultant and CEO of Cruz Brand Strategy

SESAY: And CNN political commentator John Philips. He's a radio talk show host, political columnist for the "Orange County Register" and a Trump supporter.

Gentlemen, welcome.

VAUSE: Ok. Today Donald Trump didn't have a lot to say about those Second Amendment comments except maybe it was all the media's fault. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: I would actually say that the media is almost as crooked as crooked Hillary Clinton. I mean that. I mean that.

I mean, look at the way they covered that story yesterday. Was that disgusting? Was that disgusting?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAUSE: John, it seems a little out of character for Donald Trump to let something like this go so easy and also, just as a general comment, he seemed kind of low energy today.

JOHN PHILLIPS, TRUMP SUPPORTER: About out of character to take a few whacks at the media.

VAUSE: Well, we're used to that.

PHILLIPS: Look, I think he does have a point in the over coverage of the story. There has been one actual assassination attempt in this presidential campaign and it came against Donald Trump, not Hillary Clinton. It came at a rally in Las Vegas, Nevada where someone showed up and went for a police officer's gun and said that he was there attempting to take Donald Trump's life.

If you are Hillary Clinton and you're worried about your security, I think you should worry about your own staff right because they let a man who claims to be the president of Afghanistan who's a vocal Taliban supporter within feet of her at her rally in Florida. So she has reason for concern but it's not for Donald Trump's bad joke. It's because of her own security and staff. SESAY: We'll pick up on the issue of campaigns and who they let into

the rallies to sit behind the candidates. But I do want to follow up with you, John, just on something that Dan Rather just said. You know, this issue of the Trump campaign refusing to just own it when statements are made that, you know, people out there go too far. Wasn't this is a case where he should have just said come and said, you know, my bad. I own it. I went too far. Or I'm sorry if I offended you because at the end of the day he's going to need more than the folks already in his camp to win this election.

[00:10:03] PHILLIPS: I think it's a fair assessment that they should have acknowledged that it was, in fact, a joke and didn't land. It took him off message.

He had a speech on the economy in Detroit just the day before that put him on message and he's trying to win this election by racking up wins in the Rust Belt and I thought that speech was very effective going after those voters.

For the last two days all we have talked about is the joke. We haven't talked about the economic speech. We haven't talked about any of the other themes that he is looking to pound. And for that, I think it's a setback.

VAUSE: And (inaudible) 2008 when Clinton hinted at the assassination of her primary opponent, then-Senator Barack Obama. This is what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAUSE: So Howard is there a sort of agree of hypocrisy coming from some of the Democrats, coming from the Clinton campaign in this stance?

HOWARD KUSHLAND, DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Sure. Well, look I think it was wrong then for her to say that and I think it is wrong now for Donald Trump to make the statements he made. I think what is most important is to move our time machine forward to 2016 and to look at the election we're in today.

And Donald Trump's comments were completely uncalled for and to our discussion earlier, part of the problem with the Trump campaign is they are unable to move on from their mistakes. In most campaigns you make a mistake, you address it, you move on and you go on to the next day. The Trump campaign is unable to get out of its own way and cause two and three-day stories to last a week to two weeks.

SESAY: And you know, while the Republicans and Trump supporters are bringing up the 2008 comments made by Hillary Clinton, it is worth pointing out that she did apologize. Let's play that sound. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLINTON: If anyone was offended by anything that was said, whether it was meant or not, whether it was misinterpreted or not, then obviously I regret that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: Half hearted but --

VAUSE: At least a recognition.

KUSHLAN: In politics that's an apology.

SESAY: I mean shouldn't we be seeing something --

VAUSE: -- similar to that.

SESAY: -- something similar to that.

PHILLIPS: Look, it was beyond that though. In 2007 they made a movie about the assassination of George W. Bush. I remember debating that on the radio and the argument I got in return was it's artistic integrity.

VAUSE: This is a day when there was a continued drip, drip, drip of Clinton's e-mail, the scandal that will not go away -- 300 of those e- mails released by a conservative group known as Judicial Watch. Critics say they prove what is an inappropriate relationship between the secretary of state Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. Trump though is a little more direct. Here's what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: A couple of very bad ones came out. It's called pay for play. And some of these were really, really bad and illegal. If it's true, it's illegal. You paying and you're getting things. It's illegal. I mean, it's illegal.

We'll see what happens with it, folks. We'll see what happens. But it's very serious stuff. It's very, very serious. I don't know that it can be any more serious than deleting or getting rid of 30,000 e- mails.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VAUSE: That's what I meant by low energy. The Clinton campaign just put out a statement, "Hillary Clinton never took any action as secretary of state because of donations to the Clinton Foundation."

Howard -- that does not seem to be an adequate explanation, does it?

KUSHLAN: Look, I think the Clinton campaign has had difficulty this entire cycle explaining this e-mail issue and coming up with a set of answers that make sense and that follows the line. I do think two things remain though. I think the FBI chose not to prosecute. I think that's important. I think -- granted I haven't read all the e-mails but it seems that it's mostly staff to staff communications. And I think from everything I know, Donald Trump can cause more problems internationally with a tweet than anything that's been contained in Hillary Clinton's e-mail so far.

PHILLIPS: This is her Achilles' heel. Only 30 percent -- actually we're up to 34 percent than 30 percent -- but 34 percent of the American public thinks that she's an honest person -- ok. When you look at these e-mails and you look at the potential of pay to play here where you go back to the Clinton administration you have the Mark Rich pardon which is how they ended the eight years there.

And I think that is the gold standard for how the Clintons conduct themselves. I think that is how they do business. She better hope that Julian Assange doesn't have e-mails that show her doing the Mark Rich pardon at the State Department using the Clinton Foundation as the shell.

SESAY: Yes, I hear you say that but as long as your candidate continues with this near daily kind of some would say foot-in-mouth exercise, then you know, they shift the attention away from these e- mails and the (inaudible) and on to making it a referendum about Donald Trump.

PHILLIPS: Yes, he needs to go on a very long vacation. And he needs to let us talk about this e-mail thing without stepping in it and changing the topic.

SESAY: Move the candidate off stage, basically.

PHILLIPS: He needs to go on a Kathy Lee (ph) cruise.

VAUSE: So maybe we can move on to Mark Foley who was in the Trump presser.

[00:14:55] SESAY: Yes, so you brought up the question about who is in the crowd. So just days after the Trump campaign made all this noise, if you will, about Omar Mateen's father appearing behind Hillary Clinton, here we have today in Florida disgraced ex-congressman Mark Foley turning up behind Trump -- a man who has resigned because he sent sexually explicit texts -- messages to young boys.

Isn't it time that we hear something from you guys on that?

PHILLIPS: Mark Foley is a good guy that sent inappropriate e-mails. The man that was at the Hillary Clinton rally is a guy that justified a terrorist attack at a nightclub by saying my son saw two guys kissing in Miami and that's what set him off..

VAUSE: Howard?

KUSHLAN: Critical difference. Two things -- I'm not sure if I would call someone who sent sexual text messages to an underage kid good guy. But beyond that you saw the Clinton campaign immediately repudiate, disavow, disown --

VAUSE: It took like a couple of hours, but yes.

KUSHLAN: Fair enough.

And you don't see that from the Trump campaign on issue after issue. I wonder if -- one of the problems he has is his brand is not to apologize ever. And so he lives with this stuff for as long as it lasts. And so I almost thought he was trolling us today when he did what he did because not only did he have Foley behind him but he specifically took the time to say look who we see who's behind me.

If someone's behind you that knows the campaign then raise their hands. So another day that we're talking about a Trump misstep instead of other important issues.

VAUSE: Ok. See you next hour.

SESAY: Yes, indeed.

VAUSE: Thank you both.

A short break here. When we come back on NEWSROOM L.A., the cold war in the water as U.S. and Russian athletes go head to head in the Olympic pool.

SESAY: Plus, more athletes speak out against doping. What American gold medalist Michael Phelps and Conor Dwyer have to say.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SESAY: Hello, everyone.

American swimmer Katie Ledecky has won her fourth Olympic medal, one gold in the women's 4x200-meter freestyle relay. The 19-year-old anchor of the U.S. which also includes Allison Schmidt, Lea Smith and Mai Dorado. Ledecky already has two other golds and a silver in Rio.

VAUSE: Meanwhile we will not see a rematch of the Cold War in the pool as American Lilly King failed to qualify for the 200-meter breaststroke finals. Her Russian rival Yulia Efimova finished second in her semi-final heat.

SESAY: CNN World Sports' Christina MacFarlane joins us now live from Rio. Christina -- thank you so much for being with us at this ungodly hour, if you will.

The Cold War in the swimming pool snuffed out.

CHRISTINA MACFARLANE, CNN WORLD SPORTS: That's right -- Isha. You know, this Russian doping crisis has really been the standout story of the games ever since the IOC allowed 271 Russian athletes to compete here. What they didn't plan for was the athletes themselves -- the other athletes speaking out on the matter.

And one of the pin ups of this Olympic Games so far one of the breakthrough stars, of course, has been Lilly King. And she's kind of become a bit of an unofficial spokesperson for clean sport after what we've seen in the past few days. She spoke out against doping and, of course, against her rival in the pool, Julia Efimova, who herself has been twice banned for doping.

And tonight, of course, we saw that there won't be a rematch of the showdown between these two swimmers after Efimova qualified in the 200 meter semifinal and Lilly King did not. But I'll tell you what. What Lilly King's words have done is they've inspired other athletes to start speaking out about the Russian doping crisis and having their voices heard on it.

It's the first time actually I think in Olympic history that we have really seen this happening. And people here are beginning to ask if it is the athletes themselves who can now perhaps force real change in this doping debate as our Don Riddell has been to find out. Have a look at this.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DON RIDDELL, CNN SPORTS: It takes sacrifice and determination to make an Olympic champion but it takes courage and leadership to become a role model. At the age of just 19 American swimmer, Lilly King has achieved both here in Rio taking a stand against her Russian rival in the pool and all drug cheats saying "It just proves that you can compete clean and still come out on top."

MARK KING, LILLY KING'S FATHER: Hopefully this will create some momentum with the governing bodies with FINA, with you know of course the governing body of swimming and hope that this could give them some momentum to push a little harder to do it right.

RUTA MEILUTYTE, LITHUANIAN SWIMMER: I think it was very brave of Lilly, you know, just after she became a champion to speak out and be brave to show her opinion and I think she said what we all think.

RIDDELL: It all started when King's Russian Yulia Efimova declared herself the number one after winning in the semis. Among other things, the Russian was caught doping in 2013 and was banned for 16 months. But King beat her to the gold medal saying, "You wave your finger number one and you have been caught drug cheating. I'm not a fan."

Neither it seems is the Olympics' most decorated athlete, Michael Phelps who has voiced his support. After the revelation of a state sponsored doping program, Russian athletes have been cast as the chief villains of the games, rekindling sentiments of the Cold War.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, it's not war it's an attempt to mix politics and sport but I wouldn't want to do that because the international sporting tent was an idea of a nice little island where everybody was friends, talked, make peace. We in Russia have a strong state and strong sportsmen and it seems that disturbs someone.

RIDDELL: But it's not just the Russians and it's not just the Americans taking a stand. The Australian gold medalist Mack Horton clashed with his Chinese rival, Sun Yang found to be taking prescribed heart medication which was on the banned list but no longer is.

KITTY CHILDERN, CHIEF OF MISSION, TEAM AUSTRALIA: We won't be apologizing. (inaudible) won't be apologizing and the Australian Olympic Committee won't be apologizing. Mack, as I just said had every right to express that opinion. He has strong opinions on the need for clean sport.

RIDDELL: Athletes used to assume that their governing bodies would protect them from cheats but that confidence has been eroded because of poor tests, inconsistent punishments and politics.

[00:25:01] ADAM NIELSON, 2004 SHOT PUT GOLD MEDALIST: Athletes have to come together and say this is what we demand. This is where we're going to go with it and you guys, the IOC and WADA need to follow us for a change.

CONOR DWYER, U.S. OLYMPIC SWIMMER: People are starting to speak up about it and some of the people I have raced against have failed tests and that stinks to be racing people that have failed a test before.

RIDDELL: There are many questions that need to be answered after these Olympics; rules and policies that need to be addressed. The athletes say they've been too quiet for too long. But they are learning fast and they are not prepared to let it lie.

Don Riddell -- CNN, Rio.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MACFARLANE: The athletes here in Rio growing in confidence every time one of them speaks out on this matter. I think it's an issue that is going to run and run throughout these games in the weeks to come -- guys.

SESAY: I think you're right. Christina -- thanks, appreciate it.

And Christina will be back later this hour with a live edition of World Sports from Rio.

VAUSE: And in the meantime, we'll take a short break.

When we come back the President of the Philippines insulted the U.S. ambassador with a homophobic slur. Was this a one off or a sign of a greater diplomatic row? That's still to come here on NEWSROOM L.A.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VAUSE: Welcome back, everybody. You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm John Vause.

SESAY: And I'm Isha Sesay.

The headlines this hour -- Iraqis are furious about a deadly fire at a hospital in Baghdad. Flames broke out in the maternity ward on Wednesday. At least 11 babies died of asphyxiation. An electrical short circuit is suspected. Some Iraqis are demanding the health minister resign.

[00:30:03] VAUSE: In Aleppo, Syria, a Russian general says a cessation of hostilities will start in a few hours to allow food and medicine into the city. It's not clear if it will be observed by all sides. The general says a three hour humanitarian window will take place daily, but the U.N. says that's just not long enough to stop horrific humanitarian tragedy. It is calling for a weekly cease fire of 48 hours.

SESAY: At least eight people were killed in two separate bomb attacks in Southern Turkey on Wednesday. One explosion targeted a police bus. Turkish government officials are blaming the Kurdistan Workers Party or PKK. That group wants great autonomy in the Kurdish region. The U.S., Turkey and EU consider the PKK a terrorist group.

VAUSE: And in a few hours we expect Germany's interior minister to introduce new security measures after recent attacks. Police on Wednesday carried out raids across the country and said that they arrested a man who has suspected links to ISIS.

SESAY: Now the U.S. is asking the head of the Filipino embassy to clarify controversial comment made by the president of the Philippines. Rodrigo Duterte used a homophobic slur when in referring to the American ambassador to his country. Mr. Duterte said he used insult when talking to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

VAUSE: We are about to play part of the speech when he used that slur and other profanity to describe Ambassador Philip Goldberg.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RODRIGO DUTERTE, PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES (through translator): I told him your ambassador is a gay son of a bitch. I was annoyed with him for interfering in the elections, giving statements here and there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: All right, let's discuss this diplomatic storm with our very own Kristie Lou Stout. She joins us live from Hong Kong.

Kristie, good to see you.

OK, so these comments made by President Duterte about the U.S. ambassador, was this simply about shock value like other controversial comments he has made in the past, or does it signal an actual shift in U.S.-Philippines relations?

KRISTIE LU STOUT, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: This appears to be a one-off personal attack directed at the U.S. ambassador to the Philippines. In fact, we just received this statement from the foreign affairs spokesperson of the Philippines insisting that despite these rude comments that were made, the alliance has not been damaged.

It says this, quote, "What I can tell you is that the Philippines-U.S. relations remain strong." And let me give you some context as to why Duterte would used a homophobic slur or such, you know, profane language I wouldn't dare to repeat on air.

He was accusing the U.S. ambassador with interfering with the elections.

Three months ago, Duterte was running for office. And at that time on the campaign trail he used, let's face it, rather despicable language, to make sex slur about the mass rape and murder of a missionary in Davao, Philippines in 1989. That generated international uproar.

There was international criticism coming in from the Australian ambassador as well as from the U.S. ambassador. And apparently Duterte has not forgotten that criticism hence the comments that he made directed at U.S. ambassador Goldberg.

As we mentioned, the State Department still seeking further clarification.

SESAY: When it comes to the Philippines' foreign policy and these comments have kind of brought it into sharp focus, are we looking at a tilt away from the U.S. towards China?

Because while we are getting these comments about the U.S. ambassador, it does appear that there is some movement towards a warming of ties with Beijing.

STOUT: Yes, very interesting event taking place earlier this week, actually, here in Hong Kong. We saw the former president of the Philippines Ramos making an unofficial visit here. He called it an ice-breaking visit, where he was here to visit with friends of the Philippines as well as seek additional investment, Chinese investment for the Philippines.

We attempted to reach out to him asking for an interview that was turned down because he was here in an unofficial envoy capacity. But it does seem that this could be the beginning of some sort of a thaw in this very frosty, thorny relationship between the Philippines and China. At the same time, when its President Rodrigo Duterte doesn't seem to be going out of his way to cozy up to the United States.

SESAY: Yes, indeed. A lot going on.

Also want to turn now to some comments that Duterte has made regarding martial law, threatening to declare it if the country's judiciary interferes with his ongoing war on drugs.

I want to play what he said on Tuesday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DUTERTE: (SPEAKING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SESAY: Kristie, I mean, remarkable comments given the Philippines' history.

But let me ask you this. How much of a hold does Duterte have on the military? How easily could he pull something like that off?

STOUT: Yes, and that's the key question here. Legal experts in the Philippines, they point out that Rodrigo Duterte does not have absolute power to declare martial law.

As you just suggested, there are many bitter memories of martial law in the Philippines. Martial law was declared under Marcos. And that paved the way to the long-term dictatorship in the country.

Many people in the Philippines, they don't want to return to that. So this, with his comments about this threat of martial law, this is again an example of the bravado and bluster and the tone of the presidency under Rodrigo Duterte.

Back to you, Isha.

[00:35:00] SESAY: Kristie, good to have you with us.

Thank you, my friend.

All right. Well, up next, the downward spiral of former "Fox News" chief Roger Ailes. He is accused of spying on his enemies even his own journalist. It's not ethical, but is it legal?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VAUSE: It's been just over a month now since fired "Fox News" anchor Gretchen Carlson filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against her former boss Roger Ailes.

Since then, the scandal has ballooned with multiple women making similar accusations. Reports Ailes allegedly spied on his own staff and allegedly ran a black ops unit from within the company targeting his enemies.

But could a controversy like this go from scandalous to criminal?

CNN's legal analyst Paul Callan joins us now from New York with more on this.

So, Paul, we don't know how much more dirt there is still to come. But given what we already know, what's already been revealed, what's the legality against a CEO allegedly hiring private detectives to spy on his staff.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, John, it sounds terrible. I mean, he's got a black ops unit allegedly that he's using on his personal enemies and the enemies of "Fox News" and you know maybe even some of this women who make complaints about sexual harassment.

And if he were a politician in the United States doing the same thing. Richard Nixon, for instance, who by the way, Roger Ailes got his start working for, that would be illegal. Because politicians use governmental agencies to do their spying.

But to hire a private detective, if you are a private corporation is perfectly legal. And as long as they are not wiretapping or engaging in illegal surveillance and that sort of thing, probably there would be no criminal charges arising from it.

VAUSE: OK, let's assume the information was gathered lawfully and then used to smear someone's reputation. Any criminal liability there?

CALLAN: No. In a lot of countries around the world, if you smear somebody's reputation, that can actually be a criminal act. In the United States, however, it is not.

You could bring a civil case for money damages. You could sue the person who smeared your reputation if what was said was inaccurate. However, nobody goes to jail for that sort of thing.

So I don't think you're going to see criminal charges. Now there's one possibility here. I should say two possibilities. One, of course, would be if Roger Ailes was using this black ops unit for personal purposes and didn't report the value of the unit as income, that could be a form of income tax fraud.

[00:40:06] The second way that it could become criminal is if you found damaging information about somebody, and then you use that information to try to blackmail them, that would be a criminal offense.

But in the absence of those two things and I have to add, we haven't seen anything so far indicating that that happened, this is going to be a suit for money damages probably. Mostly by the women who say that they were sexually harassed at the "Fox News" network.

VAUSE: OK. Let's look at the issue of the negotiated settlement, which we understand is underway with Gretchen Carlson.

The "Vanity Fair" has been reporting that "Fox" actually has a sit at the negotiating table. Even though they are not named in the lawsuit, it's personally against Roger Ailes.

So assuming that there is some kind of settlement and assuming that because "Fox" is at the table, they will bank roll or pay out at least some of it, do the shareholders of "Fox," do they have any legal recourse here to complain about this, to stop that from going through?

CALLAN: Well, they certainly have the ability to complain about whether the corporation was properly monitoring how, you know, Roger Ailes and other top executives were acting with support staff.

However, these kinds of settlements are actually quite common in the United States now. We have a lot of sexual harassment claims being brought against large business entities and they usually end up in sort of a private secret mediation or arbitration process and the settlement that's negotiated is never revealed. So it's likely that Gretchen Carlson's case will wind up this way and that the public probably will never hear the details, nor will the stockholders, I might add.

VAUSE: So there just doesn't seem to be a lot of transparency in all of this. I guess there's a purpose for that.

CALLAN: Well, yes, there is a purpose for it. And there's -- a lot of lawyers would say there's a very good purpose for it. Because if everything is public in these lawsuits, they don't get settled. You wind up in court. And it's a long dragged out process. Whereas you can swiftly resolve it, and if somebody has been harmed, if a woman has been sexually discriminated against, she can get a settlement quickly. And similarly, it's possible that a person accused of it can be exonerated more quickly. And, of course, this is very personal and private stuff. Nobody wants it publicly aired.

Of course, the flip side, John, is with a company as big as "Fox" and as important as "Fox" in the politics of the United States, doesn't the public have a right to know what's going on?

I mean, Roger Ailes was calling the shots basically and influencing presidential campaigns. Shouldn't we know what goes on at that network? Because let's face it, news networks are kind of quasi- public. They have such an enormous public influence. But the law says otherwise. They are treated the same way any other corporation is.

VAUSE: They coined a phrase, "We report, you decide."

CALLAN: Fair and balanced, John. Fair and balanced.

VAUSE: Always.

CALLAN: Yes.

SESAY: Fascinating observation there about the transparency.

VAUSE: This is the issue. Yes. And as Paul is saying, so many of these lawsuits and they all get settled behind closed doors.

SESAY: We should keep watching.

And thank you for watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I am Isha Sesay.

VAUSE: I'm John Vause. Stay with us. "World Sport" is next live from Rio. And then we will be back with another hour of news from all around the world.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(WORLD SPORT)