Skip to main content

tv   100 Days  BBC News  February 15, 2017 7:00pm-7:46pm GMT

7:00 pm
hello and welcome to 100 days. members of donald trump's campaign team are accused of frequent contacts with russian intelligence. president trump calls the claims conspiracy theories and nonsense. he attacks the intelligence agencies for leaking information, and journalists for their reporting. michael flynn, general flynn, is a wonderful man. i think he's been treated very, very unfairly by the media. as i call it, the fake media, in many cases. after the chaotic downfall of the national security adviser, critics in congress want to know who is in charge at the white house. also tonight: a new administration, a new relationship and yet another attempt to find peace between the israeli's and the palestinians. the united states will encourage a peace and really a great
7:01 pm
peace deal, we will be working on it very, very diligently. nationalist, anti—immigrant, in power. why poland's controversial government provokes protest but still retains great support. welcome to the programme. i'm katty kay in washington, christian fraser's in london. nonsense is how president trump describes news reports that his campaign team were in regular contact with russian officials during the election campaign. he followed up with this tweet: "information is being illegally given to the failing @nytimes and @washingtonpost by the intelligence community — nsa and fbi? — just like russia." he was on a bit of a twitter storm this morning — at a press conference in the past couple of hours, mr trump had this to say. michael flynn, general flynn
7:02 pm
is a wonderful man. i think he's been treated very, very unfairly by the media. as i call it, the fake media, in many cases. i think it's really a sad thing that he was treated so badly. i think, in addition to that, from intelligence, papers are being leaked, things are being leaked. it's criminal action, criminal act, and it's been going on for a long time, before me. but now it's really going on. people are trying to cover up for a terrible loss that the democrats had under hillary clinton. i think it's very, very unfair what happened to general flynn, the way he was treated and the documents and papers that were illegally, i stress that, illegally leaked. very, very unfair. he only took two marker questions in
7:03 pm
that press conference, not from the mainstream media. we will get into that in a second. the reports that mr trump's campaign staff had repeated contact with russian intelligence officials came from the new york times. matt apuzzo is one of the journalists working the story. iam not i am not sure if he is there at the moment? no, he is not. we will come back to him. he will tell us all about the investigation they have been holding. before we do that, i wa nt to been holding. before we do that, i want to talk to you about what he said. the interesting thing about what he had to say about mike flynn is that it completely differs to what we heard yesterday from sean spicer, who said he had lost the trust of the vice president and had to go. today, the president comes out and says he is a wonderful guy. staggering, isn't it? we have donald trump rewriting the story on mike flynn. this administration is turning all of us into armchair psychologists. you wonder if donald
7:04 pm
trump has the gene that allows them to back down, or if he has been on offence always in his business life. the idea of saying my administration made a mistake in hiring somebody that lost our trust, that is just too difficult for him. as you said, yesterday sean spicer said he had lost trust and had to go. there is the president saying he is a great quy- the president saying he is a great guy. which is it? is he a great guy? in which case, why did he have to go? or is this the president out of step with his spokesperson? then he blamed the fake media, the new york times included in that. let's speak to matt, one of the journalists working the story. thanks for being with us this morning. let's talk about the contacts. the one thing you would have to say, the people on the campaign team, if your story is right, that were talking to the russians, the one thing the russians and the campaign team had
7:05 pm
in common is that they want to donald trump to win. what were they talking about through those months of the campaign? well, that is exactly right. the very nature of the question tells you why american intelligence was so worked up about this in the last several months of the campaign. we don't know, as i sit here right now, i don't know what they were talking about. there is no evidence of collusion right now between the tramp campaign and the russian intelligence agencies. —— trump campaign. what there is is a great deal of concern in the united states that you had a candidate for president that was making very favourable comments to russia, people in his inner circle making extensive contacts to senior russian intelligence officials and
7:06 pm
the hack, all happening at the same time. it's not proof of anything, but it explains why the us intelligence agencies were so spun up. context is important. that context is important. eight months ago, the details of this hack were coming to light. while the hacking is going on and they were investigating at, the campaign team we re investigating at, the campaign team were talking to the russians? that is exactly right. this is all happening... none of these things are happening in a vacuum, they are all happening at the same time. you can see, timing wise, we are just journalists, we are not intelligence agencies. we are setting here and saying, boy, that is awfully interesting. if you are the cia, the nsa, the fbi, you see the attacks happening at the same time you are seeing this outreach and contact that high levels in russian intelligence, of course that is going to get you concern. that's a big part of why we have been interested in this. just to be
7:07 pm
clear, do we know who it was in tramp's circle that was speaking to russian intelligence officials? —— trump's circle. we have identified the campaign chairman at one point. he had done some work with pro—russian government in the ukraine, as one of the people talking to the intelligence agents. he told is definitely there was no intentional contact. he correctly said that it is not like these guys are wearing badges that say russian intelligence. they don't have hi, my name is sergei and i am from the fsb. you could see how somebody who was doing business in the ukraine, eastern russia, might inadvertently make contact with russian
7:08 pm
intelligence agents. you can see how russian intelligence agencies might see people like that as a valuable target for intelligence gathering on a clandestinely at all. they might not even know. but it was the volume of the contacts that really gave the federal government here pause. 0k, of the contacts that really gave the federal government here pause. ok, i have to say, both the new york times and washington post have done really good reporting on all of this. it raises further questions, which is why people are talking about more investigations. there are at least four different us investigations into russia's actions going on, involving the fbi and various intelligence committees. yesterday we heard from a republican that things it is a mistake to launch another big investigation. i've been speaking to a democrat who thinks the opposite. congressman castro, you sit on the house intelligence committee. i imagine you're a bit busy at the moment? we are, in fact, very busy with everything that's going on. there are several investigations
7:09 pm
underway between the house, the senate and the fbi, into the trump team's various relations with russia. does america really need another one, do you think? well, you're right, there's investigations going on in both chambers to try to get to the bottom of what happened in the 2016 elections and russia's role in that. more information continues to come out, at least in media reports. we've not been briefed as part of the intelligence committee on all of this information, so i can't necessarily confirm it. but what has come out has been very disturbing, particularly the allegations about trump advisers actively talking to russian intelligence agents during the campaign. most of all, because i have said this, we need the answer to one question, whether any americans conspired with the russians, who hacked into our 2016 elections. i said that if, in fact, americans did cooperate, they must be prosecuted to the full
7:10 pm
extent of the law, no matter how high up the trail goes. ok, so the chairman of the intelligence committee you sit on said he is not going to investigate michael flynn and his phone calls to the russian ambassador. but he is going to investigate the leaks from the fbi to journalists that led to the breaking of this story. what do you make of that? i think the biggest question that we have to answer is whether anybody over there, whether it was general flynn or anybody else, was working with the russians. i understand that the fbi and the intelligence agencies want to make sure that people aren't leaking classified information. that's a legitimate concern. but the nation, most of all, is concerned with any kind of nefarious relationship between the russians and any american. you worked closely with the intelligence services. the president, just in the press conference with prime minister netanyahu, said earlier that these leaks are a real problem. he tweeted about it this morning. it is fairly unprecedented for an administration to have this much leaking going on. why do you think that
7:11 pm
the intelligence services are leaking so much news about what's happening in the administration? i can't say definitively who is doing the leaking. but i will say that we've never seen a president who has had a rockier, more hostile relationship with the intelligence services of the united states than we see in donald trump. congressman, who do you think is in charge of national security at the white house at the moment? well, you know, of course they have a national security adviser who is now the acting national security adviser. who is really in charge? well, donald trump, i think the president is always the commander—in—chief and ultimately in charge of decisions that are made with respect to national security. but there does seem to be rather a lot of confusion about the team surrounding him? there is a lot of confusion. i think, quite frankly, he has appointed people who,
7:12 pm
unfortunately, based on their background and their lack of expertise, are in over their heads. the other problem they have is that, aside from the cabinet appointments, of course some of them are in the senate still, aside from that, the ones that don't have to go through any kind of confirmation process, they've not hired up the staff that they need to fully staff even the nsc and the intelligence part of the white house operation. i don't know why they are dragging their feet on that. whenever you talk about national security, making decisions on tough issues, the president has a final say, but it really is a team effort and you need a full team out on the field. ok, congressman joaquin castro, thank you forjoining us on the programme. that need for a team is exactly what we we re that need for a team is exactly what we were talking about yesterday. the phrase in over their heads, i am hearing it a lot in washington. in the last hour the president has held a news conference with the israeli prime minister. fair to say benjamin netenyahu never really got on with president obama. in fact you may call recall that under president obama's instructions
7:13 pm
the united states abstained recently, on a un resolution demanding an end to the building of israeli settlements. the resolution was passed, the israelis were furious. so where does donald trump stand on the peace process? as far as settlements, i'd like to see you hold back on settlements for a little bit. we'll work something out, i'd like to see a deal being made. two state, one state, and i like the one that both parties like. i'm very happy with the one that both parties like, i could live with either one. and i believe that the great opportunity for peace comes from a regional approach, from involving our new—found arab partners. and we have been discussing that and it is something that is very different, hasn't been discussed before, and it's actually a much bigger deal, much more important deal in a sense. it would take in many,
7:14 pm
many different countries and would cover a very large territory, so... i didn't know that you were going to mention that, but now that you did, i think that it's a terrific thing. let's talk to dennis ross, a former us—middle east envoy — he'sjoining us from santa fe. i was wondering if you could clarify something for me, it seems as though the president was rather casually checking out decades of american policy on the two—state solution, one state, two states, i don't really mind? yes, it sounds like that. i wonder whether it is really a function of not really having formed a policy yet. in effect, he said the two—state outcome would be easier, but it is really up to the parties. it made a different way of saying what is to be the american
7:15 pm
position, basically, we can accept whatever the parties can accept. it is hard to imagine an outcome were the palestinians would accept something less than a state. it's ha rd something less than a state. it's hard to imagine an outcome, if you are also talking about bringing in the arab states to play a role, perhaps to provide a cover for the palestinians because, given palestinians because, given palestinian weakness and division, their capacity to negotiate right now is pretty difficult, to say the least. maybe they need an arab cove r. least. maybe they need an arab cover. it is hard to believe that arab states will provide a cover and say, yes, we can accept an outcome where there is no palestinian state. i think it is the fact that there was a kind of posture of saying, whatever the two sides can agree to is fine with me, that might be less chucking away the position of the united states, which has been a position, actually, since george dubya bush. it was the notion of a palestinian state. —— george w bush.
7:16 pm
as one of the authors of the clinton parameters, we were offering up not as american policy but as a bridging proposal to overcome differences between two sides. it was clear that benjamin netanyahu feels he has a new—found friend in president trump. he also praised his son—in—law. on the critical issue of iran, do you think the israelis might be disappointed? the trump administration has made clear since the election that they are not going to rip up the nuclear deal with iran? i don't believe that there will be disappointment on that.
7:17 pm
prime minister netanyahu has never liked the agreement, the comprehensive plan of action. he also realises it bides time. what he is concerned about is, at the end of 15 years, under the terms of the jcpoa, iran is allowed a large nuclear infrastructure with no limitations on size or quality. he worries that is another way of legitimising what will be iran having a nuclear weapon down the road. i think what he is probably saying to the president in private is, find a way to extend the timeline. i'm not concerned about the deal, i'm more concerned about them becoming a nuclear state later on. find a date with that, and we will be imperfect sink.
7:18 pm
on. find a date with that, and we will be imperfect sinklj on. find a date with that, and we will be imperfect sink. i wonder if there is a backdrop for peace? we still have continuing rocket fire into israel, settlement building going on. then you look at the politics of it in israel, and whether mr neta nyahu really politics of it in israel, and whether mr netanyahu really have the power to force through the peace process. his coalition partners are zionist and well to the right, they don't like the idea of a two—state solution at all? i think one of the reasons that the prime minister was relu cta nt, reasons that the prime minister was reluctant, as he put it, to use the label. he said he didn't want to use the label. he described the conditions he laid out in his speech in 2009, the spring of 2009, where he accepted a palestinian state, that he had a series of conditions related to it which he thought made it possible for israel to live with it. he repeated those conditions without using the label. why did he
7:19 pm
not use the label? because the head of the jewish home party in the coalition is dead set against a two—state outcome. he was putting enormous pressure on the prime minister to come out and drop the commitment to a two—state outcome. there is no doubt there is pressure from within the israeli government not to accept the two state outcome. think through what you heard from president trump. he made it clear he wants to pursue a deal, he made it clear he wants to pursue peace. he made it clear that is important to him. it doesn't matter what the label is, the end of the day. i don't see any palestinian ever accepting anything less than a state, and i don't see the arab states, even if you get that approach, accepting an outcome that does not produce a palestinian state. regardless of the terminology right now, if you are going to be serious about pursuing peace, you are going to come back to the outcome that yields what would be
7:20 pm
two states for two peoples. we might not be able to produce that any time soon, particularly given the weakness on the palestinian side and the fact that hamas controls gaza, given what is going on in israel, it is all daunting. the real challenge if you are engaged in peacemaking is notjust bringing if you are engaged in peacemaking is not just bringing arab states if you are engaged in peacemaking is notjust bringing arab states into the process, the real challenge is how do you believe to restore a sense of possibility when there is disbelief more than possibility? fascinating. thank you very much for being with us. he is a transactional president, we wonder whether his patience will last on the peace process. others have tried and failed. well as the israeli prime minister and the us president met today it was overshadowed by the turmoil which is rattling the white house at the moment. yes, events in recent days have really put them on the defensive and this story continues to unfold. good morning, america. white housing
7:21 pm
crisis. aids to president trump repeated contact with russian intelligence... america woke up to speculation that the white house is already in turmoil. a day after the national security adviser was forced to resign because he discussed us sanctions with russia before mr trump took office, and then lied about it, top republicans have joined calls for a wide investigation into michael flynn's links with moscow. it is all causing confusion and chaos in the administration. obviously, there is an administration that is in significant disarray as far as national security is concerned. as is so often the case, it is now a question of who knew what and when. on december 29, 2016, president obama announces sanctions, expelling 35 russian diplomats over moscow's interference in the us presidential election. on the same day, michael flynn holds a series of phone calls with the russian ambassador. on the
7:22 pm
13th of january, mr trump's spokesman, sean spicer, said sanctions were never discussed on the calls. two days later, vice president—elect mike pence goes on national television and confirms that account. what i can confirm, having spoken to him, is that those conversations that happened to occur around the time that the united states took action to expel diplomats had nothing whatsoever to do with those sanctions. on the 26th of january, the acting attorney general sally yates warns the white house it might have been misled by general flynn's account of the calls and the national security adviser is now open to blackmail by russia. it isa now open to blackmail by russia. it is a full two weeks later, on the 9th of february, that the vice president is made aware of those warnings. on the same day that the washington post reports that mike flynn had discussed sanctions with the russian ambassador. today's news
7:23 pm
reports of more extensive communications between members of trump's senior team and russia have clearly angered the president. trump's senior team and russia have clearly angered the presidentm trump's senior team and russia have clearly angered the president. if it turns out any deals were made, this would be not only unprecedented, it would be not only unprecedented, it would be not only unprecedented, it would be shocking and would be something that you would have to ta ke something that you would have to take active steps to ensure never happens again. it would leave a permanent stain on this administration. there are two big stories here, russia and the west wing dysfunction. it's simply not clear who is running national security right now. general flynn is out. senior policy adviser kellyanne conway is losing respect among the press. that leaves stephen bannon, senior policy adviser stephen mellor and son—in—law jarod krishna senior policy adviser stephen mellor and son—in—lawjarod krishna as the people closest to the president. the people closest to the president. the people shaping this presidency.”
7:24 pm
people closest to the president. the people shaping this presidency. i am fascinated by the split you are outlining. you have the three people there, steve baron, steve miller, then from the other side you have then from the other side you have the vice president, mike pence. there is a question of how the vice president comes out of this. according to the adies for the president, they talk every day, and yet for two weeks they don't bring up yet for two weeks they don't bring up the issue of mike flynn? we are a month into the administration, we have had a major breach between the president and his vice president. i'm not saying this relationship is irreparable, but we need a marriage guidance counsellor fast. there cannot be a perception that you have the president and his advisers, and the president and his advisers, and the vice president left in the dark, particularly because conservatives in this country like mike pence.
7:25 pm
that is important to the president as well. he is a real conservative, they can trust him on economic and social issues where they might feel that donald trump is wobbly, they know mike pence is the real deal and they don't want and squeezed out of a perception he has clout.|j they don't want and squeezed out of a perception he has clout. ijust wa nt to a perception he has clout. ijust want to share this quote from tony thomas. he is not the kind of guy that would come out with a quote like that for effect. he is a four star general. what did we hear from the congressmen earlier? effectively, this is not a competent administration and that is a concern for national security. you're watching 100 days from bbc news. temperatures continued the upward
7:26 pm
creep and felt pleasant if you had some sunshine. this was cornwall, but they were not so lucky in staffordshire. the weather system brought wet weather into the midlands. it is stretching all the way to western parts of scotland as well. some heavy bursts, clearing from eastern parts of england. showers in western parts of england and wales. midnight, a lot of dry weather to come, although there will be rain feeding into scotland. in argyll, strong and gale force wind with that. lighter wind across southern parts, so there could be some fog patches, slow to clear on thursday morning. low pressure is close to scotland on thursday. it will be a windy start to the day. continue across northern and western parts, we will see outbreaks of rain. that will ease along with the wind. you have some shelter in
7:27 pm
western scotland. a lot of dry weather in northern ireland to begin with, and across the bulk of england and wales, the odd shower dotted around. lighter wind across southern parts, feeling cold, especially in the countryside. some fog patches around as well. where you are starting the day that way, with mist and fog, it could be slow to clear. once it is gone, variable cloud and sunny spells. england and wales mainly dry, bar the odd shower. turning weather later in the day in northern ireland and the rain and wind easing in scotland. as for the temperatures, many places getting into double figures, get a bit of afternoon sunshine and it will feel pleasant. light wind for some of us on thursday night coming to friday morning. furtherfog patches forming. not widespread, but could slow you down before they clear. it tends to brighten up on friday before another weather system comes into western parts, bringing outbreaks of rain. it is mild. the average temperature is about eight
7:28 pm
or9 average temperature is about eight or 9 degrees. look at that, easily beating that over the next few days, and at the end of the weekend, into the start of next week, it could be very mild in a few spots. staying mild this weekend. a bit of sunshine? if you are lucky. the risk of catching some rain. more especially across northern parts of the uk. goodbye. welcome back to 100 days. members of donald trump's campaign team are accused of frequent contacts with russian intelligence. president trump calls the claims "conspiracy theories" and "nonsense". but democrat congressman joaquin castro told us he wants the reports investigated. we need the answer to one question — whether any americans conspired with the russians who hacked into our 2016 elections. and i've said that if, in fact, americans did cooperate, that they must be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, no matter how high up the trail it goes. and nationalist, anti—immigrant, in power — why poland's controversial government provokes protest
7:29 pm
but still has a lot of support. it's election year in europe, and right wing, populist parties are challenging the political establishment in germany, france and the netherlands. they hope to emulate the success of poland's anti—immigrant nationalist law and justice party, which swept to victory in 2015. their first year in power has been marred by controversy. but, asjenny hill reports, the party still enjoys widespread public support. familiar routines, but magdalena's country is changing. she is a journalist. she says it is getting harder to tell the truth about the polish government. i remember the communism. and i always wish that it
7:30 pm
never come back. every step which is made to destroy our law, to destroy our constitutional courts, to destroy free media, i can't accepted. turbulent times for poland. the right—wing law and justice party, or peace, has ruled for more than a year. it initially limited media access to parliament. it has increased its power over public broadcasters and appointed its ownjudges to public broadcasters and appointed its own judges to the constitutional court, defying eu condemnation. but after thousands of polish women took to the streets, it backed down over plans to all but outlaw abortion. translation: what is happening now is no different to what was happening five, ten, 20 years ago.
7:31 pm
it is not worse than other parties in the past. nothing has changed. the only difference is that now, only now when peace came to power, international media started to pay attention to what is happening in poland. this is catholic country. the peace party is close to the church, champions traditional family values, speaks a nationalist language. and away from the capital city, they like what they hear. for me, the value of family and religion is important. i think new governments support young people. the situation with immigrants, i think this is a really big problem, not only for poland but for germany and france. division, populism, nationalism. for poland, for its
7:32 pm
neighbours, the political landscape is shifting. the law and justice party spoke to voters who felt left behind by the liberal political mainstream. and that's why europe's established political parties are watching closely and with a degree of alarm. because law and justice is well over a year into its government. and despite the protests, despite the condemnation of its methods, it retains widespread popular support. jenny hill reporting. ijust want hill reporting. i just want to get some news coming in from the senate. we talked about chaos in the administration. it looks like another setback for donald trump. it looks like his labour secretary paik is in trouble. republicans have sent a letter to the white house saying they do not have the votes to get him confirmed. he has too many problems with
7:33 pm
republicans, it seems, in the committee. this could be another problem for him. he is a fast food millionaire who is opposed to the minimum wage. he has raised questions about overtime payments. not popular with labour organisations. it looks like he may actually be out before he is in. and all that on the back of the betsy devos saiga, where the vice president had to pass her appointment with the casting vote. let's go back to our top story. is the russian connection nonsense, a fake news media conspiracy theory, as the president calls it — or is there something more to it? last night, white house communications director sean spicer was telling us they had been pretty tough on russia. well, not during the campaign — here's a flavour. wouldn't it be nice if we actually did get along with russia? wouldn't it be nice? rusher, if you're listening, i hope you're able to find the 30,000 e—mails that are
7:34 pm
missing. i'm going to take a look at is, but the people of crimea, from what i hear, would rather be with russia. i don't know putin. he said nice things about me. if we got along well, that would be good. that is because he would rather have a puppet as president. you at the puppet. i do respect putin. i respect a lot of people. that doesn't mean i will get along with them. putin is a killer? you think our country is so innocent? we're joined from moscow by sergei markov, a political analyst and former member of the russian parliament. i think what a lot of people find difficult to understand in the united states is that donald trump is so tough on his own intelligence agencies, he calls them nazis, and yet he put such a premium on his loyalty to president putin?
7:35 pm
i think loyalty about president putin, it's natural for me, for example, as part of his team, and for the russian intelligence service. but not for donald trump. we believe that a new administration will start a war against russia, which —— will stop a war against russia started by the obama administration. we hope that washington will start to fight against al—nusra and stop terrorists. and we're hoping that donald trump will stop the supporting of neo—nazis in kiev, where a terrorist junta created civil war. we are not sure if this
7:36 pm
will happen or not. you want to build this new relationship with the white house. yet in the last few days we get lots of news of russian jets flying over american warships in the black sea. we get reports that russia is moving cruise missiles in russia. and we get a report there is a spy ship off the coast of delaware. that doesn't sound like you are trying to build bridges with washington? we still hope that we will be more able to build bridges and good relationships with the new administration. we think mike flynn is a victim. we very much are afraid that the cia,
7:37 pm
military intelligence, have some cooperation with terrorists in syria and in the ukraine. but nevertheless, donald trump's that macdonald trump —— for donald trump, the priority would be domestic politics, but not foreign policy. we still didn't see the foreign policy of donald trump at all. we see only domestic politics. anti—immigration, some project to build a wall with mexico. it is mostly domestic politics. we know that donald trump
7:38 pm
will follow its promises to the people of america, to pay tribute to the domestic policy but not the foreign policy. forgive me for jumping in. i want to ask you about the mood in the kremlin today. do you think there is some concern among russian officials that you speak to, close to president putin, that the white house may have to change course on russia? that they may actually be losing some of their close relationship with donald trump because of what is happening here in washington? i think in moscow people still look with small positive hopes of the new administration. in the kremlin there are good specialists on the united states. the specialists are predicting that
7:39 pm
donald trump will not —— will improve the relationship with russia and change something in domestic politics. we didn't have the solution because we have no illusion. but still have some positive feelings about donald trump. we look very positively on you, donald trump. we will pass that message the white house if we have a chance! thank you. this whole relationship is so interesting. we have had all along questions about why donald trump is so reluctant, given all the opportunities, to criticise vladimir putin. he has never done so. now these questions about contact. the russians and the trump campaign, all they had in
7:40 pm
common during the campaign, was a desire to get donald trump elected. and i have just desire to get donald trump elected. and i havejust given sergey desire to get donald trump elected. and i have just given sergey bubka insta nces and i have just given sergey bubka instances where president would be talking about russian activity and we have had nothing from the white house. if there are questions, we have just seen a press conference in the last hour where he only took two questions. one was from a christian broadcast network and the other was from a newspaper called townhall. not one of the mainstream media outlets. is he ducking the issue? yes, i think he is. there have been three press conferences in a row in which the president has only called on conservative news outlets. previous press conferences with heads of state, the president would call on the newswires, independent, nonpolitical news organisations like reuters and associated press, and they would be the ones who got the question. this is a definite departure. it means the american
7:41 pm
public is not getting the answers to the kind of tough questions that they would like to ask. that is it. thank you forjoining christian and i. we will see you back you're tomorrow. hello there. welcome to bbc news. the headlines: president trump has welcomed the israeli prime minister to the white house, saying he will work very hard on what he called a great peace deal between israel and the palestinians. the church of england's general synod has voted against the report on sexuality. malaysian police have arrested a woman in connection with the
7:42 pm
suspected poisoning of the half—brother of north korea's leader kim jong—un. the ftse and half—brother of north korea's leader kimjong—un. the ftse and the dax in london and frankfurt both up. about an hourand a london and frankfurt both up. about an hour and a half to go until trading ends in the united states. in the past hour, the ruling body of the church of england, the general synod, has voted against a report on theissue synod, has voted against a report on the issue of same—sex marriage. the report called on the church to welcome and support gay people but concluded that marriage in church should only be between a man and a woman. martin bashir is in central london. is this a surprise? well, it's an embarrassment. it's an embarrassment to the house of bishops. let me tell you how the voting broke down. 43 bishops voted in favour of this report. one
7:43 pm
against. in the laity, congregations of anglican churches throughout the country, 106 voted in favour, a.d3 against. but it was the house of clergy which voted 93 in favour and 100 against, those seven volts, which means this report has not been taken note which means this report has not been ta ken note of. which means this report has not been taken note of. what that means is it cannot form the basis of any moves forward for the anglican church in this country. it cannot be referenced again for at least five yea rs. referenced again for at least five years. so to some extent, the last three years of shared conversations, an impassioned debate, a personal plea today from the archbishop of canterbury, failed to achieve what they wanted. and let's remember. the bishops said this was not the end of the process. all they were saying was that at the moment marriage in church should remain a lifelong
7:44 pm
union between a man and a woman. that was turned over by the house of clergy, who decided that that was
7:45 pm


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on