hello, everyone. i'm john berman in new york. wolf blitzer is off today. a north korean missile launch has raised the stakings for a possible nuclear crisis. in a cnn exclusive, u.s. officials say the two-stage missile launched by north korea is a brand new weapon that has not been seen before. barbara starr joins me now. what have you learned? >> reporter: what u.s. officials are telling me is they have not seen this missile before. when they initially looked at it after the launch, they thought it was a missile they were familiar with, something called the kn-17 liquid fuel, but after looking at all the data, all the intelligence, they found that it was a two-stage missile, perhaps
a deception. they put out the missile that was expected and put out another on top of it. why is that so significant? it's because this is now the configuration that gives the north koreans the eventual capability for that intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the u.s., are they there yet? no, this is just demonstrating that capability. they will have to make a lot of improvements to actually make it hit an intercontinental target, specifically the west coast of alaska. but what the u.s. is seeing, is north korea living up to the threat. they said they were going to test, they said they were going to develop, and that's exactly what they're doing. now putting president trump in the position as he heads towards the g-20 summit meeting with the russian president, with other world leaders, having to come up with a plan about what to do. we saw the u.s. yesterday fire
back a drill, a test of its own missiles that could strike targets in north korea. nobody's looking for a military confrontation, but people are looking for a u.s. solution to this, president trump may have to come up with some ideas for it. >> it will be interesting to hear what he says when he lands. the tensions over north korea will loom large over the g-20 summit, that is where the president is headed right now, it is only one of the few major tests for the president. right now he is on his way to poland, one of the most important aspects of this trip in poland, then germany. the president's face-to-face meeting with russian leader vladimir putin. nic robertson in hamburg, germany, where the g-to will take place. what are we expecting in this one-on-one between the president and the russian leader? >> reporter: the kremlin gave us an indication, they said there wouldn't be time for president putin in this meeting with
president trump to fully explain the russians' views and understand about ukraine. you can read between the lines very clearly, they'll talk about it, don't expect anything to happen. on syria, the russians are saying they want to talk about a pathway to peace, how to get peace there, they're promoting some peace talks and after talking to syrian opposition the past few days, they say those talks are dead, but clearly russia and putin are going to try to push their agenda, saying we will work with president trump on a peace process in syria. so i think we can expect those topics to come up, but don't expect any big ground to be covered. undoubtedly the pair of them will mention north korea as well. >> and of course president trump will also meet with the chinese
leader xi jinping. it seems like a lot has happened since that meeting. >> $1.4 billion worth of arms sales to taiwan, the state department downgrading china's human rights rating in the world to sort of one of the lowest in the world. you know, the trade differences between them, president trump has tweeted today, the u.s. made some of the worst trade deals in history, why should we continue with those deals with those countries that do nothing to help us, there's a real expectation on the chinese parepart that there may be tariffs or quotas of what president trump calls of dumping of chinese steel. there are those hurdles between the pair of them before they can even begin to see eye to eye, on north korea. russia, putin and xi jinping
yesterday agreed that the united states was part of the problem in north korea, that they should deescalate and not have their military activity with the south korean forces there. and that they should remove the missile defense system from south korea. this pair, rather president trump and xi jinping are so far apart when you look back at mar-a-lago this year, that seems years ago, not just months ago. >> nic robertson in hamberg, let's talk more about the foreign policy minefield that president trump will soon have to navigate. ambassador, if i can, i want to start with north korea, this is a new kind of missile, a two-stage intercontinental ballistic missile, how does this change the calculus for the united states?
>> north korea has had missiles and war heads, but the idea of reaching the continental united states is a major development. one way or other we have got to respond, either live with it. attack it, with all the uncertainties of what that would lead to or to try to negotiate some limits on it. those are essentially our three choices, at the moment we haven't chosen, but we're going to have to seener than later. >> you say acceptance not really palpable, military intervention, not really realistic either. you say the united states needs to explore the possibility of negotiation. what would that look like with north korea? >> i would say the other two are realistic options, they're risky either way and we may come down to them if negotiates don't work. and if we're going to try negotiations, i think we should, because they might work, but if they don't, that's a useful step to take before you take
something that's costlier and riskier, some kind of a freeze on production, testing, inspections, we in turn would probably have to give them a degree of diplomatic recognition, perhaps some sanctions reduction. it wouldn't solve the problem, it would not get them out of the nuclear business, but it would significantly bound or limit the problem. >> so you do say we should not rule out the possibility of military action? >> but at the same time, you also say that the u.s. should never use the terminology surgical strike when dealing with north korea, what do you mean by that? >> surgical strike is one of the phrases that ought to be banned. it implies that you can do something small and antiseptic and it will solve the problem, but here if we were to use military force against north korea, it would require an awful lot of force, because we would have to take out every known nuclear and missile size plus take out a lot of their ability to retaliate, essentially going
to war and we can't rule out that the north koreans would not retaliate with thousands of missiles and artillery shells and so forth. we would have to go into it assuming we're going to be in a second korean war. so the idea that there's something small and antiseptic or surgical should be jettisoneded from the debate. >> what do you think about what trump said, trade between north korea and china grew 40% in the first quarter. so much for china working with us, but we had to give it a try. the president made a show of the chinese president meeting at mar-a-lago, and he was talking about him kindly. now he seems to be taking a different approach. >> china has the most influence over north korea. it doesn't have control, but influence. they haven't use ed all of it. so i think it's legitimate to
put pressure on china to use the leverage that it has. i'm not sure speaking about it publicly is appropriate. >> the president has been very public all of a sudden about pressuring president xi, he's been going on twitter, these are statements that the whole world can see. >> china has politics too, and you have to ask yourself is this likely to get the response we want? i say not because the chinese don't want to be seen to be pressuring north korea because they in turn are being pressured by the united states. there's strong nationalist sentiment there, you have to take it into account in how we go about our diplomacy. >> this is not the only thing on the president's plate, he also has to deal with russian president vladimir putin, they will have a face-to-face meeting on friday.
for now the kremlin says they won't bring up russian meddling. >> putin will have an agenda, we should have one as well. and this needs to be on the agenda, what they did is totally illegitimate. and i think we also should put down a marker that if they continue against us or anybody else, there will be further repercussi repercussions. >> it's interesting because you are someone that the president says he likes and listens to. i think he's a big fan of your commentary on tv. if the president is listening right now, what do you have to say to him about the g-20. >> he should be focussing on the meeting with all the foreign leaderings, because he's also going to have issues of climate change, saudi arabia, iran, this is a loaded inbox he's walking into in europe right now. >> well, maybe he will read the
transcript afterwards and if he did read the transcript, what would be your advice regarding president putin? >> we ought to push on ukraine, to get them to cease doing the destabilization in the east, make clear there won't be any sanctions relief until they do. we got to push hard on the interference in our elections, but we ought to be open to areas of cooperation, say in syria or anywhere elsewhere we can, conceivably, north korea, though i'm more worried about russian mischief making there, where they are complementing what china has done in being a source of support. we should have a broad relationship with him. i don't think favors is something we should do for him. meetings like this to me in principle are welcome as long as they are conducted in a smart, tough way. >> we'll have to wait and see
the results. it will be a fascinating few days. all right, poland pulled out all the stops for president trump, why he can expect a warmer welcome there than from european leaders. the fallen offer and the moment s leading to her death. in helping prevent another stroke. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen.
that's a good thing, eligible for medicare? but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,
they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call today to request a free decision guide to help you better understand what medicare is all about and which aarp medicare supplement plan works best for you. with these types of plans, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed. there's a range of plans to choose from, too, and they all travel with you anywhere in the country. join the millions who have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations... and provided by unitedhealthcare insurance company, which has over 30 years of experience behind it. ♪ call today. remember, medicare supplement insurance helps cover some of what medicare doesn't pay.
expenses that could really add up. these kinds of plans could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you'll be able to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. and there are virtually no referrals needed. so don't wait. with all the good years ahead, look for the experience and commitment to go the distance with you. call now to request your free decision guide. this easy-to-understand guide will answer some of your questions and help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that's right for you. finding the best hotel price is now a safe bet. because tripadvisor searches over 200 booking sites - so you save up to 30% on the hotel you want. lock it in. tripadvisor. ready to of your back pain? new icyhot lidocaine patch.
desensitizes aggravated nerves with the max strength lidocaine available. new icyhot lidocaine patch. in just a few hours, president trump will land in poland, this is part of his crucial overseas trip. the president will be making a 15-hour stop in the country before heading to germany for the g-20. he is preparing for tense meetings with angela merkel and teresa may and vladimir putin. he can expect a warmer welcome. >> reporter: this is a country that has traditionally warmly welcomed u.s. presidents going back to richard nixon who came here in may of 1972. and even though the communist regime at the time told people not to go and greet him, to stay at home, apparently large crowds
came out to greet nixon and it's expected that many people will attend the ceremony, rather the address he's going to give at the warsaw uprising tomorrow afternoon. and of course poland is a country that spends at least 2% of its gdp on defense, which is something that president trump haranged european leaders in may at the g-7 summit. so this is a country that by and large is well disposed to president trump. having said that, it's worth pointing of the that the pugh research institute on its poll of trump and other leaders found that only 23% of polish responders have confidence in president donald trump's ability to deal with global affairs, compared to angela merkel who has an approval rating of 46%. so this is a government, a
rightist, populist government that shares president trump's skepticism about things like climate change and the need to welcome refugees and migrants to europe. so they will put on a warm reception, not all poles clearly share the opinion of the government here. >> you're talking about a warm reception, how are they planning on filling the audience, ben? >> reporter: well, we understand from the social media presence of some of the members of parliament here, of the ruling law and justice party, that they are providing free transportation from various cities outside of warsaw, to the capitol, so people can attend his address tomorrow. and afterwards, they're going to be holding a picnic, so there's something of a draw, and facilities for anybody who does want to attend. but the government, however, has
not said one way or the other whether they're actually encouraging or facilitating people to attend his address, john. >> ben, thanks so much, everyone loves a picnic. now to the somewhat chilly reception, it will be no picnic for the president at the g-20 summit. the european leaders president trump meets with this week are the same ones that he sat down just six weeks ago at the g-7. the president is said to have left those meetings feeling picked on, outnumbered and you will recall that the german chancellor vented afterward that europe could no longer rely on the united states as a steady partner. and now just one day out from the meeting with the president, angela merkel's tone had not changed. she said last week, anyone who thinks that the world's problems can be solved with isolationism
and protectionism is simply delusional. we have a member of congress, jane harmond, david drucker. congresswoman, i want to start with you, the g-7 was awkward, the meetings with nato, awkward. how awkward will these meetings be? >> it occurs to me that the stop in poland is also a do over. that will be president trump's opportunity to say he does support article 5 after he personally left it out of his speech a few weeks ago in europe, which stunned his own advisors and everyone else. so, check, that will help, i think. but it's going to be awkward. a lot of the countries and there's a new leader in france, feel that our country, sadly, is out of step with where they want to go and i think one of the things, if trump could do it
over, he might consider doing over was dropping out of the climate accord because that's creating dissent around the world and leaving it open for china to take the lead. >> we don't see any signs of him pulling out article 5. but david, in terms of repairing these relationships, who do you think needs to go further at this point? do you think the president needs to perhaps be a little bit warmer? or is this something that the european leaders in particular, they need to go the extra mile? >> i don't think it's so much, john, about relationships as opposed to reasserting that the united states is a western leader that is going to uphold nato and send a message to adversaries russia and china that they're not messing around. and i think part of the president's problem has been the
indecision that his preference for unpredictability or sort of a lack of attention to detail has sent. our allies don't know if they can depend on us, our adversaries have taken to testing us because they don't know how the u.s. is going to respond. at the end of the day, even though personal relationships are so important, i don't think it's that big of a deal that angela merkel and president trump have a warm personal regard, but they want to know that president trump is going to uphold article 5. and and don't have any delusions as past republican presidents did that we can somehow find a detente with them and work with them. if the president can do that during in trip, i think it would be a success. no matter what european leaders think of him personally. >> sticking points? areas of agreement? >> there are a lot of sticking
points. almost every leader at that g-20 believes in the paris accords on climate change believes that climate change is a real threat and actually wants to do something about it. >> the u.s. is out. >> and most of the leaders also agree with a basic ideal of a liberal trading order which has not only been good economically but has helped to keep the peace since world war ii. trump has isolated on that. he's even isolated on north korea where the russians have an actually more workable plan on north korea than does trump. i think >> where then are there possible areas of agreement. is there anywhere that the president of the united states can come together? >> on nato, he's back in. and nato is a crucial defense
organization in europe and a wedge against russian aggression. both peter and the other commentator were right about being strong against putin. when trump meets with him, and that's something you haven't asked us about yet, he has to be strong. putin will perceive any sort of comfort level and friendliness as weakness. it also will offend everybody else in europe. and there is no good reason to be friendly with russia right now. keep the relationship going, collaborate on the arctic, which is something, the polar initiative that the wilson center has, that's a place we can work together. but with respect to aggression in ukraine, absolutely not. >> that's where the visit to poland can actually be very worthwhile. russia has always looked at poland as a sort of buffer state that they have influence over and control. the fact that the president's stopping there to give a speech, regardless of the character of the speech, in a sense, it can
send a message to vladimir putin that we see pole -- their proposed deal to deal with north korea should be a wake up call for this president in particular, he cannot rely on them to be their friends. whatever this country says about wanting to help the u.s. with issues of terrorism and global hot spots, their interest is satisfy when we're caught up in problems and controversies and they will do what they can to facilitate that and that's important for him to learn as this crisis unfolds. >> i really disagree with a lot of that. i think the character that he presents in poland is very important. he's going to a poland that's become increasingly to
totalitarian. as odious and the chinese and russian regimes are in many ways, the united states needs them especially china if there's going to be a deal on north korea. and what china is saying on north korea, is that there has to be pressure, but also an accommodation on some of these issues with the north koreans is actually the only potential way to have meaningful negotiations. a path of pure pressure alone led by the united states will only make the united states isolation and the north korean problem worse. >> president trump has got to juggle xi jinping over here, vladimir putin over here and angela merkel over here. what are the provisions that president trump can get out of this meeting and what does vladimir putin want out of it? >> it's good that you raised that, and to peter by the way, i wasn't suggesting cutting these
people off, i was suggesting being tough in terms of presentation, but there have to be deliverables. i hope that president trump is not tweeting on the airplane and is preparing carefully for this meeting. what do we want out of it? we want obvious liz to show the world that we can stand up to aggression, and in europe, after all, russians were the aggressors in ukraine, it's not okay to give them crimea and it's not okay to have them continue to destabilize the east part of ukraine. what's our deliverable? that putin will move back, particularly on the ukraine can destabilization. we should not wave sanctions, we should not show weakness. what do we want him to do that? what he would want us to do? he wants respect, so building a relationship with president trump would be useful. it's important to note that prime minister xi met with him
before trump did. so china may be higher on his list than the u.s. is. but it's a tense time for trump and he has to get this right. in the middle east, i'm not sure whether there's a workout in syria. >> watch the body language between the two leaders, watch if president trump tries to bring up the russian meddling. i think that's an easy thing for him to bring up and score some political points. thank you to our panel for your discussion. the new york police department mourning the loss of one of their own. the parent of three ambushed and killed in what is being called an unprovoked attack. we're going to hear a dispatch that came from her partner that's next. boost® the number one
yeah, and i can watch thee bgame with directv now.? oh, sorry, most broadcast and sports channels aren't included. and you can only stream on two devices at once. this is fun, we're having fun. yeah, we are. no, you're not jimmy. don't let directv now limit your entertainment. xfinity gives you more to stream to more screens.
a new york city police officer was killed in an unprovoked attack early this morning. the police commissioner is calling it an assassination, this is the call for help from the slain officer's partner. >> 10-85! shots fired. >> what's your location where the shots are fired? >> give me a bust! >> just horrifying, you can hear the officer saying my partner is shot, and asked for a bus, which
means an ambulance in that situation. what have we learned about the crime? >> reporter: this is where it took place, it was just a few blocks from here when that suspect, police say it was unprovoked, surveillance camera actually shows him going up to one of those larger nypd mobile units and firing through the window striking the officer in the head, that's when her partner called for help. called for an ambulance. you heard the distress in his voice and how frantic it was of a scene early this morning. now after that happened, we know that that suspect bonds, he took off and a nearby nypd unit was able to track him down about a block away from where we are. when they confronted him, he pulled out a gun. just a horrifying sequence of
events, we know that bonds has a criminal history, he was on parole for an incident that happened in 2005, a robbery in syracuse, new york, and now police are just at hiss house, investigators talking to family members, trying to figure out what went wrong here, why did this officer do this? but you heard the commissioner say this was an assassination, and at this point this is a community that was devastated. we have been talking to people who say at the precinct, officers are crying, and a chaplain came up and was holding the hands of a few police officers and they were praying. >> talk to us about the slain officer. a veteran, a parent of three? >> reporter: yes, we know that he was a parent of three, she actually had twins and then a
♪ approaching medicare eligibility? you may think you can put off checking out your medicare options until you're sixty-five, but now is a good time to get the ball rolling. keep in mind, medicare only covers about eighty percent of part b medical costs. the rest is up to you. that's where aarp medicare supplement insurance plans insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company come in. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans,
they could help pay some of what medicare doesn't, saving you in out-of-pocket medical costs. you've learned that taking informed steps along the way really makes a difference later. that's what it means to go long™. call now and request this free decision guide. it's full of information on medicare and the range of aarp medicare supplement plans to choose from based on your needs and budget. all plans like these let you choose any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients, and there are no network restrictions. unitedhealthcare insurance company has over thirty years experience and the commitment to roll along with you, keeping you on course. so call now and discover how an aarp medicare supplement plan could go long™ for you. these are the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp, an organization serving the needs of people 50 and over for generations. plus, nine out of ten plan members surveyed
starr of the pentagon and also major general james sparks. mosul has been complicated for centuries, you have religious tensions, you have ethnic tensions, now you add to the fact that you have millions of people in a city that has been devastated, what's the plan there to go forward? >> reporter: this is the key kwee, question, i mean people are coming out of mosul in dire straits, plus the people that have already been displaced. so it's going to be the responsibility of iraq to rebuild the city and to help these people. and will the iraqi government be strong enough, in shape politically to be able to do all that? that's really the key question, and that's what's fallen apart in the past, the governance, the rebuild, the civilian control in these areas that are racked already by ethnic divisions. you know, will security forces
treat people even handedly, will there be a deduction in the violence. the u.s. is trying to encourage that. but that's not something that u.s. troops can really do for the iraqis at this point. the iraqis are going to have to stand up on their own and do it. but they're going to have to have help from the u.s. government, from the trump administration, getting rid of isis in combat is really just the beginning of the process. >> major general, you were in iraq during the war, and we all saw what happened after the surge in iraq and things seems okay for a while and then they descend, how do you keep it from slipping away again? >> as barbara just described, she has actually nailed the challenge of the government in baghdad. as you'll recall, the strategy was always to clear, hold and build. clearly what has happened so far is the clear part in mosul, the
hold and build, that's where the heavy lifting really begins. you have to be able to sustain all of those elements of governance and the ability of this military to take a step back and allow civilian leadership to move forward, not disappear, but be available to provide what we call the outer ring of security and protection so that isis and other elements cannot slip back in. this is really the very, very difficult part and there's a long-term engagement. lots of money. there will continue to be conflict that will take place, there will be attempts at trying to undermine what's taking place in mosul and in baghdad in terms of their relevance. and then the ironic thing moving forward is the kurdish people are looking at this as their victory or are the iraqis looking at this as their greater victory. >> you bring up the issue of the kurds in iraq, the kurds are
actually in play in syria as well. do you have any sense of what the strategy is there during this next phase of the war? >> i think that u.s. military officials are a bit cautious of it falling any time soon. they like to take a more cautious approach to this. they're suggesting it could be some time. but again, it's the post combat phase, to paraphrase and i had milt that i'm paraphrasing, president trump bombed the heck out of isis, that is far from the total solution, because we have seen two things, we have seen isis leave raqqa, they're now down in the tigris river valley. they're going to go after that, and several of the terror attacks that we have all seen? europe sadly in recent weeks have been from people already living in europe, not from isis fighters necessarily going back to europe. so again, getting rid of isis
doesn't end in guerrilla attacks, doesn't end the terror threat. >> in general, would there be any utility in a greater u.s. troops presence inside syria? would that help with the transition at all? >> it would if we are narrowing the discussion to going after isis and not broadening the discussion in terms of what happens with assad, and is there a discussion about a regime change, and what does the next regime look like in damascus? the discussion has to be narrowly defined as us going against isis, decreasing the size of that caliphate, so that we can have increased pressure from locals that isis has to go away, and if that atrophies or at least moves into a less important strategy, we have to bring to the table in the
long-term how does our strategy match up with russia's strategy in syria and that becomes the largest discussion going forward? >> what's the current relationship, because it's going to come up at the g-20. >> vladimir putin is not going away, he is backing assad, and president trump right now is not calling for assad necessarily to go. so if the rebels take raqqa, what happens when the russian backed syrian forces say, hey, wait a minute, it's our country too. >> the end of fighting in syria does not end the problems in syria by any stretch of the imagination. thank you for being with us. coming up for us, venezuela. who are these people?
but in place of celebrations, clashes unfolded at the national assembly as the south american nation has been facing months of political turmoil with nearly daily protests, pro and anti-government forces have been on the streets battling. venezuela's civil unrest in a humanitarian crisis in the wake of president maduro's austerity program has left that nation on the brink of collapse and lacki lacki lacking 80% of the basic medical supplies needed. across the border in colombia, venezuelas are crossing the border. they are desperate for that medicine they need, not to mention food and that is where we find cnn's leila right there on the border. these people fleeing, what are they hoping for? >> reporter: they're hoping for relief, john. we are in bogota, colombia, where tens of thousands of people are crossing this very bridge every single day. let me walk you through what we're seeing. on this side, you can see this
is where venezuela is. they're coming in, checking in with immigration and you'll notice that some of the folks come in with -- to try to find the very goods that they can't get in venezuela. you mentioned the medical supplies. certainly something that they come here to find. and then also, john, it's just basic food. this gentleman just walked by. they have basic things like bread, rice, oil, things that every family should have in their home, but they can't find because of the shortages in venezuela. you know, i talked to one woman who, let me go through her suitcase. let me let you listen to what she had to say. she's crying because she says the insecurity is too much. she doesn't know what she's going to do. she said she would like to leave
but she's got a family of four so it's too tough. that's why she crosses here once a week to get her basic needs. john, this woman is a lawyer, and she cannot afford, with the wage that she makes, the price controls that the government puts in, to buy those basic things that she had in her suitcase. the cooking oil, the garlic, the crackers for her infant. and these are the stories that we are hearing over and over. i also met a woman who could not take one more step when she crossed that border into colombia. she was on the ground, waiting for an ambulance because she can't get the medical supplies in venezuela. john. >> we're seeing what looks like small scale exodus right behind you as you're speaking. the people move back and forth quickly. you had a chance to visit a hospital. what'd you hear there? >> reporter: we did and those hallways are filled. hospitals here, we went to the
largest public hospital in this region, and they were already having strained resources, financial problems. now add to that more people coming in, in need of pretty dire need of medical attention and the doctors will tell you that it's unsustainable, and they're actually calling this, like, treating patients in a war zone given the injuries and the conditions they're coming in. >> all right, on the border between venezuela and colombia. terrific report. fascinating perspective. thank you all for joining us for our international viewers, amanpour is next. for our viewers in north america, "newsroom" with brooke baldwin starts after a quick break and for all of you, we want to give you a sneak peek of the upcoming cnn original series "the nineties." >> some of my all-time favorite shows aired in that decade. >> you can't talk about the '90s without so many monumental bands.
nirvana gave the record industry a wake-up call. >> gangster rap really starts to take hold. >> it was a hip hop tsunami. >> while the '90s represented so much growth and progress, we had so much further to go. >> rodney king in 1992 exposed some of that. >> we the jury find the defendant -- >> the bombing in oklahoma city, the davidian compound in waco, something dark was moving in the society. >> something is happening outside. the skies over baghdad have been illuminated. >> the promise of a new world order. >> george bush took the loss to bill clinton very hard. >> bill clinton was a president who was turning the corner to a different time. there was scandal, scandal, scandal, scandal. >> bill clinton is christened the comeback kid because he was resilient. >> bill gates' game plan was world domination. >> you could see the start of this new online culture. >> you've got mail. >> it is the equivalent to the
that's why at comcast we're continuing to make4/7. our services more reliable than ever. like technology that can update itself. an advanced fiber-network infrustructure. new, more reliable equipment for your home. and a new culture built around customer service. it all adds up to our most reliable network ever. one that keeps you connected to what matters most.
here we go. top of the hour. you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. we begin with a potential nuclear showdown. the president of the united states is about to touch down in europe for a series of meetings as his administration scrambles to respond to this first ever test by north korea of this icbm, this intercontinental ballistic missile. this marks a crucial advance in its arsenal. one, the secretary of state calls, and i'm quoting him, a new escalation of the threat to the u.s. and to the world. before the president left the united states, he again took to twitter to call out china for its economic support of north korea, tweeting, "trade between china and north korea grew