Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Biden Allows Ukraine To Use Long-Range U.S. Weapons In Russia; Kremlin: Biden Throwing "Oil On Fire" Of Conflict; Meeting Overshadowed By Trump's Return To White House; Trump's Controversial Cabinet Picks Rattle Congress; Israeli Course: Progress In Talks For Ceasefire In Lebanon; Prosecutors: "Diddy" Trying To Influence Witnesses From Jail; Masked Thieves Break Into Windsor Castle Grounds. Aired 12-1p ET

Aired November 18, 2024 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:29]

ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Stockpile diapers, medication and baby food. New warnings as the war in Ukraine rages on.

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: ONE WORLD starts right now.

Ukraine, officially, has permission to launch long-range American missiles in Russia. Russian lawmakers say the move could lead to a third world war.

ASHER: Also ahead, we look at a continued string of Donald Trump's cabinet picks. The latest election literally wrote part of the book on Project

2025.

GOLODRYGA: And later, a break in at Windsor Castle. Did the thieves take jewels, art, or priceless antiques? We'll find out later this hour.

ASHER: All right. Coming to you live from New York, I'm Zain Asher.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. You are watching ONE WORLD.

Well, the stakes just got higher and the Kremlin is making its feelings known after U.S. President Joe Biden gave Ukraine permission to launch

attacks inside Russia using American long-range missiles.

It is a move that the White House have previously resisted due to concerns that it could escalate the conflict further.

ASHER: Yes. Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has repeatedly pushed Washington for the green light. The weapons are expected to be used

primarily in Russia's Kursk Region, where North Korean troops have joined the Russian offensive.

The Kremlin, responding to the White House change of policy, accused the Biden administration of wanting to, quote, throw oil on the fire.

Let's go to our Pentagon correspondent, Oren Liebermann. So, Oren, the overall supply of ATACM missiles is quite short. U.S. officials have in the

past questioned whether they can actually give Ukraine enough to really make a difference here. And also, just walk us through what reaction we're

expecting from the Kremlin.

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, for months, we've heard a number of different reasons why the U.S. isn't changing its policy when

it comes to the use of long-range ATACMS missiles by Ukraine, and then suddenly, of course, to see this change coming out, or at least publicly

confirmed yesterday to us and to other media outlets.

Amongst those reasons, and you listed some of them, the limited supply of these missiles, the fact that Russia has pulled many of the targets Ukraine

wants to hit out of range of these missiles, about 200 miles or so, Ukraine was using the limited supply they effectively strike targets in Crimea. And

Ukraine has longer range drones that they can use to hit these types of targets, and yet, Ukraine kept on pushing.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy presented a list of targets to President Joe Biden in September when he was here in Washington D.C. Biden didn't

outright refuse but effectively, there was just an agreement that they would keep discussing this.

And yet, this change coming, at least in part according to U.S. officials, because of what the U.S. saw as an escalation. Russia bringing in thousands

of North Korean troops to help fight in the Kursk Region, more than 10,000 at this point according to the latest number, with the possibility that

more will come from North Korea to Russia.

The U.S. saw that as enough of an escalation that it merited or warranted some sort of response. And this change in policy is at least part of that

response. The expectation is that Ukraine will use these long-range attack homes to hit missiles in that Kursk Region, whether that's command and

control nodes, logistics hubs, troop cons concentrations.

The reason Kursk is so important, even though it isn't a tremendously large swath of land, if there is the possibility or perhaps even an expectation

that President elect Donald Trump pushes for negotiations, as he said he will.

Hanging on to that region by Ukraine is effectively the most powerful leverage they have in those negotiations, and that perhaps is part of the

reason the U.S. wants Ukraine to be able to use these powerful weapons in such a way to make sure they have the best -- the best chance at holding

them that region and the best chance in negotiations, should that be the direction this goes.

The Kremlin, meanwhile, saying this is the U.S. throwing oil on the fire and said, it is making Ukraine a -- rather the U.S., a direct participant

in the war. It is worth noting, Zain and Bianna, that's a threat we've heard from the Kremlin before, and yet it is, at least in the past, all

bark, no bite. They haven't done anything or changed much because of that.

Yes. We'll see if this time is different. Fred Pleitgen live for us there - - or Oren Liebermann, I apologize. Live for us there. It's Monday. Thank you so much.

[12:05:01]

GOLODRYGA: But now we will go to Fred Pleitgen, who is in Moscow.

And, Fred, as we've just heard, the Kremlin describing this decision as Biden throwing oil on the fire. We heard from Oren Liebermann, the Kremlin

also reiterating some of its past statements that this is akin to a conflict directly with the United States.

Walk us through what else we're hearing from the Kremlin and what you're hearing and watching there on state television.

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, yes. So we are hearing actually a lot of outrage on state television. I've watched some of

the main talk shows that they have here on state TV. And of course, all of them opening up with this decision by the Biden administration, essentially

accusing the Biden administration of escalating and continuing the war in Ukraine, which one show said the Trump administration or Donald Trump

wanted to end.

And we've heard similar reactions, Bianna, from several Russian lawmakers from the state Duma coming out overnight, some of them going so far as to

claim that this could start World War III. Of course, we do very often have such over-the-top reactions, especially from some of those Russian

lawmakers.

Now, from the Kremlin, the reaction has been a little bit more subdued, but at the same time, of course, still quite angry there as well.

The spokesman for the Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, coming out with that quote, saying he believes the outgoing administration is trying to pour oil onto

the fire, as he put it. But also saying that this, of course, runs the risks of more involvement by NATO nations, of course, specifically by the

United States in the war in Ukraine. And, of course, that's something that Vladimir Putin has been warning about as well, Oren alluded to it a little

bit just now.

Essentially, what Vladimir Putin is saying is that he believes that these type of weapons, for instance, the United States-supplied ATACMS surface-

to-surface missiles, or also missiles by other NATO members that have long- distance capabilities, that the Ukrainians would not be able to use those, that the targeting wouldn't be able to be used, also the maintenance

wouldn't be able to be used without the help of the specialist from the countries that provide these weapons to use those weapons.

And so, therefore, the Russians are saying that if such weapons are used to strike deep into Russian territory, that then the Russians would consider

this to be an attack from those countries against Russia.

So that could mean that the Russians could say an ATACMS attack against an airfield, for instance, deep inside Russia, could be considered an attack

by the United States or facilitated by the United States against Russia, which then obviously could lead to a major escalation.

Oren is certainly right to point out that the Russians have drawn red lines in the sand before, for instance, when it came to providing tanks to the

Ukrainians, F-16 fighter jets. So we have seen this in the past.

However, this time, the Russians have actually changed the fundamental nuclear doctrine of this country to include a new scenario, which is, if

Russia is attacked using long-distance means by a non-nuclear nation, like, for instance, Ukraine, with the aid of a nuclear nation, like, for

instance, the United States, that that could trigger a nuclear response from the Russians.

Now, so far, they have not said what their response in this case will be. They certainly are waiting to see. All that we're hearing right now is that

any response to an attack would be, quote, appropriate, guys.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Fred Pleitgen reporting to us live from Moscow. Thank you so much.

ASHER: All right. This hour President Biden is on one of his major international trips as America's leader before Donald Trump takes control

of the White House.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And remarks earlier, the president urged fellow leaders to continue making progress on a range of issues, including the wars in

Ukraine and Gaza, after he leaves office.

CNN's Kevin Liptak joins us live now from Rio.

So, Kevin, of course, this is an opportunity for President Biden to really burnish his legacy. But as expected, Donald Trump is casting a long shadow

over the summit. Take us through that.

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, he very much is. As leaders who are gathering here for the G20, try and ascertain what exactly

a new Donald Trump presidency will mean for them, trying to suss out what exactly the next four years will look like.

And I don't know that President Biden necessarily has a lot of answers for them. His advisors have been frank that the Trump transition team hasn't

necessarily engaged on what specifically they have planned when it comes to foreign policy.

Certainly, they can glean some things from what Trump has said publicly, an isolationist viewpoint, his love of tariffs.

But when it comes to specifics like, for example, the war in Ukraine, they're frank that they don't have a lot of answers to bring to these world

leaders who are here in Rio gathering for this G20.

And I think part of the reason that President Biden took this decision to allow Ukraine to fire these missiles into Russia was to try and position

Kyiv in the best possible as he departs office.

Now, Donald Trump's influence, in a way, is already creating some drama behind the scenes here in Rio as the leaders work to put together this

final joint communique, which is traditional at a G20 Summit.

[12:10:06]

What we've learned is that one of Trump's top global allies, the president of Argentina, has thrown up some roadblocks and threatened to block that

communique over language about taxing the ultra-rich.

Now, ordinarily, that might not be all that unusual. There's always a back and forth with these leaders' statements, but what struck diplomats here as

curious is that the Argentines had already agreed to this language over the summer. And it was only after Trump was elected that they reversed course.

And they are interpreting this to mean that the president of Argentina is trying to curry favor with Trump before he comes into office.

So you can already see how Trump's influence is affecting these global summits even before he comes into office. I think for President Biden, his

goal is very much to reiterate where he stands on all of these issues, to try and put in place certain funding initiatives and certain, you know,

climate protection initiatives that he hopes can outlast a Trump presidency.

But I think at the end of the day, no one here is necessarily fooled that Trump could come into office and reverse a lot of what President Biden has

done over the last four years.

ASHER: Kevin Liptak, live for us. Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Well, who will he pick next? That is the question buzzing through the U.S. political world as we await more of what Donald Trump's

Cabinet could look like.

ASHER: He positions like education, transportation, and treasury secretary are as yet unfulfilled. The latest pick reveals over the weekend was

Brendan Carr to head up the FCC. Carr has been a fierce critic of what he calls censorship of conservative voices in the media.

And he wrote the chapter on the FCC for controversial project -- the controversial project, the '25 blueprint for remaking the American

government.

GOLODRYGA: Well, after Donald Trump announced each of his high-profile picks, the next question is whether they can be confirmed.

ASHER: Yes. That is a big question. A source tells CNN that Trump is going to push extra hard to make sure that Republicans approve Matt Gaetz for

Attorney General. There's been a lot of pushback on that pick amid calls for House Republicans to release a report on Gaetz by an ethics panel.

Senate Democrats say that Gaetz is simply not qualified for such an important role in law enforcement.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ADAM SCHIFF, INCOMING U.S. SENATE DEMOCRAT: Are we really going to have an attorney general who there's credible allegations he was involved in child

sex trafficking, potential illicit drug use, obstruction of investigation, who has no experience serving in the Justice Department only being

investigated by it?

But, Jake, I think the whole point with these nominees, several of them, is their un-qualification, is their affirmative disqualification.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Let's bring in CNN's Paula Reid with more on all of this. Specifically as it refers to Matt Gaetz, you're hearing real questionable

responses, not only from Democrats who are objecting to this nomination, but also from Republicans as well, especially given the Ethics Committee

investigation that was just wrapping up.

What more are you hearing about the status of that report and if it could ever see the light of day?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, we're learning more on Wednesday about whether the committee is going to formally release

this report. There's also, of course, the risk that it could leak, but I've been covering this ethics investigation for well over a year.

I've broken more stories than anybody. And I can tell you, that committee, does not leak and that's partly to protect their work, protect the subject

of their work.

So what we've been looking at is some of the evidence that we know they've gathered through our reporting. And one key piece of evidence comes from a

civil lawsuit down in Florida. This lawsuit was brought by one of Gaetz' associates. This associate sued another friend of Gaetz and the underage

girl, the woman who was underage when she allegedly had sex with Gaetz.

He sued them, and as a result of this civil lawsuit, they entered into discovery. They created a whole new record of evidence, including

depositions with witnesses like that underage girl, other women who were at these parties, allegedly with the former congressman.

And those depositions by the women and the underage girl are under seal, but the lawyers in the case were kind of clever. And they quoted some of

that deposition under seal in their questions directed to the man who brought this lawsuit.

So, for example, they referenced the fact that the underage girl said in her sealed deposition that she had sex with Gaetz on an air hockey table.

They said, quote, in the deposition, and you heard her testimony that she said that you observed her and Matt Gaetz having sex on the air hockey

table.

Now this person denied that they saw this, but the lawyers also referenced another witness, a friend of the underage girl who brought her to the

party. She testified that she too had sex with Gaetz at the same gathering.

Now this is relevant because we know the Ethics Committee has talked to some of these same witnesses. They have the same evidence. It's unclear how

much of this they're going to include in their report.

But we also know the congressman was investigated by the Justice Department for this and other allegations, and he was not charged. They opted not to

proceed with a case. And the former congressman has always denied wrongdoing.

[12:15:05]

GOLODRYGA: All right. Paula Reid, thank you so much.

Joining us now for some additional perspective on all of Trump's most controversial picks is CNN political commentator S.E. Cupp. S.E., good to

see you.

So there we just got a taste of what the confirmation process could be like for Matt Gaetz among senators. Do you think that senators, including many

Republicans who have already vocally said that they are concerned about this nomination, will be able to go ahead through the process and approve

someone like Matt Gaetz, given what is more likely to look like a really disturbing report and background?

S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I am -- I have some hesitation about the idea that Matt Gaetz will get through and there's a couple of factors

there. You already have some senators on the record saying that they don't like this pick, that they have deep concerns about this pick.

They're already out in public saying that. So you have to imagine there are maybe even some others who haven't weighted in publicly.

But I would look at senators Murkowski, Collins, and Tillis to be something of a resistance to this pick. You also have the fact that regardless of

this ethics report gets out, there will be background checks. The FBI will do a background check and that could bring out some more information that

would make this pick really difficult.

But I think what you also have is a -- is a sort of a choice that senators are going to have to make. There are some other picks they don't like

either. Pete Hegseth for defense secretary for one. They'll have to choose who is more dangerous, Matt Gaetz at DOJ, Pete Hegseth at Defense, Tulsi

Gabbard at DNI. I mean, there are some questionable picks alongside some other more conventional picks.

And I think senators are going to have to sort of make a list of priorities here. They're not going to be able to keep all of these -- you know, all of

these questionable picks from getting through, but I think they will be able to stop one or two.

ASHER: You know, S.E., it's not just the fact that these picks are extremely controversial. I mean, you know, RFK Jr., someone who's a vaccine

skeptic, you know, picking them to lead HHS, Matt Gaetz, who's subject to an investigation himself, for attorney general.

It's also that Trump is clearly surrounding himself by extreme loyalists, right? These are people who it is very likely that they will do whatever he

says.

And so, what does that tell you about the type of second term that Donald Trump is envisioning for himself?

CUPP: It tells me he did not enjoy the part of the first term where people came in and left because either he disagreed with them or they leaked or

they said things that were unkind.

And, you know, I get that and he got a mandate. He has a mandate to kind of do whatever he wants. And so he's going to bring in the people that he

knows are going to do what he wants them to do.

And Don Jr., his son, hinted at this, I think even before the election or right after the election and said, my dad's not going to bring anyone into

the administration who thinks that they're smarter than he is.

And listen, when you've won the way that Donald Trump just won, you get to do that. I'm concerned mostly about the cronyism, the conflicts of

interests that a lot of these people will have, as well as what they will do in those positions. But certainly there will not be as many checks

around Donald Trump inside the administration as there were in 2016.

GOLODRYGA: Well, this is just a confirmation process. This is assuming that does actually go forward.

CUPP: Yes.

GOLODRYGA: Donald Trump floated the option publicly on Truth Social last weekend about how he would support recess appointments. The ability to

confirm cabinet members is something that's enshrined in the Constitution as a duty and a job and responsibility of members of the Senate. They don't

typically like to give up responsibility and power that they have.

Do you envision this particular Trump 2.0 Republican Party acquiescing to that and perhaps not wanting to go through the dirty process of a -- of a

nominations hearing and trying to get through Senate approval, given what we know at least somebody like Matt Gaetz probably will have to publicly,

you know, expose to the country? Do you envision a recess scenario at all?

CUPP: Yes. This is going to be, I think, one of the first tests of the new Republican majority. How far are they willing to go? Or alternatively, how

little interest do they have in pushing back against Donald Trump, right? They all want to be in his favor over the next four years.

But as you mentioned, Bianna, you're so right that in the Senate, they take themselves very seriously and have sort of an outsized sense of importance.

And that's because their legacies tend to be a bit more robust than members of the House, right?

[12:20:10]

So I think you will have resistance inside the Senate, especially for people who will be up, you know, in four years or won't be up rather within

the four-year period of Donald Trump's first term to maybe have a little more freedom or courage. We'll see.

But this will be a big test of what this new Republican majority looks like and how far they're willing to go in order to support Donald Trump.

ASHER: S.E., you mentioned in my question to you that, you know, obviously you're concerned about the cronyism here. But just in terms of Donald

Trump's promises to enact revenge in his second term, I mean, how concerned -- I mean, just seeing sort of the sorts of people, the extreme loyalists

that he's picking for some of these positions, again, as I mentioned, people who are just simply not going to say no to him, are you concerned

that he's going to be using the powers of government to enact revenge? And what can Democrats do about it at this point?

CUPP: Yes. Well, it's not just Democrats. It's Republicans who oppose him as well.

ASHER: Right. Right, right.

CUPP: So, you know, and members of the media. So I am concerned because he seems very determined to make the revenge part of his agenda a big part of

his administration.

I would caution though, I -- the way I covered this past election was to go into the seven swing states and just talk to voters. And I did that all day

for six months. And not a single voter told me, I'm voting for Donald Trump to enact revenge on his enemies. That just didn't matter to voters.

His MAGA base at rallies probably loves when he talks like that. But to the actual voters who got him over the finish line and came out for Donald

Trump, they were not motivated by that.

So listen, the midterms are two short years away. And if Donald Trump takes this mandate and does something that most people who voted for him don't

want him to do with it, they will let him know.

So the personal revenge stuff, I think, works as virtue signaling or vice signaling to his base, but it is not why he was elected.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. It's not going to impact how inflation is affecting millions of Americans --

CUPP: Correct.

GOLODRYGA: -- which was a very important factor for them in this election cycle.

S.E. Cupp, thank you so much.

ASHER: Thank you, S.E.

All right. Coming up, Israel pounds targets in Lebanon over the weekend as Israeli-Hezbollah ceasefire talks gain some steam. We'll have a live report

for you from Jerusalem, ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:18]

ASHER: All right. For the first time, Israel is acknowledging it's using artillery batteries positioned inside Lebanese territory to attack targets.

Previous batteries have remained on Israeli soil, firing into villages across the border.

GOLODRYGA: This, as an Israeli source says, there is some progress in talks to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon, even as Israel pounded Beirut Sunday for

a sixth day in a row.

Let's bring in CNN's international diplomatic editor, Nic Robertson, who's joining us now from Jerusalem.

Nic, there had been some reporting as to whether or not U.S. envoy, Amos Hochstein, would be visiting the region again this week. What more do we

know about any inroads that continue to be made about a possible ceasefire with regards to Lebanon?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Yes. I think there's still a question mark over Amos Hochstein's expected travel itinerary. The

specific dates seem to be unclear at the moment. As you say, there have been that expectation.

What we're hearing here from Israeli sources is that the progress over the talks that he was shepherding through between them and Hezbollah were

making some progress. Hezbollah had promised to give a response to the U.S. proposal by today. That appeared to have been given. That was certainly the

position of the Lebanese prime minister. He understood Hezbollah had responded.

And what we're hearing from Israeli officials is that there appears to be a disconnect or an issue developing there that Hezbollah is not open. It

appears to what's being phrased by this official as direct to action that Israel could take if the terms of the ceasefire was broken.

And the stronger language being used by right-wing members of Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet, Bezalel Smotrich. The finance minister has said that

there must be freedom of -- freedom of action that Israel must have complete free operational freedom to, it appears, to respond to any

breakdowns in a ceasefire.

But the Lebanese prime minister and the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, Nabih Berri, who's the Amal Party is aligned with Hezbollah. Both say that

they are not aware of that sort of language in the proposal that had gone to Hezbollah.

So there does appear to be a disconnect or details that are still being worked upon. The broad framework of the agreement, the reaffirmation in

position of the U.N. Security Council resolution 1701 demanding Hezbollah pullback 30 miles from the border north of the Litani River that the

Lebanese army would be the military force that would be the security on the Lebanese side of the border.

Those approximate details still seem to be in play. But the real question is Israel's right to response if the terms of a ceasefire broken and the

pricewise language there, we really don't know about at the moment.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. And the rocket fire, meantime, continues to be hitting Northern Israel as well, coming in from Southern Lebanon.

Nic Robertson, thank you so much. We'll continue to follow this story.

And still to come for us, for the first time since the war began, the U.S. is allowing Ukraine to fire American-made long-range missiles into Russia.

What kind of an impact could it have on the battlefield? That's just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:30:52]

GOLODRYGA: All right. Welcome back to ONE WORLD. I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ASHER: I'm Zain Asher.

Almost 1,000 days into Europe's most grueling conflict in decades, there was a growing sense of escalation in the war in Ukraine.

At the weekend, the U.S. President Joe Biden authorized Kyiv to use American long-range weapons to attack targets deep inside Russia.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. The decision had been under consideration for months and comes after Moscow deployed nearly 50,000 troops to Kursk, including

thousands of North Koreans.

But could peace talks for Ukraine be on the horizon? This as the German chancellor picked up the phone on Friday to call Vladimir Putin, ending the

Russian president's isolation by the West.

ASHER: Even after that, it was a punishing weekend in Ukraine, enduring Russia's largest aerial attack in months.

CNN's Nick Paton Walsh reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NICK PATON WALSH, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT (voice- over): The search for survivors after a Russian missile attack on Sumy Sunday night. Eleven people here were killed, two of them children, when

missiles hit a residential neighborhood in this city near Ukraine's border with Russia.

Hours later, at least eight people were killed in a strike on Odesa. Horrifically, this is now the norm for Ukraine, under near constant

bombardment after a thousand days of war.

Zelenskyy's saying strikes show, quote, what Russia is really interested in, only war.

That war is not going Ukraine's way right now, with sustained and slow losses along the eastern front, perhaps a reason for the stark and

significant policy change from the White House Sunday.

Sources telling CNN that the U.S. President Joe Biden has finally given Ukraine the go-ahead to use long-range American weapons to strike inside

Russia.

The weapons are primarily meant to help Ukraine hold on to Kursk, according to one U.S. official. That's the region in Southern Russia where Ukrainians

launched a counteroffensive this summer, a potential bargaining chip for the Ukrainians in any future peace talks.

Biden had refused for months to provide the weapons to Ukraine and then to permit them to strike inside Russia with them.

But like previous decisions over HIMARS missiles, Abrams tanks and F-16 jets, Biden delayed and then finally consented. This change is unlikely to

alter the battlefield overnight, owing to how few ATACMS Ukraine can get.

But it's a critical decision, showing this outgoing White House is keen to help Ukraine and entangle the United States yet deeper into this war, just

months ahead of Donald Trump taking office.

VOLODYMYR ZELENSKYY, UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): Hits are not made with words. Such things don't need announcements. Missiles will speak

for themselves.

WALSH: For Ukrainians, this is a little too late, this lady says.

It should have been done at the very beginning, when Russia was too weak, another man adds.

In Russia, the news is being reported on state T.V., but so far, silence from Russian President Vladimir Putin, who's previously said Ukraine firing

U.S.-supplied ATACMS would be the equivalent of NATO entering the war.

[12:35:11]

Putin's spokesperson Monday said Biden was throwing, quote, oil on the fire of the conflict.

It will burn brighter as both sides seek to maneuver ahead of the Trump presidency.

Nick Paton Walsh, CNN, London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ASHER: All right. Time now for The Exchange. Joining us is retired U.S. General Wesley Clark. He spent 38 years in uniform, most recently serving

as NATO's supreme Allied commander in Europe.

General, you're the perfect person to have on to talk about this. Just in terms of the sort of reaction that we can expect from Vladimir Putin in

terms of the U.S. sending these ATACMS.

We've seen Putin and the Kremlin issue red lines in the past and then nothing has come from it. Is this time different, do you think?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK, (RET.), FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER EUROPE: Well, I don't think you're going to see a great response out of Putin. He's

going to continue the grinding attack. He thinks he's winning. This isn't going to change that battlefield equation by very much. How many ATACMs are

there? Maybe a few dozen. What can they be targeted on?

I think there's going to be restrictions on the targeting, so that it's not possible to really go into and get the production facilities and the other

things deep inside Russia. This is essentially being announced to help the Ukrainian forces hang on to the Kursk salient.

It's a response to the Koreans, by the way. There will be more Koreans coming, apparently up to 100,000 is what the first information is, is

coming out. And they brought their long-range guns. So I think this is a sort of minimal response.

It's really business as usual. From the start, the policy has been, don't let Russia win, don't let Ukraine lose. And so there's been tit for tat

escalation, counter escalation and so forth.

And Putin's betting on the fact that he's going to grind down Western support and with President Trump that hopefully he'll be given something

that his battlefield prowess doesn't -- can't take, but he's going to want relief from sanctions in negotiations and then he's going to strengthen his

armed forces and have another go at it. I think that's the prevailing view of all of us who are deeply involved in this.

And so we wish these ATACMS decision had been taken sooner along with the F-16s, M1 tanks, artillery, HIMARS, et cetera. And that it had been

organized in a way to achieve concentrated battlefield impact so that Ukraine could have taken back its terrain. Instead, we're prolonging the

fight.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. This continues to be a theme throughout the war with this Ukraine asking constantly for more sophisticated weapons, the U.S.

delaying, allies delaying, and then ultimately caving in and delivering those weapons.

Even if the ATACMS are isolated or green-lit to just use in Kursk, they could still do significant damage to the Russian infrastructure and

facilities there.

I mean, do you see this impacting the state of play on the battlefield as it relates to Kursk. Could Ukraine ultimately develop, end up having the

upper hand in this particular fight?

CLARK: I'd be surprised if the ATACMs could be decisive even in that limited operational area, but certainly they'll help. I mean, every bit of

firepower you can bring on a North Korean or Russian assembly area, on staging grounds on logistics, on storage in that limited area. Sure, it's

all going to help.

But to have a decisive effect in conflict, you have to be able to mass forces at a specific time and place for a specific objective. And that's

never been done in this conflict. And it's not adequate force here to make a decisive impact on this battlefield as I see it right now.

ASHER: General, Biden has, of course, been withholding these long-range missiles for quite some time.

What was it that ultimately changed his mind? Was it North Korean troops? Was it, you know, the fact that Donald Trump is heading into office come

January 20th? What was it specifically that led to this decision being made now?

CLARK: Well, I think, you know, President Zelensky came in and asked for these ATACMS as part of his victory plan. And he was told no. And so, and

those were to be unrestricted ATACMS so he could strike deep.

I think the North Koreans are coming in. I think they're continuing a battlefield erosion that Ukraine is facing because of delays in weapons and

delays in mobilization of forces and other things and the concern that the president wants Ukraine to have the strongest possible hand if negotiations

should somehow begin shortly after the new president's inaugurated.

[12:40:23]

GOLODRYGA: There had been reporting, and I don't know where things stand as it relates to the ATACMS, but as with previous weapons deliveries, there

had been reporting that there were disagreements internally within the administration, whether it's the State Department that had been pushing,

perhaps, for the green lighting of these weapons systems, only to have Pentagon officials push back.

Given your military experience, you know these players. Has that surprised you throughout this process?

CLARK: No.

GOLODRYGA: Because we know -- no. OK. Explain why.

CLARK: No. Bianna, because, look, the Pentagon's under instructions to prepare for war against China. And the people who were managing the

Pentagon and giving the advice, were saying there's only so many ATACMS, there's only so much -- so much munitions.

And really from the beginning, there's been a tug of war inside the administration on this. I think part of it, to be brutally honest about my

former colleagues, is they came out of Iraq and Afghanistan with a little bit higher opinion of themselves relative to other armies than was merited.

And so I think they didn't really appreciate Ukraine's commitment, the quality of the forces that were in Ukraine and their ability to absorb

technology quickly.

But that's been proven now. So now it's a question of what are the priorities of the Pentagon? Pentagon's following national guidance,

following congressional guidance. Everybody says China is the major threat, but Ukraine's the war you have. And all of us on the policy side on the

outside, and I think State Department to some extent, is saying the same thing.

Look, if you let go in Ukraine and you show weakness in Ukraine, you are encouraging a problem in the Pacific. So if you want to deter China, look

strong against Russia in Ukraine. And yet, for the people in the Pentagon, this is tough.

And also, I'll tell you this about our -- about our leadership in the military. When we're looking at the use of these weapons, we're asking

ourselves, will it be decisive? What's the difference on the battlefield? And honestly, a few dozen ATACMs, unless it's coupled with complete synergy

of other resources, it's not decisive.

And so at every stage along the way, the Pentagon's response to the White House and State Department is just, you're not giving them weapons that can

be decisive. So why give them weapons at all if you don't have a policy that says they're going to try to win?

So it really goes back to the policy issue, Bianna. It really does. And the policy, from the beginning, has been a sort of no win for Russia, no loss

for Ukraine. It's like setting up two bumper markers.

And the question is, OK, but what's the -- those are the barriers. But what's the real objective here? And so now, we're talking about the Olaf

Scholz' call to Putin.

Well, every time you make a call to Putin, it's more -- it's more assurance to Putin that Western will is weakening. So it gives him more reason to

hang on and continue. This war is only going to end when Putin realizes he cannot win.

ASHER: Well said. General Wesley Clark live for us there. Thank you so much.

GOLODRYGA: It's great to have you on. Thank you.

ASHER: Yes.

CLARK: Thank you, Zain. Thank you, Bianna.

ASHER: Of course. All right. Still to come, burglars break into the grounds of Britain's royal Windsor Castle. Details on the major security breach and

what the masked thieves stole, ahead.

GOLODRYGA: And Sean "Diddy" Combs now being accused by prosecutors of trying to obstruct their investigation and taint the jury pool all from

behind bars. The music mogul's legal team's already firing back. That's just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:45:55]

GOLODRYGA: Well, lawyers for Sean "Diddy" Combs are accusing prosecutors of violating their clients' constitutional rights for obtaining the music

mogul's personal notes from his jail cell. They're also asking the judge overseeing Combs' sex trafficking case to hold a hearing about it.

ASHER: Yes. Over the weekend, the prosecution fired new allegations at Combs claiming that he, based on part of those notes, had been trying to

influence witnesses ahead of his trial.

CNN'S Kara Scannell joins us live now from New York. What more do we know about this alleged witness-tampering, Kara?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So Combs' lawyers, as you said, are pushing back here. They're asking the judge to hold an evidentiary hearing

because they believe that prosecutors have improperly and, as they put it, outrageously got notes, personal notes, from Sean Diddy's jail cell. And

that is because they got those notes as a result of a pre-planned sweep across all BOP facilities. But his lawyers are now saying that that

violated his constitutional rights.

Prosecutors initially disclosed this over the weekend to Sean Combs' legal team, telling them that they think shouldn't get bail. This is what this

argument is all about. The Combs' lawyer is still trying to get him released on bail.

Their prosecutor is saying that they learned by looking at these notes and through other information they detected that Combs is still trying to evade

law enforcement from jail and is attempting to contact witnesses in this case.

They say that he's done this several ways. Used the phone's accounts belonging to eight other inmates to try to evade detection. And he also has

engaged in three-way phone calls where he would call one person and then someone who he's not allowed to contact that's not on some pre-approved

list, he would make contact with the person that way.

And they also say that he was working on some social media campaigns to try to influence the potential jury pool, telling his children how to post

certain posts around his birthday and then studying the analytics and looking at the audience engagement time.

So prosecutors say he's trying to corruptly influence this trial, the jury process, behind closed doors while he's in jail. So they're saying that he

shouldn't be granted any bail following the rules now behind bars, why would he follow them if he was released?

Now, Combs will be due in court on Friday for this bail hearing. His lawyers will try for the third time to get him released, and so far it

hasn't worked. Bianna, Zain.

ASHER: Kara Scannell, live for us there. Thank you so much.

We'll be right back with more after the short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:50:52]

ASHER: It is a major breach of security for one of Britain's royal residences. Masked thieves broke into the grounds of Windsor Castle while

members of the British royal family were believed to be asleep nearby.

GOLODRYGA: Yes. Police said the incident took place last month, but what they stole may surprise you. Max Foster has the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ROYAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): You would have thought it was one of the most secure compounds in Britain, a base for all the U.K.'s

senior royals. But that didn't stop burglars from breaking into Windsor Castle grounds.

Police say thieves entered a farm building on the Crown Estate land late on Sunday October the 13th, stealing a pickup truck and a quad bike before

making their escape. The farm just minutes away from Windsor Castle and from Adelaide Cottage, where the Prince and Princess of Wales have a family

home, and they were likely there that night.

FOSTER: There's no indication that the royal family were targeted or ever in any danger. But the incident does show another security breach

surrounding the royals. Kate and William live on the estate in a cottage during school term time with their children and they don't live with any

staff, so it does raise questions.

And for their part, Kensington and Buckingham Palace both say they don't comment on security matters.

FOSTER (voice-over): The break-in just days before King Charles and Queen Camilla's long flight to visit Australia and Samoa. The couple weren't at

Windsor when the break-in took place.

Incidents like this aren't new, and this one certainly not the most serious.

In 2021, a man broke into Windsor Castle itself wearing a mask and armed with this weapon, a crossbow. The 19-year-old was hoping to kill Queen

Elizabeth II. But he was stopped before he could harm her. Still, the incident raising serious concerns about security around the royal family.

Max Foster, CNN London.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ASHER: All right. We spent some time this hour addressing the serious questions surrounding some of Donald Trump's controversial cabinet picks,

so maybe we should have a minute to perhaps laugh about it as well.

GOLODRYGA: It is the best medicine, right? Well, Alec Baldwin returned to Saturday Night Live this weekend. You'll be surprised who he appeared at

as. He's obviously appeared as Trump for many years, but this time, he was tasked with playing Trump's Health and Human Services nominee, RFK Jr. Have

a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALEC BALDWIN, AMERICAN ACTOR: Americans need someone to teach them how to be healthy someone like me, a 70-year-old man with movie star looks and a

worm in his brain.

JAMES AUSTIN JOHNSON, AMERICAN COMEDIAN: Bobby, I love you. I can't wait to see what you do with this country in terms of health and with regard to

measles outbreak.

BADLWIN: I care deeply about a woman's right to choose, to choose to give her child polio.

All right. I got to go. I got a dead dolphin in my car. I'm thinking about sawing it in half and dumping it in Central Park.

JOHNSON: Instead of being rude and crazy like usual, I'm doing quiet and serene. Which in many ways is a lot scarier.

[12:55:01]

DANA CARVEY, AMERICAN COMEDIAN: I'm going to sit here and smile while ignoring the giant fire right behind me. Just like that meme. Can we put it

up side by side? And this is fine.

(LAUGHS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: Oh, my god.

ASHER: I needed that.

GOLODRYGA: Dana Carvey as Joe Biden is so funny.

ASHER: I needed that.

CARVEY: At one point, Trump invited President Biden to be part of his cabinet. It was actually a really funny cold open.

Well, that does it for this hour of ONE WORLD. I'm Bianna Golodryga.

ASHER: I'm Zain Asher. Appreciate you watching. "AMANPOUR" is up next.

(INAUDIBLE) Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: No fire. Yes, no fires behind us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:00]

END