That’s What Xi Said: Trump’s China Summit

Hank joined BJ's Wholesale Club the day he became a father of 30. I coach football. Now, Coach Hank saves up to 25% off grocery store prices. 30 pounds of pasta, 3 cases of protein bars, 75 sports drinks. And that's just pregame. He knows teamwork, and BJ's knows savings. This is your home, Coach. Home of the Save. Join for just $20 at bjs.com slash mesquite and save 10 cents per gallon for 6 months. Open soon. Limited time offer. New members only. BJ's. Home of the Save. It's Friday, September 25th, and for two countries who think they could be imperiled by the other, they seem awfully friendly. We start here. President Trump rolls out the red carpet for Chinese President Xi Jinping. There were troops on display, military jets flying overhead. If the warmth was artificial, that's likely because of artificial intelligence. We'll break down the negotiations. A judge said to reinstate the reporters, the White House kept them out anyway. Over and over again, these reporters were going, back to the Secret Service booth and essentially getting turned away. Now even with the journalists back in the building, there are new questions for the free press. And how many service members have to try to kill themselves before something changes? We've talked to some people who say, oh, that's normal for a deployment, but this was unlike any other deployment. As the Iran war continues, a disturbing report about our sailors in the Middle East. From ABC News, this is Start Here. I'm Brad Milkey. I'm Brad Milkey. I'm Brad Milkey. President Trump has met a lot of world leaders this week. That's what happens when the world comes to the United Nations and you're the U.S. president. You can shake hands with as many of them as you want. But perhaps no meeting mattered more than this one yesterday in Washington. In a variety of ways, the U.S. and China are on kind of a collision path. The U.S. is used to being the world's dominant superpower, while China is ascendant. And whenever Chinese President Xi Jinping wants something, whether it's a megacity built from scratch or a larger military or an entire AI industry, he's got a billion people at his disposal to make it happen. But while clear rivals, there's also a case to be made that these two countries' fates are intertwined. They can make each other's lives easier or much, much harder. Which is why, when Xi made his way down a red carpet toward Washington yesterday for an official state visit, you could tell everyone had their game faces on. Let's go straight to the West Wing now. ABC's Chief White House Correspondent, Mary Bruce, is standing by. Mary, general vibes check. What was it like over there? A lot of pomp and circumstance, Brad. I mean, the president really pulled out all of the stops to welcome Chinese President Xi. This was a lavish display from the Trump administration. There were troops on display, military jets flying overhead, Trump giving Xi a special tour of his White House renovations, eager to show off his new helipad, Trump telling reporters that Xi, quote, loves good granite. The president even taking Xi, onto Marine One. The president piling on the praise from the start. And inside the White House, the president declared that he and the Chinese leader, quote, have forged a friendship, a truly great friendship. He said it was built on mutual respect and the vital interests of our people. But he did not mention the war with Iran and China's support for Iran as it targets American troops and allies in the war. Now, for his part, Xi called the interests of China and the U.S., quote, deeply intertwined, adding that their, quote, should be a race of catching up with one another, not a wrestle in which one either wins or loses. But this is the thing, is when it comes to the world of artificial intelligence, people increasingly say there is kind of one big winner and one big, like whoever's first to become like the dominant AI player is a winner. And so did that end up being kind of one of the more heated discussions that was anticipated, at least? And what are the two sides thinking about? Yeah, I mean, the rapid growth of AI certainly is a critical issue for discussion here. And while the president did say that it would be a big topic of discussion, he said in a post before yesterday's summit that he wants to leave it exactly where it is. And he said that's China's position also. So it doesn't seem that much progress was made when it comes to the question of any possible future coordination between the U.S. and China on this issue. That's wild because we've been hearing so much about how American AI companies are sort of looking to China being like, we'd really like to slow down how much these AI, agents are able to do without human input. China is like, we would like to regulate more like who's able to use these systems, but they're less concerned about, you know, the doomsday scenarios. And so what you just got each country being like, OK, I guess we'll stick with where we are. What other issues were coming up between these two countries? Certainly, there are plenty of other topics they could discuss everything from trade to the pandas that China is now gifting to the Atlanta Zoo. But I think the overarching theme here is that while the day was, is heavy on ceremony, it seems to be light on substance. There were not deliverables that were announced coming out of these meetings. In fact, the two leaders spent just about 90 minutes together behind closed doors throughout the entire day. This was really a show of friendship and the personal relationship between the two countries more than it seems to be focused on coming out and announcing concrete progress on some of these thornier issues. But that's really interesting that the friendship itself, like President Trump seems to have taken some heat for. Even in fighting Xi, right? Why? Yet look on Capitol Hill, many Republicans are unhappy with the president for embracing the Chinese leader right in the middle of this war. I mean, she's here now. I mean, I understand that, you know, Trump has to be diplomatic, but she's a despicable person that is killing us with fentanyl, building a military to try to defeat us. The idea that we are rolling out the red carpet for authoritarian leaders, especially when we have very strong information about China being engaged in support. Voting Iran, targeting us, everything's turned over on its head right now. Democrats are also zeroing in on China's support for Iran. Look, you are hearing from members of both parties on the Hill who are urging the president to get tougher on China. I'm not sure we saw much of that yesterday. Really interesting, especially since President Trump, in regard to AI, kept saying American companies need to be fighting China in this race. And now everything's sort of kumbaya for the moment. All right. Mary Bruce, thank you so much. Thanks, Brad. Next up on the show. I'll start here. If there was a little less TV coverage of this summit than you were expecting. Well, now you know why we're back in a bit. Today, I want to tell you about an exciting new deal from our friends at Cozy Earth. Take a moment and think back to the best night of sleep you ever had. Did it feel like you might never sleep that well again? Well, good news. You can give yourself an amazing night of sleep every night by upgrading your bedding to Cozy Earth. Cozy Earth offers luxury bedding at an incredible price, their ultra soft temperature regulating sheets, coverlets, and duvet covers are the perfect companion for a night of uninterrupted relaxation. The sheets come in all different colors and stripes, so there's something for everyone, whether you're doing a big fall refresh for your master bedroom or updating a guest room in time for the holidays. And as comfy as they are on day one, they actually only get better from there because they are designed to get softer with every wash. Best of all, with our limited time deal, the already great prices are even better. You can get 50% off a wide assortment of bedding options by going to our unique, that's right, 50% off, but hurry, this deal is only for a very limited time. Get yourself the bedding of your dreams. Right now, go to abcsecretsavings.com slash start here for 50% off the best bedding you will ever sleep on. That's abcsecretsavings.com slash start here. I coach football. Now, Coach Hank saves up to 25% off grocery store prices, 30 pounds of pasta, three cases of protein bars. 75 sports drinks. He knows teamwork and BJ's knows savings. Home of the Save. Join for just $20 at bjs.com slash mesquite and save 10 cents per gallon for six months. Open soon. Limited time offer. New members only. BJ's. Home of the Save. From the moment the Trump administration decided to ban three big time news organizations from the White House, it seemed obvious there would be a lot of trouble. There were significant legal hurdles here. A federal judge had already ruled against the first Trump administration when it tried to ban a CNN reporter. And wouldn't you know, this time around, when CNN and Politico and MSNOW sued the White House this week, that exact same judge was assigned to the case. Well, yesterday morning, reporters returned expecting their access to be restored, but it wasn't. Not immediately, at least. ABC's Alex Mallon covers the Justice Department. Alex, this became kind of a fast-moving legal soggy yesterday. What did the judge rule for? And what's happened since? Yeah, so it was really frantic. We got this ruling from Judge Timothy Kelly around 1 a.m. on Wednesday morning, and then we expected, based on this ruling, he effectively said that the White House needed to restore all of the reporters' hard passes that had been revoked as a result of this announced White House ban. Hard passes, like security, those are like the security passes you get just to go in the building consistently. Yes, exactly. And what happened after the ban was reporters were coming in and they'd arrive at the gates, they'd touch. They'd touch the security pad. And essentially, from right then, Secret Service began revoking and pulling back those hard passes and essentially confiscating them. So what we got from this ruling from this judge on Wednesday morning was essentially ordering the White House to immediately, in the words of this order, restore all the access for all the reporters who had their credentials revoked. And that set off a clock. And we saw, beginning around 6 a.m. yesterday, reporters from CNN, MSNOW, and Politico start to arrive at the White House. the White House. And they were being turned away and, you know, open, essentially defiance of what this order called for. There was one producer from CNN who reported being able to get in, but largely everybody was being turned away. And this took place over the course of several hours over and over again. These reporters were going back to the Secret Service booth and essentially getting turned away and being told that Secret Service had received no guidance from the White House press office, that anything had changed as a result of this ruling, Brad. So was this like it takes a while to update the systems or was this the White House refusing to comply with the order? Because, I mean, that's a that's a judge's ruling. I imagine that would be illegal to just say no. Yes. So what happened as a result of these reports being turned away is they went back to their lawyers, this media coalition. And the lawyer, Ted. Boutros immediately filed with Judge Timothy Kelly at the D.C. District Court, saying that it appeared that the administration was openly in defiance of his order. And he asked and the judge quickly asked the administration to clarify by 1230 p.m. yesterday what their response was. Were they actually intending to defy his order? And we saw right before 1230, the White House press office, their lead responded, basically giving a timeline and saying they in no way that they were trying. They just basically laid out a timeline of the communications that they had received as a result of the order and the back and forth that that resulted between Secret Service and in order to effectuate getting all of these reporters credentials reactivated, essentially. And then shortly after noon, we did see reporters beginning to get access again to the White House complex. OK, so then at this moment, then CNN, MSNOW, Politico do have access once again to the White House. But again, this was all just over a restraining order. Right. I mean, what are the potential outcomes for news coverage of the White House now and when the judge rules on the merits, perhaps? Yeah, I mean, so the crux of this order from Judge Timothy Kelly is that none of the outlets were given proper due process. They were not given a right to contest the White House's efforts to ban them. So you could presumably see the White House seeing this new order as an instruction for them to now enter into this idea that they have a they have to give notice to the reporters and to the outlets that they are. Trying to remove them. And then that could set out a potential process where the news organizations then have to go back to the White House to try and argue the case why they should still retain their access to the building. That's separate and apart from the case. But this essentially this order from Judge Kelly sets out a 14 day clock. And now he's asking the lawyers from the media outlets to essentially argue whether he should extend his injunction against the administration that will still give them the right to the building. So we're going to see. A series of filings over the next two weeks and then potentially again going back to court to see the White House argue against these news organizations and make the case for why they should again potentially have their credentials revoked. And right to the building, Alex, or right to cover the president, because there could be a difference, right? I mean, the White House could say, yeah, you're allowed on the building grounds. But actually, when we're doing this photo op in the Oval Office, I could imagine the president being like, no, no, no, CNN, not you. Is a judge allowed to be like, no, this reporter gets. To be in the room. This reporter gets to ask questions. How far does this go? Yeah. And that's going to be the biggest back and forth. I think that we're going to see on the ground at the White House over the next couple of weeks. Does the White House seek to restrict the same way that they did with the Associated Press earlier in the year last year? We saw them be banned from presidential trips for banned from going into the Oval Office. Do we see the White House try and effectuate something like that with these particular outlets? But in their mind, the White House, at least what we saw. Earlier this week, their total victory is having them banned outright from the White House complex. They believe that covering the White House is a privilege, not a right. And they believe they can make the case that these outlets represent a, in their words, national security threat. They pointed to various stories that some of the outlets did, many of which were not even written by their White House reporters that they say amount to threats to the potential security of the White House. Again, that is something that did. I don't want to sit well with this district court judge, but the White House has vowed and the Justice Department has vowed that they will plan to appeal up the circuit court and potentially as high as the Supreme Court to make the case why they should have the ultimate discretion as to who is able to cover the building based on whatever arguments they want to make. And again, what's so interesting is as this goes on, you're seeing like a state dinner is usually a thing you'd want the world to see. Like, that's why you do it is to have the pictures and the images of the two presidents breaking bread together. The broadcast pool did not put out any of those. Because it still hasn't been confirmed that CNN will actually be able to do the coverage that, you know, even if they're allowed in the building. Alex Mallon, thank you. Thanks, Brad. With the war in Iran continuing in fits and starts, American service members have been in battle mode for months now. Thousands of them are in aircraft carrier groups patrolling waters near the Middle East. It's hard vexing work. In fact, last month, you remember, we told you about the conditions that sailors on the USS Lincoln were dealing with on a deployment that was much longer. These guys hadn't set foot on solid ground in months. And at the time, families were expressing concern that some of them had attempted suicide. It was a scary time. It was difficult. Imagine if you're, you know, Trey or any of the other 5,000 kids and the president comes on and says that you haven't been on the ship nearly long enough. Well, gee, how does that make you feel? You know, it's just terrible messaging and frustrating. Yesterday, the acting secretary of the Navy put out a letter. And not only did he seem to confirm attempts, there appeared to be a lot more than we knew. About ABC's chief global affairs correspondent, Martha Raddatz joins us. Martha, what are we learning from this report? Well, this acting secretary of the Navy actually confirmed that there were eight sailors who attempted to take their lives during this deployment. Now, this is in the Lincoln carrier strike group, which means it just wasn't on the carrier. There were also other warships that the sailors were on. But that was really eye opening. And Brad, we've talked to some people who say, oh, that's normal for a deployment. But this was unlike any other deployment. And I think we also have to remember that we had the secretary of defense saying the conditions on the Lincoln and all these reports about suicide completely misrepresented what was happening. Completely misrepresented. Listen, we make sure that every ship, every crew, every captain has everything we can provide them at every single moment. So I think that's part of why people, whether this is normal during a deployment, it's certainly shocking to hear those numbers. And because this deployment was record breaking, record breaking, the longest at sea carrier group ever without going into a port. So at sea, the longest ever. I see. And when you say like it's normal, that's because like what, when there's thousands upon thousands of sailors on the water, like there are statistics over years and years of how many, many of them might attempt to take their own lives. And yet, I mean, is there conversation about conditions or length of deployment times? Is any of that going to come into focus from from the Pentagon? I think that's something that has to be looked at. And you're hearing people on the Hill saying that's exactly what they should do. We need to be guided by what the facts are. And I don't know what those are. And we need to know. I'm absolutely appalled that these suicide attempts have happened. But also they've been apparent. We can feel what is it about the conditions because this was such a lengthy time at sea. I mean, those sailors did not touch ground for months and months and months because they couldn't go into a port because the ports were dangerous or destroyed. So they were at sea for longer than ever before. So I think that is something that they'll look at. I mean, when you hear somebody say, oh, it's normal that, you know, eight sailors would try to take their lives. I mean, suicide in the military is a huge problem. There is no question about it in the military and with veterans. It is a huge, huge problem. But hearing these numbers and knowing what the conditions on that ship were at times is really eye opening. The other question I had for you, Martha, you met the president of Iran yesterday after his appearances at the United Nations. I mean, while we're talking about how this war doesn't seem to be ending, what can you tell us about him and I guess his outlook on the war? Well, I think it's quite extraordinary to be, in the room with someone who is the enemy of the United States and who we heard also this week railing against President Trump after President Trump threatened to annihilate Iran, that he was trying to make a decision whether he'd do that or come to an agreement. He was not confrontational. He met with a group of journalists in a hotel in downtown New York, very near the U.N. It wasn't exactly a press conference. There weren't really, a lot of follow ups they had, but they would take a list of questions and he would he would answer them. And I think the takeaway is really that they do want some sort of agreement. Now, are they going to get one that's good for the United States that President Trump will accept? We don't know. I mean, they have been at odds. But he also talked a lot about what it's like inside Iran, which is, of course, the big mystery. We we have heard many voices talk about, you know, about the conditions. But he he basically said that people are suffering that despite that, he said it is impossible for the U.S. to make Iran surrender, which is, think, a lesson that the United States is learning right now, given how long this has lasted. Fascinating that you are among this group of reporters. All right, Martha Raddatz, thank you so much. You bet, Brad. Okay, one more quick break. When we come back, if you've got a photographic memory, well, you're going to be really confused when someone edits you out of the photo. One last thing is next. Tammy regularly hauls stuff to her kids at college. That's why she shops at BJ's Wholesale Club, saving up to 25% off grocery store prices. Beef jerky, microwave meals, laundry pods, even they can't screw up. Have you met my kids? And with BJ's gas, she gets there for less. They call me the road warrior. This is your home, road warrior mom. Home of the save. Open soon. Limited time offer, new members only. BJ's, home of the save. Do you hear that? That sound, right? That means that summer's officially here. It means that grown adults just sprint into the street for a frozen dessert shaped like a cartoon. But this summer, Mint Mobile has a better treat. Every plan, including unlimited, is $15 a month. And unlike ice cream, it won't drip down your wrist or look nothing like the picture. Does anyone have any cash? Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for a 12-month plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. New customer offer for initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes. May slow when network is busy. See terms. And one last thing. You know those college catalog shots where everyone seems to be smiling, everyone's wearing their college sweatshirt, no matter whether they're in the quad or the chemistry lab, no one is stressed out ever. These have been cringeworthy for decades, and that was before AI was on the scene. This week, the student paper, the Stanford Review, interviewed a senior named Billy Ramirez, who had taken a photo with two other students in the cafeteria. They're all smiling, holding their food. It ended up being an advertisement for the university. It was up on posters. What became weird, though, was Billy wasn't in it. He had been digitally replaced. That's right. While the original photo featured an East Asian woman, a white guy, and Ramirez, Ramirez had inexplicably been swapped with a black woman wearing a Stanford sweatshirt. She's still holding trays with the same food Ramirez was holding. It's bizarre, because one stereotype about these photographs is every group of friends always seems to magically include exactly one student of each race. You know what I'm talking about? Colleges are diverse, but rarely like this. Well, here it appeared someone had harnessed artificial intelligence to create this very aesthetic. Several students told our station KGO that they found it funny and then troubling. It's kind of unacceptable. You know, Stanford is a place where we have, they actually pride themselves on having students from like over 60 different countries in their incoming class. Like they have diversity that they shouldn't need to fabricate it. Stanford admits that it messed up. In a statement, they said, quote, we have reviewed the matter and confirmed that AI was used to alter the image in violation of university policy. The banners with the image in question have been removed, end quote. But as you look at these photos side by side, you realize the switcheroo was not the only liberty taken here. In the original photo, the guy in the middle has headphones around his neck. They've been digitally removed. Then you realize, wait, have his eyebrows been darkened? Even more bizarre, the face of the young woman on the left appears to be thinner than the original. Did a photo editor decide she needed to be slimmed down? In many ways, this is a story that could have happened 10 or 20 years ago, right? This would not be the first school to offer a curated look at its student body. But in the AI era, it's also easier than ever to make these micro edits on a whim. That's the difference now. Anyone, not just a senior photo editor or marketing director, anyone can say, eh, yeah, let's see what she would look like with higher cheekbones. I think it was like weird because like, obviously there's pictures of like different people already, like out there. So why like change stuff with AI? With all that power at their fingertips, the next generation is going to have to decide how to wield it and why. You hope some of the best and brightest at Stanford will have some ideas by the time they graduate. I also wonder how the young woman who was added feels about all this. Like, what if she's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, I would never eat that much chow mein as that kid was eating. Now I'm going to be holding his food on these banners. Start Here is produced by Anthony Ali. Ferrer, Emily Schutz, Vika Aronson, and introducing our newly promoted coordinating producer, Jen Newman. Couldn't be more deserving of the big bump. Ariel Chester is our social media producer. Josh Kohan is director of podcast programming. I'm our managing editor. Thanks to John Newman, Tara Gimbel, Eamon McNiff, and Katie Dendos. Special thanks this week to Catherine Falders, Michelle Stoddart, Armando Garcia, and my wife, Jolenta Greenberg, for loaning me her phone for two days because I lost mine in a cab. You know how difficult it is to do this? You know how difficult it is to do this job without a phone? Because now I do. I'm Brad Milkey. I'll see you next week. They call me the road leader. Home of the save. Open soon. Do you hear that? That sound, right? Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for 12 month plan required. $15 per month equivalent to taxes and fees extra. New customer offer for initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy. See terms.