our top story: president trump has said the us and the uk have the greatest alliance the world has ever known. after talks with the outgoing british prime minister, theresa may, the president also promised what he described as a phenomenal trade deal after brexit. in australia, the disgraced catholic cardinal george pell is in court to appeal against his convictions for sexually abusing two choir boys in the 1990s. and this vigil has caught people's attention on the bbc news website. tens of thousands of people have gathered to hold a vigil in hong kong marking the 30th anniversary of the massacre of pro—democracy protestors in beijing's tiananmen square. it is one of the few places in china commemorations can be safely held. that's all, stay with bbc world news.

now on bbc news, it's hardtalk. stephen sackur speaks to american billionaire and democratic party donor tom steyer. welcome to hardtalk, i'm stephen sackur. as donald trump and family revel in the pomp and circumstance of a state visit to london, his staunchest political opponents continue to plot a pathway to impeachment. my my guest today is funding much of that effort. tom steyer is a californian hedge fund billionaire turned deep—pocketed backer of liberal causes, and he is funding much of that effort. his focus was climate change. now, it is impeachment. he is a powerfulforce in the democratic party. but is he in danger of pushing the party in the wrong direction?

tom steyer, welcome to hardtalk. stephen, thank you for having me. would it be fair to say that, over the last couple of years, the impeachment of president donald trump has become your political obsession? well, let me say this. i started an organisation called nexgen america, that is the largest grassroots organisation, political organisation, in the united states, which did the largest youth voter mobilisation in american history last year, that knocked on $10 million with their partners in the organised labour movement, and that

also ran three statewide propositions to push for 50% clean energy by 2030. so it's true that oui’ energy by 2030. so it's true that our organisation need to impeach has got over 8 million signatures, and i have spent a lot of time doing town hall stalking people about —— talking to people about the danger that trump presents to the people of the united states and to our way of life —— need to impeach. but it's also true that our organisation has done a lot of grassroots, the most of any organisation. true, and that's why imagine your commitment to the climate change issue. you have been committed to that for many yea rs, have been committed to that for many years, you have funded various democratic party campaigns, but as i say, last couple of years, i would like to know how much money you have spent on the need to impeach president trump movement, and in particular on a whole series of tv ads that have run across the nation? i honest to goodness don't have a ha rd i honest to goodness don't have a hard number, stephen. ithink our campaign has cost over 30 million bucks. yes, i have seen estimate that go as high as 60 or 70, just on

the impeachment campaign. that go as high as 60 or 70, just on the impeachment campaignlj that go as high as 60 or 70, just on the impeachment campaign. i think that's probably an exaggeration, but i don't think we have a hard number. but it's not far off, is it? it somewhere between what i said and what you said. what interests me is that you started calling for the impeachment of donald trump long before robert miller's special council investigation was complete, and your list of reasons why trump has to be impeached goes far beyond any sort of legal cause —— robert mueller. well, really what happened was this, let me go into why i think he should impeached. we got 50 plus legal scholars, constitutional lawyers, to come up with the criteria that he met to be impeached, and they gave us ten or 11, and we put them on our website. but what i've been saying for the last year and a half is that mr trump has met the criteria for impeachment in public site, very clearly. 0ne impeachment in public site, very clearly. one is the obstruction of justice, which mr robert mueller did

a two year, exhaustive investigation into, and you can read it. yes, and refused to reach a conclusion. well, actually what he said was... and i have read it, what he said was, i'm not allowed to draw a conclusion from this other than that he is innocent, and i can't say that. so here is the rules for finding innocent, and i can't say that. so here is the rules forfinding him guilty. here is the evidence. and they all meet the rules. but he never said therefore he is guilty. he said the only people who can draw that conclusion our congress. he has all the information. they are the people who have to hold him to account. i've done all the work and all the investigation, here it is. that's one thing. well, we'll get back to that, but one more, there's two many. there's three. the second one's corruption. he takes payments from foreign governments through his real estate operations and from american corporations that are under his jurisdiction. american corporations that are under hisjurisdiction. and three, his refused any kind of oversight from congress. he's refused to have anyone in the administration answer anyone in the administration answer a subpoena, testify to congress. on

this or anything else, while they are investigating him, for oversight. that is all three of those are absolutely against the constitution, important refusals to do his duty as president, and is contrary to his oath of office. those allegations. donald trump has responded by calling you, and i'm quoting him, wacky and unhinged, and toa quoting him, wacky and unhinged, and to a certain extent one can see where he is coming from when some of your reasons for saying that donald trump has to be impeached include things like bringing america to the brink of nuclear war. his attacks on the free press. now, you might not like his attitude to the press, but it certainly isn't an impeachable offence. well, listen, asi it certainly isn't an impeachable offence. well, listen, as i said originally, stephen, we got constitutional lawyers to draw up what they thought. yes, but it does mean that what they concluded was credible, in terms of impeachment. my credible, in terms of impeachment. my point is for a year and a half i have gone around saying only two things, andi have gone around saying only two things, and i said then, that he is not willing to talk to congress. and thatis not willing to talk to congress. and that is what i have said consistently is, one, he has

obstructed justice, two, he is corrupt and has taken payment from foreign governments which is absolutely against the constitution, and lastly, now he has refused to do hisjob as president and lastly, now he has refused to do his job as president and deal with other branches of government. of course, in the end impeachment is a political process that has to take place in the us congress. do you think it is healthy for us democracy and us politics that a billionaire like yourself can plough, let's ee, like yourself can plough, let's agree, tens of millions of dollars into tv advertising, other sorts of campaigning, which create this sort of sense of a movement demanding donald trump's impeachment, when all of the opinion polls, and indeed all of the opinion polls, and indeed all of the opinion polls, and indeed all of the political anecdotal evidence that democrats as well as republicans see on the ground across america suggests the us public by a majority, doesn't want it to happen? well, actually, if you look at what's going on, what we've done is runa what's going on, what we've done is run a petition drive. we have more than 8 million americans... in a country of well over 300 million. of

which about1 country of well over 300 million. of which about 1 —— country of well over 300 million. of which about1 —— 100 million vote. so we have had 8 million american signa so we have had 8 million american sign a petition saying that he should be impeached, and when you go around, the way that americans will get their information is by televised, tv hands. that is what happened in 1974 with richard nixon, another corrupt president who had the exact same kind of ratings that you refer to. until, the exact same kind of ratings that you referto. until, infact, the exact same kind of ratings that you refer to. until, in fact, the people in washington held a series of televised hearings showing his corruption, and showing that in fact he was a president who was doing damage to the country. the people of the united states changed as a result of those hearings, after not before. and so what we have been saying all along is, put the evidence on tv. we have one hearing, which was michael cohen, it moved your number is 6%. and in fact, all we have to do is let the americans, whether they are democrats, republicans or independence, see the information and they will be revolted. you are suggesting that in fa ct revolted. you are suggesting that in fact he hasn't done anything wrong,

that's absolutely untrue. no, it's really not important what i think, what i'm suggesting. what i do think we need to come back to, because of your answer and because of the importance of due process, is a discussion of your contention that there is clear evidence of obstruction of justice. there is clear evidence of obstruction ofjustice. my contention to you is that the reading of the robert mueller report, what mueller said in the response to it, does not indicate that there is clear evidence of sufficient grounds for charges of obstruction of justice. sufficient grounds for charges of obstruction ofjustice. because, frankly, robert mueller could have indicated that with his belief if he chose to do so. he didn't. he left it entirely inconclusive. and the attorney general, the tightly —— top legal officer of the united states, look at the evidence in the mueller report and concluded there was no basis for criminal charges. and i respond to that? the attorney general of the united states has become the absolutely dishonest tool of mrtrump. become the absolutely dishonest tool of mr trump. 1000 prosecutors have looked at the evidence that you say

is inconclusive and say this is an open and shut case to bring obstruction of justice. open and shut case to bring obstruction ofjustice. do you believe in the fundamental principle of innocent until proven guilty? of course i do, but that is a principle for the law courts. this, as you pointed out, is a political case. we have a president of the united states who is not obeying the rule of law, who is trying to make himself above the law, and to put his interests ahead of the interests of the people of the united states. so... and that is not a trivial point. so if you are to get your way and the impeachment of president trump, it will become a political process , trump, it will become a political process, it will go into the us congress and be dealt with by the house of representatives. your big problem as a democrat is that the leader of your part in the house, speaker nancy pelosi, says impeachment is off the table. it is so divisive to the country that u nless so divisive to the country that unless there is something so compelling, overwhelming and bipartisan, i do not think we should go down that path. it is just not

worth it. she is the speaker of the house, and what she is saying is that, if republicans don't go along with this, that i think we need a bipartisan vote in the senate, and i'm not going to do this on a part is in basis, as a democrat. the only thing i can say is this. this is about the people of the united states, not just people about the people of the united states, notjust people in washington, dc. i know the rules of impeachment, and they do occur in washington, dc. but the only way that this will happen in the real world as if we put the evidence in front of the american people, let them see that there is actually a fundamental attack on the rule of law and democracy itself, coming from the white house. and if they in fa ct from the white house. and if they in fact look at that on a bipartisan, non—partisan basis, from a patriotic standpoint, and say our country is under attack by its own leader, that we will in fact get the result that i'm talking about. well, i don't

wa nt to i'm talking about. well, i don't want to trade opinion polls with you all day, but if you insist on bringing it back to the feeling amongst the american people, i do have to just quote you the most recent polls, within the last month, ipso ‘s reuters poll, 50% of adult america say that continued investigation into trump would negatively interfere with government business. 54% of the nation, across the nation, the surveys most recent, suggest 54% against impeachment. so you are not taking the public with you. my point is there is no way for the public to understand this. we have had one hearing. it moved impeachment polls 6%. we should be having a dozen hearings, and in fa ct, having a dozen hearings, and in fact, when you say it's going to interview with the the business of the united states government, the business of the united states government in washington, dc is at a standstill, stephen. i don't know if you are aware of it, but if you look at the big issues in the united states, comprehensive immigration reform, not possible to be discussed. gun violence, off the table. climate. we are the only

country in the world that is not in the paris accord. we have an inability to discuss energy policy at any level. sorry, are you suggesting to me that going down the track of a full—fledged impeachment process is going to improve the possibilities of getting things done in washington? daly well, let me give you a scenario where in fact thatis give you a scenario where in fact that is exactly true, because what i'm positing and which i believe to be entirely true is that this government is at system failure. an inability to even discuss, let alone pass, legislation on the major issues of the day. so let's start for a second. about the idea that we actually have a series of hearings at which americans across the country get to see exactly what the president is doing, yet to react to it, and come to the conclusion together that there is something they can do. you are so fundamentally out of sync with many, many elected representatives of the party you have back for so many yea rs. we party you have back for so many years. we talked about nancy pelosi, but on the ground it's

years. we talked about nancy pelosi, but on the ground its people like hakeem jeffries, a congressman who is in the democratic caucus has told the new york times very recently, listen, we didn't campaign on impeachment. we didn't campaign on collusion, or obstruction of justice. what we campaigned on was lowering healthcare costs, and that is what we should be focused on. ok, let me make a couple of points about american politics. hakeem jeffries is the number five american politics. hakeem jeffries is the numberfive person in the democratic party and the congress. he is part of the leadership that reports on a daily basis to the speaker, nancy pelosi. 0k, let me ask you a question. you are telling me that because he is connected to nancy pelosi, who you no longer speak to, you are telling me that all of these people are totally misreading the interests of their own party? let me make a point to you, listen for a second. they are saying that what we campaigned on was healthcare costs. 0k, let me ask you the question. what is the chance

there is going to be something done on healthcare costs between now and 2021? well, i wouldn't think it's good, but it could be a whole lot worse if you undertake a partisan, toxic war, which the white house, by the way, says bring it on. they've said, and i'm going to quote you the campaign manager for trump 2020, brad pascal, says the more they beat the drum for impeachment, the more that emboldens our campaign, bring it on. let me make two points. mr trump has lied 10,000 times by the count of the washington post. secondly, when people talk, if you poled people before the election, they would say healthcare was their number one thing. but the real question is why? it's not that healthcare suddenly became an issue in 2018, what happened was the republicans three times try to take away the affordable care act, which would remove healthcare from tens of millions of americans and they came within one vote in the senate of doing so. so if you actually look at what happened in 2018, the number of democratic voters went up to

two—thirds. not because they suddenly discovered they needed to go to the doctor, but because the republicans were trying to take away their healthcare, were doing a lot of destructive things. so when you see mrtrump of destructive things. so when you see mr trump good as it wasn't about the impeachment, i beg to differ. it was very much about the threat that mrtrump was very much about the threat that mr trump represents to the people of the united states that makes the term out by democrats —— turnout, to go from 34 million to 59 million. let's leave that on one side. but this is a data driven question, stephen. i want to ask you a question, it's important and i think simple. which is more important to you? impeaching donald trump or getting a democrat into the white housein getting a democrat into the white house in 2020. you asking me this question is if getting him impeached will give us a better chance? which one is more important to you today?

i believe impeaching mr trump is critical for america i believe impeaching mr trump is criticalfor america and i believe impeaching mr trump is critical for america and i i believe impeaching mr trump is criticalfor america and i believe is the single thing that is for donald trump. there's an impression that you are giving that somehow it isa that you are giving that somehow it is a choice and it's not. it's not my impression, but let me give you different sides to the party you have finance to the tune of many tens of millions of dollars. david axelrod, knows a thing about winning elections, he was an advisor to barack 0bama, he has described your determination to use your money to push the impeachment campaign as" a vanity project. those quote which is doing the democrats no good. he did say that about a year ago. you know something? he implied somehow we we re something? he implied somehow we were going to hurt them in 2018, but in fact we were the largest grassroots organisation in the united states, we did the biggest turnout of youth in the history of the american — of america, the

turnout of people under 30 went from 18% four years ago to 41%, that is the largest generation in america. and they vote at a 44 point spread democrat to republican. so whatever david axelrod says, the truth is the programmes that we ran had more influence in turnout, which is the actual reason the democrats won the house, than anyone else. so whatever you're saying, what we did was change that election in a way that no—one else did. change that election in a way that no-one else did. how upset are you by the state of the democratic party today, then. we've talked about leadership in the congress, let's talk about the front runner for the presidential nomination. i lifted a pole before i came to the studio, jill biden was scoring 32% —— i looked at a pole. then bernie standers at 14% —— sanders, neither isa standers at 14% —— sanders, neither is a fresh or new voice in the democratic party. but the interesting thing is ——joe biden,

has made it plain. he doesn't think impeaching the president is the correct route to power. well, of the 24 democratic announced candidates, over half a for impeachment. and how well are they doing in the polls? joe biden is the only leading contender who is not for impeachment. and he is as you say, trying to carve out or himself a position as a moderate, the person who is in the middle, who is not taking on progressive causes, but is in effect moderating between the progressive wing of the party and moderate republicans. that's it. that's where he's trying to establish himself. why didn't you run? last year you were clearly toying with it. you tempted and taunted if you report is based saying i'm not entirely sure —— reporters, you now that you're not going to run for 2020. why?|j

reporters, you now that you're not going to run for 2020. why? i said to me the biggest threat to the country as the president, the biggest impact i could have was trying to make sure that america stood up for the rule of law. who are you going to back, then? biden's at 32%. you have to find someone to stop him if you want your kind of democrat to get to the white house. if you want a fighter who will push the impeachment of trump, who is it? steven, let me say this, you are acting like this is a one issue by itself. the democratic party is commonly described as a large tent. there are progresses in the democrat party, a bunch of them are running for president and they are very progressive on climate, they are very progressive on economics, there isa very progressive on economics, there is a whole host of issues where there is in the democratic party a range. who do you think right now has the voice that is closest to yours? look, we have spent a lot of time... give me a name. no, i'm not

going to. why not? because we're trying to find the right strategy to push down to the people so they can make the smartest decision. and if you look at what we have done, that is what we have done. we registered people to vote, going door—to—door to encourage them to vote and get them to the polls. so what we're trying to do with propositions on the ballot to change the law directly, with turn vote strategies and by petition drives is actually know what you are describing which is one person going to have his way with the system. but actually, to ta ke with the system. but actually, to take the power away from leeds and give it to the people so populations that don't dissipate who are underserved and underrepresented can have their voices heard —— elites. that is admirable work. well, my question to you would be how does a california, liberal progressive, billionaire hedge fund come the guy who reconnects the democrats to

those states that donald trump took in 2016 and which swung the election. i'm thinking michigan, west virginia, 0hio, wisconsin... how, given everything you have described as your set of values, are you going to be the guy to reconnect the party with those voters? look, in michigan, what we're going to do is what we did. by the way, michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania we re michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania were all huge democratic victories in 2018 and the reason was that democrats turned out. in fact, the real question is, and i — what are you inherently disagree with what you inherently disagree with what you are saying is the way that michigan and ms constant and —— wisconsin become democratic is by giving a straightforward, honest message and getting them to turn out. there are many more democratic —— democrats in the united states than republicans. and impeachment

get in the way of that? we are pushing to do it now. this is something that is a multi— month, but not a year—long recess, not a six—month process. we've been pushing for hearings now to have this happen, that the american people see what in, make a decision and move on. in fact, this is something that is time bound and urgent. in a word... no, iwant something that is time bound and urgent. in a word... no, i want to a nswer urgent. in a word... no, i want to answer your question. you owe challenging me about being the person in michigan, wisconsin and pennsylvania... we were getting people to turn out and vote with their values, not imposing our values but making democracy work, which is what is not happening. we have a breakdown in democracy in the us because people don't believe in the system. 80% of the people think isa sham the system. 80% of the people think is a sham and what we're trying to to do is rebuild the idea of buying for the people, everyone gets an equal vote. that is exactly what we're doing. that's what our organisation doesn't that's what

needs to happen for the united to go back to being a vibrant, proud country. a yes or no answer, please. laughter if you don't get your way, impeachment into the house of representatives as you say now, will you walk away and take your money away from the democratic party? first of all, you don't understand. we don't give money to the democratic party, we run programmes to energise voters and get them to come out. it doesn't go through the democratic party. we have independent programmes to push power down to the people. so we are going to stop doing that. i guarantee we are going to stop doing it. my going to pals and take mobile and go home? stephen, what we're trying to do something that we can't look away from us mark my going to take mobile and go home? this is not bickering about small bowl, this is about democracy existing in the united states itself. if the president doesn't have to obey the law, if the president is a king who can do what he wants, fine. let's establish

that, but if you want to set that precedent, i certainly don't. i don't think it's something you can walk away from, i think it is something that will endure and make us something that will endure and make usa something that will endure and make us a much worse country.” something that will endure and make us a much worse country. i thank you very much for being on hardtalk. laughter hello, most parts of the uk saw some wet weather on tuesday as an area of low pressure pushed its way from south to north. the centre of the low will push increasingly out into the north sea now as the hours go by, but it will trail whether front —— weather, behind it to keep things

grey and wet in the north throughout the day. we also have this front to the south and we'll see more out of that as we look to wednesday and overnight into thursday. this morning, it scotland and northern ireland, though, that sit under the band of cloud and rain and for much of the day, the prospects will be for rather dank. first thing, perhaps a bit of brightness for the north—east of england, some showers to the north—west, a few for north wales. some decent sunshine as we head for the south into england, a few early—morning patches of mist are possible but they should be fairly short—lived. and actually for england and wales on the whole, a lot of fine weather. perhaps a bit of sunshine as well just getting into southern scotland later on in the day. just a chance of a few showers forming across the centre of the south—west peninsual towards 0xfordshire through the afternoon. in terms of our temperatures, 12 in aberdeen, there, up to 20 further south where we get more in the way of sunshine. then, on wednesday evening into thursday, remember that front down there across the continent? it's going to bring some rain of the far east of england.

now there is some uncertainty as to how far onshore these parts of rain will make it. if it does come onshore, it could be very heavy. at the moment, it looks like the majority will sit offshore, in the north sea. wednesday night and thursday does look largely dry, but through thursday daytime we certainly are expected that low to track further north. the uncertainty is exactly how tight into the east coast it will come and how far north into scotland. thursday will be a pretty decent day with a chance of some chances of rain late in the day. scattered showers for northern ireland, too. temperatures somewhat disappointing, average values at best, perhaps a little below. that low pushes away to the north, but working on another system firing

up from the continent, the timing will be quite difficult because we are expecting these areas of low pressure firing through in quick succession. certainly wet to the south on friday, still unsettled for the weekend.

hello and welcome to newsday, i'm kasia madera in london. after talks with the outgoing prime minister theresa may, mr trump lavishly praised the us—uk relationship. it is the greatest alliance the world has ever known. thank you, prime minister, thank you. the president also said there could be a "phenomenal" trade deal after brexit, as long as everything is on the table. i'm rico hizon in singapore. also in the programme: in australia, the jailed catholic cardinal george pell is in court to appeal against his convictions for child sexual abuse.