hello and welcome to one hundred days. president trump says his view of bashar al assad and the situation in syria has changed after yesterday's chemical attack. at least 70 people have been gassed to death in what's been described as an attack on all humanity. angry words at a crisis meeting of the un security council as members reject russia's claims that rebels were behind the attack. how many more children have to die before russia cares? the situation in syria is just one of the issues from address by posting king abdullah ofjordan. reports out of washington that president trump's chief strategist steve bannon has been removed from his position on the national security council. also, the egalite of a french election. a four hour televised debate with 11 candidates, so what did we learn three weeks from the vote? bringing back a classic, cinemas across the united states

screen an adaptation of george 0rwell‘s1984 in an anti—trump protest. i'm katty kay in washington, christian fraser's in london. we've seen more video today from the gas attack in syria, it's miserable viewing. rescue workers hosing down the lifeless bodies of children trying to wash away the chemicals. trump said he is the basher al—assad has changed. he said the attacks gci’oss has changed. he said the attacks across a lot of lines but he didn't say what he was going to do about it and he didn't condemn russia. we will show you what doctors say is evidence that sarin gas was used. his patients have those pupils which do not react to the flashlight and

that would be a common symptom of a sarin gas attack. syria admits attacking a rabble target in the town of khan sheikhoun, but they say the bomb hit a rabble factory manufacturing gas. western sources said that is not likely. there is no information of such a factory existing and the casualties were over a wide area indicating the chemicals came from big brother. let me say a few words about recent events. yesterday, a chemical attack, a chemical attack which was so attack, a chemical attack which was so horrific in syria against innocent people, including women, small children and even a beautiful little baby, their deaths were an affront to humanity. these heinous

actions by the assad regime cannot be tolerated. the united states stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this horrific attack and all other horrific attacks, for that matter. there were strong words exchanged earlier at the un security council. members called on russia to stop its support for president assad's regime, including nikki haley, the us ambassador to the un. how many more children have to die before russia cares? the united states sees yesterday's attack is a disgrace of the highest level and assurance that humanity means nothing to the syrian government. the question members of this council must ask themselves is this, if we

are not able to enforce resolutions preventing the use of chemical weapons, what does that say for our chances of ending the broader conflict in syria ? niki daly sounding a lot like her predecessor. questions about what this all means. let's go live now to new york and our united nations correspondent, nick bryant. what does she mean when she talks about the idea that the united states might act unilaterally and syria if the united nations does not? i don't think we have got any more clarity on that than we had after listening to present tramp in the rose garden talking about red lines being tra nsgressed. the rose garden talking about red lines being transgressed. i think administration policy on syria is still being formulated and they do not know what they will do next and how they will respond. it does seem that the administration has decided to ta ke that the administration has decided to take a much tougher stance toward

bashar al—assad as a result of this latest chemical weapons attack. the evidence, rex tillerson was in turkey last week saying the fate of assad should be determined by the syrian people. niki daly had a sit down with reporters here in europe. she said that removing assad was no longer the number one priority, it was fighting islamic state. the syrian opposition claims that that contributed to the attack yesterday because it created the sense of impunity. we have seen a change. evidence of that, the british and french came forward with the draft resolution condemning the attack. when the americans got involved in drafting a resolution, they wanted it to be much tougher. they inserted what one un diplomat called operational teeth into that resolution. among which is the demand that the syrian military has to hand over its flight logs from

yesterday and give access to international inspectors looking for chemical weapons. a clear sign that the american administration, the trump administration, is tough and sta nce trump administration, is tough and stance toward the assad regime. we have been listening to president tramp and it was interesting he didn't make any mention of russia. his focus was on syria. the last major attack in 2013, when gas was used,it major attack in 2013, when gas was used, it did bring washington, albeit not for very long, it brought them closer together. could that happen this time? no, not at the moment, the opposite in fact. niki daly did condemn russia. she give it to them with both barrels. it was similarto to them with both barrels. it was similar to listening to some of the power. indeed, arguably, she gave a more powerful and theatrical performances at the united nations, because not only did she use those

condemning words against the russians that you play earlier, before that she actually stood up from her seat, which is very rare at the united nations security council. she got up from the horseshoe table and she brandished focus of the children killed in the attack yesterday. we have grown used to seeing some on the power, her predecessor, deliver some very powerful speeches, but that was equally powerful and what was noticeable was that she was not only pointing the finger at the assad regime, she pointed the finger strongly at russia and that was key. thank you. this is the location when reality comes up against mr trump's stated policies. he wanted the syrian people to decide on assad. we wa nt to syrian people to decide on assad. we want to reset the relationship with russia but facts come along and this is his big test. i think the question is exactly the one that nick bryant has just laid out. question is exactly the one that nick bryant hasjust laid out. to what extent is this white house, in

the light of the chemical attack, the light of the chemical attack, the horrific images that niki daly displayed at the end, that his daughter ivanka trump tweeted about yesterday, to what extent as donald trump turned and said i cannot tolerate the assad regime and, therefore, i will also look at the relationship with russia? we don't know. they love. we don't know what these lines are worth what it means when he says many, many lines have been crossed the sub what does that mean? i will policy change toward syria because of this attack? i think it will be interesting to watch the development in terms of the relationship with russia and whether donald trump has decided he will take some kind of action in syria that he wasn't prepared to ta ke syria that he wasn't prepared to take before. he also talks tough and one issue in the past has been that when the united states talks tough it doesn't back it up with military action and he says i will not given advance warning of what i wanted

militarily defeat this and some teeth behind it doesn't mean very much, does it? and did didn't mean much, does it? and did didn't mean much during the 0bama administration either. he will look to the world to join in and we will look at the global reaction. plenty of reaction to the attack in the united states. the white house not particularly quick in its condemnation, maybe we will talk about that in a second, but here is a tweet from the democrat senator richard blumenthal who sits on the armed services committee in the senate. "the world must come together to end the horrific evil in syria, an atrocious crime taking world back to blackest chapter in history." senator blumenthaljoins us from capitol hill. when you talk about the world taking action, it has taken action for six yea rs. action, it has taken action for six years. here we are again, another chemical attack. it didn't take much action under president 0bama. what will happen this time around?|j action under president 0bama. what

will happen this time around? i know what i hope will happen, that we will have more than just tough talk. there are opportunities here for real action against not only the assad regime and bashar al—assad must go, that has been policy, but against russia. sanctions are possible and that ought to be pursued, much as we did against iran and those sanctions from iran to the table to reach an agreement on ending the weapon development and there should be action at the united nations in every form where we can ta ke nations in every form where we can take it because the russians and the iranians, as the world knows, are aiders and developers of this kind of yanez, absolutely unacceptable war crime. let's call it what it is, it is criminal in moral terms and a violation of international law and assad should be pursued for war crimes. we are introducing legislation this week. the war crimes accountability act 2017 that

will allow better collection of evidence and we should insist on access to the crime scene so we can ta ke access to the crime scene so we can take more of this evidence. we are sitting here again trying to figure out what the message from the white house is. we have had clarity from president tramp in the last few minutes but time and again they do not send out very clear signals on the big issues and no one is really sure who is speaking for the president, his rex tillerson, is varga, said steve bannon? until he sat it out, we didn't know what the american policy was. what is unclear is who is saying what the president, but also what the president is saying to the world. that is where there needs to be much more clarity of the kind ambassador saili provided and, quite honestly, the trump cosiness with russia has actually very likely contributed to

the license that assad fields, through russia, to do this kind of heinous act. the fact the president has been so cosy with russia gives them additional sense of freedom. to stay with this, we want to talk to you about the row over president trump's supreme court. the senate will vote on friday, the democrats have enough votes to hold his nomination through a tactic known as the filibuster. it's setting up a historic fight. republicans can get neil gorsuch confirmed but they'll have to change senate rules to do so. and in the future that could lead to supreme court candidates who are more politically extreme. so why are democrats refusing to compromise on a candidate who many say is well qualified for thejob? senator richard blumenthal is also on the judiciary committee and met withjudge gorsuch. let me ask you a political question, president trump's approval ratings

are at 35%. if his approval ratings for hire, would you be voting to confirm neil gorsuch to the supreme court? i would be opposed to this nominee regardless of the trump approval ratings and, regardless of the absolutely intolerable treatment of meric garland, the nominee of president 0bama, almost a year ago. he was not accorded a jury or a vote. both are being provided to neil gorsuch. the reason i frozen is that he has evaded, very specific questions on fundamental principles and presidents of the united states supreme court. whether he agrees with them, he refused to answer again and again, which leaves us with the inescapable conclusion that he has agreed to the trump litmus test. he would automatically overturn provisions on gun violence and abortion. you know that president tramp might get another

pic with the supreme court. he might get a second justice during his term. if it only takes the republicans 50 films, he could also do the mainstream and choose some of my conservative, doesn't worry you? iam my conservative, doesn't worry you? i am worried about the next potential nominee, but i'm more worried about this one. as a matter of principle and conviction this nominee is outside the mainstream and every phone and the supreme court there are nine justices, has equal weight. everyone is potentially a swing vote. the gorsuch is also and he is potentially a sway vote. he can persuade others to go his way and rather than fighting the next fight, iam rather than fighting the next fight, i am focusing on this one because the majority are anyjustice to be a bipartisan consensus. there is still a possibility for that agreement here. i want to quote a quite

separate. they call it the nuclear option, the tactic republicans might imply, because there is followed and this followed would be dangerously, perhaps disastrously, radioactive for the senate for years to come. what did you mean? it could well effect the ruins, but also personal feelings among senators. i hope its repercussions will be limited, but it could be radioactive in terms of the ability to move things forward, legislation, and other matters and it will affect future appointments. i sincerely hope that we will get beyond this. it is good to have you with this. thank you for coming on the programme today. one of president trump's closest advisers, his chief strategist steve bannon, has been removed from his position on the national security council, the main group advising the president on security and foreign affairs. a white house aide has told us media the reshuffle is ‘not a demotion‘ for mr bannon.

i have to save the whole fuss about steve bannon being on the national security council in the first place was that he is a political figure. he is the political adviser to the president. he fix it campaign issues and election issues and re—election issues and intelligence on the national security council is meant to be pure intelligence that is not subject to political interpretation. that was what people in the national security world were upset about him being put on the national security council and that is why in being removed from the national security council is being seen as a victory for the people who are supporting national security. we talk about power struggles in the inner circle. does this tell us thatjp mcmaster, the national security and fast —— adviser, is getting a grip and discovered his power base? when i heard this news i tweeted that it

looks like the ship is being rated a bit in the white house and swinging backin bit in the white house and swinging back in favour of national security, which would be mcmaster and away from politics, which would be bannon. the white house spin is there is no big deal, he was happy to come of the national security council and he was only there to look over the shoulder of michael flynn the national security adviser who was demoted. that is their spin on it. i think this is the forces of mcmaster asserting themselves in the photos. let s go back to president trump's press conference a little earlier. he has been holding talks with king abdullah ofjordan. it's the second arab leader he has met this week, ahead of that crucial meeting with the chinese president xijinping tomorrow. let s have a listen to what else he had to say. the king has been a leader in calling for a plan to defeat islamic state once and for all and i am with you on that. we are both leaders on that, believe me. that is what we speak about the date and that is what we are going to do. it will be

a shorterfight what we are going to do. it will be a shorter fight than a lot of people are thinking about, believe me. we have made tremendous strides as we have made tremendous strides as we have discussed. i don't want to sound too sceptical that we are in this position became president trump has said, as he did during the campaign, i have a secret plan and it will work marvellously and i'm not quite tell you what it is because that would undermine the efficacy of the plan, but at some point that plan has to be put into action. he says if we told you what the plan was we would have a disaster as opposed to the fight against most of which has been hard and taking a long time and that shows you how difficult it defeat islamic state. at some point we have to know what the president is saying when he says he will fix everything. i saw between the us entered last night about the state department comment on this missile being fired from north korea and it was short. it was a0 words long and it said we

have spoken enough about north korea, we don't need to say any more. he talks tough and he says time is running out for north korea. their time will come, there is a point when you have to either quite serious diplomacy behind it or some military teeth. that tweeted about 11 o'clock washington time, you should be in bed. i am attentive. there have been some testy exchanges in the european parliament today over the future of the brexit negotiation. the parliament in strasbourg has been setting down its red lines for the talks. guy verhofstadt, the parliament's chief negotiator, had his say. so too did nigel farage, who, rather undiplomatically, compared his fellow mep's to gangsters. you are behaving like the mafia. you think we are a hostage, we are not. we are free to go. we are free to go. this... i know. i know.

we are free to go. we are free to go. this... i know. i knowlj we are free to go. we are free to go. this... i know. i know. ido understand. i go. this... i know. i know. ido understand. lam go. this... i know. i know. ido understand. i am convinced and 100% sure about one thing, that there will be one day another young man or young woman who will try again. who will lead britain again into the european family once again. that suggests the tone will be combative over the next two years. but the european commission's chief negotiator michel barnier, who is the main figure in these talks, was a bit more considered. to succeed we need to devote the first phase of negotiations exclusively to reaching an agreement on the principles of the exit. we are not proposing to be tactical or create difficulties for the uk. 0n the contrary, it is an essential condition to maximise our chances to reach an agreement together within two years. he is clearly not a

populist. mr farage is more of a populist. mr farage is more of a populist. they all played their part. if you had seen before the debate began, how they work each other, nigel farage comes down the steps and he shakes the hand of jean—claude younger, his nemesis, and he shakes the hand of mr barnier and he shakes the hand of mr barnier and they are pleased to see him. you know what you will get from them. look at this. hello, how lovely to see you. you are not suggesting it is an act, are you? it is a performance? there is a very bizarre relationship that goes on behind the grandstanding in that parliament, i have seen it first hand and they get ona have seen it first hand and they get on a lot better than you might think when you play some of the stuff they say. i think it was all planned out, the whole thing is a show.

if you were go into the bookshops here in washington this afternoon christian, you might find that one or two have sold out of george 0rwell‘s book 198a. in what's become known as the trump bump, sales of 0rwell‘s 198a increased by 9,500% since trump's inauguration. the novel shot to the top of amazon's bestseller list. the last sales spike was in 2013 following the edward snowden spying revelations. today across the united states two hundred cinemas are screening an adaptation of the novel. tom brook has been taking a look. this week on tuesday at more than 200 community cinemas, crows can add to see 198a. this film, made in the 19805, to see 198a. this film, made in the 1980s, is an adaptation of george 0 rwell‘s 1980s, is an adaptation of george 0rwell‘s novel detailing the experiences of a man who exists in a dystopian future, in a big totalitarian state. among the crowd

was a sense of anticipation. totalitarian state. among the crowd was a sense of anticipationlj was a sense of anticipation.” haven't seen it in a few years, i am curious to go back and see what resonates now. the man who co—organised these 198a international screenings believes the film is timely in the age of trump. which was making 84 because it isa trump. which was making 84 because it is a work that is really resonating with a lot of people at this moment in the united states and even this moment in the united states and even around the world. the truth in 198a is manufactured, it isn't rooted in reality. many commentators we re rooted in reality. many commentators were startled when trump president david kelly and conway used the phrase alternative facts in referring to a true event. john spicer, our press secretary, give alternative facts to that. using a controversial film from 30 years ago as it applies to treat the trump administration might appeal to opponents of the president but to his supporters might come across as facile, unfair and meddling with the truth. after all, the united states

doesn't have anything like the totalitarian government depicted in 198a. the film—maker was on a panel to discuss 198a. she warns against drunk to close comparisons between the trump administration and the film. i grew up in a totalitarian regime in communist east germany which certainly is closer to what we see in 198a and what we see right now. right now we live in a democracy and we should be aware that we actually have influence of the things that are happening. it is not a totalitarian regime. the war is waged at the reading group against its own subjects. when people might interpret 198a differently, no one can deny the ongoing currency of 0rwell‘s work, which many say is being helped by the trump presidency. the novel is back on the bestseller lists and in a few weeks a stage version of the will open on broadway. it has also been talk of another big screen adaptation. the film and the book. the have 20

seconds to say something profound and george orwell. when i was in france they used to go to the barricades to protest against their leaders. in american's america they grab the popcorn. what happened to militant demonstrations? you're watching one hundred days from bbc news. stay with us, still to come for viewers on the bbc news channel and bbc world news: the gloves are off. the second french presidential descends into a slanging match. we'll have the details. and a new first lady, with a new approach. she's chosen to stay in new york rather than move to the white house and she's kept her official role toa minimum. we find out more about melania trump and how she compares so far to her predecessors. that's still to come on one hundred days, from bbc news. good evening. very interesting

weather as we head into the weekend. before then the next few days will probably be dry or rather cloudy as we start to get more sunshine over the weekend, especially in england and wales, it will warm up considerably. for many this we will have sky is a bit like this over the next couple of days. this picture was taken in train and the thin cloud was built southward across many parts of england and wales. they would—be breaks here and there. they would—be breaks here and there. they are more likely in eastern scotla nd they are more likely in eastern scotland and north east england. it could be chilly but with club we will sit around 7 degrees or so. the cloud, due to this area of high pressure for many parts of the uk, the wind will be light. further north we have differences across scotla nd north we have differences across scotland because we will have this atla ntic scotland because we will have this atlantic went around the top of the high pressure. that will drag more moisture, cloud and drizzle for western scotland eastern scotland will get some sunshine, helped by

the mountains and the wind breaking up the mountains and the wind breaking up the cloud. a similar story for north—east imminent. northern ireland will be cloudy on thursday and, as you can see, there is a lot of talent for inland and wales. difficult to pick up where the sunshine for the record will be the incident with the brightness at times. the bridge is about 1a degrees or so where we do get sunshine. friday is dj vu again. generally dry and party. the best of the sunshine for eastern scotland and north—east england. that is because the position of the eye. into the weekend, this is where it gets interesting. beehive moves into the near continent. the weather fronts from the north—west of the uk. we will draw up a southerly wind that will pick up more sunshine and bring some air across inland and wales. this is the picture for saturday. a fine day. more sunshine away from the far north—west. that will see temperatures rising higher, perhaps 16 or 17 degrees. it is on

sunday, across england and wales, when we will have sunshine. eastern scotla nd when we will have sunshine. eastern scotland will get some sun. elsewhere the weather front will approach to bring some rain later in the day. in this corner of the uk temperatures will not be quite so high. moving to england and wales and it gets warmer and warmer and we could hit 23 celsius on sunday in the south—east. welcome back to one hundred days with katty kay in washington, and christian fraser in london. a reminder of our top story today... president trump firmly blames bashar al assad for yesterday's chemical attack in syria. at least 70 people were gassed to death in what's been described as an attack on all humanity. and it wasn't a debate — it was a marathon. the french presidential candidates took to the stage for four hours. did anyone actually watch the whole thing? the us president, donald trump, has condemned a deadly chemical attack in syria as an affront to humanity. at least 70 people were killed and hundreds more injured.

the attack happened as leaders gathered in brussels for a summit on syria. here's some reaction. the images we've seen yesterday from syria remind us all that here we have a responsibility to unite for real with a serious engagement the international community, the regional players, but also the syrian parties to make this. all the evidence i have seen suggests that this was the assad regime who did it in the full knowledge that they were using illegal weapons in a barbaric attack on the own people. the use of chemical weapons is a crime against humanity. it is a crime against humanity. those responsible must be held accountable and brought to justice. let's speak now to mark malloch brown, the former deputy secretary general at the united nations. he's also served as a foreign office minister in the uk government. when you listen to those reactions,

my heart sinks because i think we been here before and nothing changes but will it this time? i very much doubt it. before we had the 0bama administration which was too dense did and did not show enough resolve when assad crossed that red line with chemical weapons and now the trump administration has so prioritised the fight against isis that it leaves it with no room to pressure assad and its new russian ally in terms of the fight against isis. we have struggled from one bad policy on syria to apparently new and equally bad one. we did here nikki haley ticking on the russians this morning but we don't know if that will be repeated by the white

house. you have suggested that president assad thinks he has more wiggle room with trump than he did with 0bama but the whole point of the trump administration if it wants to project strength and he is the man people will not cross. he wants to do that but very much where american national interests are directly engaged. as far as his definition of national interests, thatis definition of national interests, that is the fight against isis, the rest is secondary and almost redundant. while i'm sure he will be frustrated and, like any of us, shocked and dismayed by the human casualties, it isn't strategically his priority, or at least it hasn't been until now. and along the way, his attacks on the un sharply undermine its authority to intervene and try to get some state on this kind of action. the trouble is that these pictures will be beamed into

muslim homes around the world. can there be a greater rallying cry for islamist terrorism than this kind of crime going unpunished?” islamist terrorism than this kind of crime going unpunished? i suspect not. it is a first and sadly predictable step in terms of where we are headed in terms of middle east policy. what president trump must be quickly discovering is that it isa must be quickly discovering is that it is a lot more complicated than it seemed from the campaign trail. this kind of stuff is a great recruiter to muslim or any other kind of extremism for that point. this is a very bad moment for the people who have died and been injured but much more broadly for the region and international affairs. there will be this renewed debate about safe zones and no—fly zones but if you have those, and it might be easier with turkey now involved in the northern pa rt turkey now involved in the northern part of the country, but you also have to have the appetite for

policing them which possibly means bringing down syrian or even russian aircraft. that's right. the reason there is so much certainty that this was an official government action was an official government action was that it was apparently delivered from the airand was that it was apparently delivered from the air and the only people who have the capacity to put planes in the airat have the capacity to put planes in the air at the moment and go unchallenged is the syrian government. indeed, if we move to a solution like no—fly zones, almost certainly it will lead to some kind of combat and it is not quite clear that it could not draw, at the worst extreme, america and russia into some direct military exchanges. this is very delicate stuff, we are walking on broken glass here. is very delicate stuff, we are walking on broken glass harem is very delicate stuff, we are walking on broken glass here. it was something donald trump spoke about in the campaign, that he supported the idea of no—fly zones. you say thatis the idea of no—fly zones. you say that is not necessarily the easiest option. in simple language, what could the world do right now to stop

these kind of atrocities? the reason it is not the easiest option is because you need agreement among the principal parties that they will respect it and not get drawn into conflict over the maintenance of the no—fly zones so if you can get a diplomatic deal it is still doable but the more fundamental issue remained getting, turning a ceasefire into a proper peace process with a movement toward a transitional government in damascus. that has been set back by the fact that this administration has declared it is not such a priority for them and they are the assad as likely to state which undermined the prospect of negotiation. mark malloch brown, thank you forjoining us. the second french presidential debate was held last night and the gloves were off. at time the debate descended into a slanging match, with 11 candidates, yes, 11, all making their pitch in a four—hour television marathon.

i like to think you watched the whole thing! i dipped in to it. it was a bit like one of those seven course french meals but less appetising! the centre right candidate, francois fillon, was accused of having his hand in the public purse, over that alleged "jobs for family" scandal that refuses to go away. while the front national leader, marine le pen, also came in for some criticism. this was the moment when she was challenged by centrist frontrunner, emmanuel macron. translation: nationalism is war. i come from a region which is full of its cemeteries and i do not want to go back to that time in history. so don't everforget where we've come from. you shouldn't present yourself as new if you trot out the old fossils which are at least 50 years old. i'm sorry to tell you, ms le pen, but you trot out lies we've heard for a0 years and which we heard

in the mouth of your father. those were the highlights! not the whole four hours. it seemed that it was marine le pen who was getting the most flak from the others. using the most flak from the others. using the analogy of the boxing max, the frontrunners are so the analogy of the boxing max, the frontrunners are so far ahead of the others, macron and le pen, theyjust need to keep going around the ring. but the others came into the ring like this guy philippe poutou who is a factory worker from the south of france, a militant anti—capitalist. not even in a shirt and tie, he turned up in his pyjamas! the start landing these punches on fillon who threatened to sue him at one stage! when the police come knocking on my door, i have to respond, saying that

blue—collar workers had to respond but you lot don't have too will le pen started to weigh in and she suffered at his hands. his surname, poulou, means kiss. we're going from pyjamas to a high fashion. the first lady of the united states is one of the most well—known and recognised women in the world. but with fame comes scrutiny. melania trump is very different to michelle 0bama and immediately she set people talking with her decision to remain in new york with her son, barron. she is doing what she needs to do as first lady. in the past hour she's been visiting a school with queen rania ofjordan, but she's kept her official role toa minimum. so who is she? the president and first lady of the united states will take their first dance. meet melania. beautiful, always immaculately turned out. a few things you didn't know about mrs trump. she's 2a years younger

than her husband. she is the first american first lady to be born and raised in a communist country. she speaks five languages but is said to be self—conscious about her thick slovenian accent. 0urfather, who art in heaven, hallowed by thy name. and a homebody who is reluctant to move from new york to the white house. they are so lucky that they don't have to do this every night, right! if melania is happy in this newjob, she doesn't always show it. perhaps it's only fitting that this unusual president should have such a nontraditional first lady. let's speak now andrew 0ch, a journalist who spent a year travelling around america researching first ladies for a book and television documentary. he is known as "the first ladies man". welcome to the programme. i'm going to play the bad cop here but she is

in this hotel in new york, very different to michelle 0bama we hardly see her and it is costing the taxpayer a fortune for her to be there. could you not be doing more? she could and her approach to first lady is unusual but not unprecedented. there were a number of others that did not spend much time in washington or come to washington at all and even more that we re washington at all and even more that were not married to the president and served as home test —— hostess duties. we have not seen this in america since 191a when eleanor wilson died and the president's sister had to sit in and be the stand—in first lady. we are not used to it in modern times. for the last hundred years we have had more active first ladies, particularly the last three or four. is it not time we gave up on this notion that we had to have a first lady who was

there to cut ribbons and shake hands and look wonderful and smile at the cameras? if she wants to stay in new york, good for her. there is an angle to that. this is a non—elected and nonpaid role, the womanjust happens to be married to the president. and various first ladies have taken more of a traditional role and more of an active role and what melania is doing in protecting the sun and keeping him where he is for the time being, a lot of first ladies and first families, the clinton and 0bama and kennedy and roosevelt families went to great lengths to keep their children out of the public eye and give them a normal childhood as much as possible. the role is changing and the trump ministration is an unusual one. you can say that again! andrew 0ch, thank you forjoining the programme. in all seriousness that has to be a re—evaluation of what a woman who happens to be married to the president is expected to do. if

she wants to stay in new york, good for her. yes, she is very different to michelle 0bama. i wonder if she might shine in that role and do him some good. we will see. that's all from one hundred days for today. if you'd like to get in touch with us, you can do so using the hashtag, bbc one hundred days. thank you for watching. hello. this is bbc news... the headlines... president trump says the syrian gas attack on children had a big impact on him, describing it as an affront to humanity. one of mr trump's closest advisers — his chief strategist, steve bannon — has been removed from his position on the national security council. labour's ruling body is to review ken livingstone's status in the party following his comments about hitler and zionism, and his suspension for another year. an update on the market numbers for you.

here's how london's and frankfurt ended the day. and in the the united states this is how the dow and the nasdaq are getting on. let's return to our main story this evening. the united nations security council has been meeting in an emergency session to discuss a suspected chemical attack in idlib province in syria. the us, britain and france have blamed president assad's forces for yesterday's bombing. but russia says a syrian air strike hit a store where rebels kept chemical substances. let's speak to thomas pickering, a former us ambassador tonight president trump has said his attitude to a sara chad has now changed. that i bashar al—assad. —— his attitude to bashar al—assad. let's speak to thomas pickering, a former us ambassador to russia and to the un. he's also served as under secretary of state for political affairs. hejoins us from our washington newsroom.

thank you forjoining us. how certain are you about how or who carried out this attack?” certain are you about how or who carried out this attack? i don't think we can be 100% certain but it looks as if the assad government has done it. and until more material examination takes place, we would wa nt to examination takes place, we would want to stick with that kind of conclusion in large measure because an aerial attack i gather was carried out by syrian aircraft at the time and they are the people who have sarin. it is not clear that the sarin gas is in the hands of the rebels. whatever story the russians have produced, and it seems to be not necessarily a different story to what they have produced in the past with similar attacks, i would suspect it is to be doubted until proven to be absolutely true. how likely is it that the un security council will come up with a

resolution on syria and what use is it if it does? highly unlikely, the russians and chinese have already made it clear they are