Will he be isolated at the g20 summit . And states of defiance, opposition to the president s Voter Fraud Commission is growing with more states rejecting requests for voter information. And tonight there is more backlash, a lawsuit in federal court. We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world. Wolf blitzer is off. Im jim sciutto, and youre in the situation room. Announcer this is cnn breaking news. We are following breaking news. An emergency meeting of the u. N. Security council in response to north koreas latest missile test, u. S. Ambassador nikki haley demanding tougher sanctions against north korea, and she had pointed words for the Russian Ambassador saying a vote against sanctions means, quote, you are holding the hands of kim jongun. Tonight we are learning new details of the missile, u. S. Officials tell cnn the twostage rocket will be classified by u. S. Intelligence as a brandnew weapon na has not been seen before. President trump will have the chance to discuss north korea directly with the russian president Vladimir Putin when they meet at the g20 summit in germany on friday. The president just arrived at his first stop, wausau, where he will give a speech tomorrow. White house Officials Say he will outline his vision of transatlantic ties. Covering all that with our guests including former Senior Advisor to Hillary Clinton and joe biden jake sullivan, and correspondents and specialists also standing by. But lets get straight to the breaking news. President trump arriving at his first stop on his highstakes europe trip. Cnns senior White House Correspondent jim accosta is traveling with the president. He joins us now live from the polish capital. Jim, on that flight over, did the president , did his advisors address north korea . Reporter jim, just briefly just before landing here in wausau, White House Deputy press secretary Sara Huckabee sanders told reporters President Trump and Top White House officials spent part of this flight working on his speech to the polish people tomorrow. Asked what the next steps are, the white house often said that the president does not want to telegraph his next moves. We also asked sanders about his tweet from the president earlier today on north korea and china. We can put it up on screen. It says, trade between china and north korea grew almost 40 in the first quarter. So much for china working with us, but we had to give it a try. Now, that seemed to be an indication that the president may be giving up on chinas help with north korea. When asked whether that was the case, sara sanders simply did not have anything to offer to us. We hope to hear more from the president on this issue tomorrow, jim. He is scheduled to deliver joint statements with the president of poland, but there is some uncertainty over whether he will take questions. As you recall during the president s first foreign trip, he did not hold a News Conference and officials with the polish president say yes, they are taking questions tomorrow, but the white house, jim, says they are still working those details out. Enormous attention focused on the president s first meeting with president Vladimir Putin of russia. Did white house officials give you any indication as to what his priorities will be in that meeting, what he will address, what he will offer, et cetera . Reporter not much, jim. I have to tell you, Sara Huckabee sanders, she was asked about that as well, but she did not want to get ahead of things set for friday. Of course the big question, jim, is whether the president will bring up russian meddling in last years election. I asked sanders myself whether the president would in fact confront Vladimir Putin on this issue. She did not offer us any answer on that front. We should point out another thing were going to be watching tomorrow here in poland, jim, as you know, this is a nato partner. During that last foreign trip, the president did not offer a stout defense of article 5 that says an attack on one nato country is an attack on all. A lot of people in poland will be watching that very closely to see if the president does that tomorrow because, after all, poland does pay its fair share of its gdp into the nato coffers, jim. On the front lines, you can say in the standoff with russia, cnns jim accosta in wausau. Thanks very much. Lets get more now on the Emergency Security council meeting. Cnn senior diplomatic reporter, he had strong words not just for north korea, but china as well. Reporter thats right, this is the u. S. Calling this special session. Wanting to send a strong message of rebuke to north korea, but also beyond that, a rebuke and warning to any country that continues to do business with north korea, especially china. Over the last couple of weeks weve seen the u. S. Increasingly criticize chinas role here. Using words like complicit, aiding and abetting. This problem has only been getting worse and nothing is working. You run out of ways of saying essentially the same thing. Today nikki haley told the Security Council that now the world is on notice. There are countries that are allowing, even encouraging trade with north korea in violation of u. N. Security council resolutions. Such countries are also like to continue their trade arrangements with the United States. Thats not going to happen. Our attitude on trade changes when countries do not take International Security threats seriously. Reporter its interesting to see in there today russia and china aligned in their view, saying that dialogue has to come first. Even without preconditions, which the u. S. Has been against, saying that you need to be creative in diplomacy, that theyre against the kind of rhetoric and stance that the u. S. Has put out there. But in response, nikki haley said, well, nothing has been working and thats why its time to do more. And that if youre going to sit there and not sanctions against north korea, then youre Holding Hands with kim jongun, jim. Now, Ambassador Haley said, as u. S. Officials have said for years, that military options remain on the table. How important is that threat . Reporter she said that the u. S. Is prepared and willing to take its own path if necessary. Its unknown how close the u. S. Is to doing Something Like that, but she made her words very clear today. Listen. The United States is prepared to use the full range of our capabilities to defend ourselves and our allies. One of our capabilities lies with our considerable military forces. We will use them if we must, but we prefer not to have to go in that direction. Reporter so, what were likely to see in the near term is more u. S. Military presence in the region, more sanctions, more countries doing more to tighten the screws on trade. And the u. S. Has also been urging other countries to limit their diplomatic engagement with north korea. Jim . Cnns Michelle Kosinski at the state department. Thanks very much. We are also learning more new details about what we know about the Missile Launched by north korea. Barbara starr has more. I imagine they keep analyzing intelligence for what they can learn about this Missile Launch. Reporter they are continuing to look, jim, at all the data they can gather about it, and they are beginning to come to some conclusions about the threat this north Korean Missile may pose to all of us. Viewing u. S. And north korea videos, first north korea showing the world its new intercontinental ballistic missile. Then a south korean show of force, holding a drill, firing missiles that could destroy north korean targets. The pentagon warning even the test of the north Korean Missile poses new dangers. This missile flew through busy air space used by commercial airliners. It blew into space. In landed in japans exclusive Economic Zone in an area thats used by commercial and fishing vessels. All of this completely uncoordinated. Reporter there is an internal debate within u. S. And allied circles about whether this never before seen missile really shows a north korean capability to hit a target 3,400 miles away. The definition of intercontinental range. The current calculation is its right on the edge of being able to go that far but would need extensive improvements. Exactly what defense secretary james mattis recently said would not be allowed. Is it the policy of the Trump Administration to deny north korea the capability of building an icbm that can hit the American Homeland with a Nuclear Weapon on top . Is that the policy . Yes, it is, senator graham. Reporter u. S. Commanders have updated options for President Trump for a Rapid Military response to north korean provocations. A likelihood that had russias foreign minister issuing a blunt warning. Translator the russia and china, it is absolutely clear that any attempts to justify the military solution using the Security Council resolution as a pretext are not acceptable. Reporter meanwhile, south korea showing its own graphic video simulating a response to a north korean attack which experts believe is a strong possibility if the u. S. Were to strike. Some have advocated that there be a military strike to prevent north korea from completing development of an icbm, but that kind of strike would escalate the likelihood or at least the potential of an allout war on the peninsula. Reporter and as always, the idea of being able to strike all of north koreas weapons sites before they could strike back at south korea, take out the north korean threat, that remains very problematic. Jim . By design spread around the country. Pentagon barbara starr. Thanks very much. Lets a get more on this with jake sullivan. Senior advisor to both Hillary Clinton and joseph biden. Thanks, jake for joining us today. Thanks for having me. I wonder, a series of president s, democrat and republican said we will not allow north korea to get a nuclear tipped missile. Here we are today, it appears that this is an icbm, whether its a tested capability to deliver a Nuclear Device is another question. But have we gotten close to that point to the point where its effectively a reality . Weve gotten close, but were not there yet. They have now crossed the threshold of what the experts define as being an icbm. They can fly the missile more than 3,400 miles. What they havent done is shown either they can put a miniaturized Nuclear Weapon on top of it or that they can master the reentry vehicle or the targeting to make it an effective weapon. So, there is still work for the north koreans to do. But what we saw yesterday was a big leap forward for north korea and one that should certainly make us all sit up and take notice because it means they are moving faster than i think a lot of people anticipated towards that capability. So, whats to stop them from theyve taken all the previous steps to, despite a mix of sanctions and public rebuke and statements at the u. N. Security council, et cetera. Whats to stop them from taking the next step, the final step in effect, knowing from their point of view they view this as a matter of survival . You know, its a very difficult question. Its a question that has bedevilled democrats and republicans alike. Each guy comes in, says the other guy didnt do a good job, im going to do better. The Trump Administration is now discovering the options are limited and the options arent good. So, the military option in particular poses all kinds of risks even if we knew what when he were trying to take out, which we dont. Its been interesting to see Donald Trumps rhetoric to change from were going to work with china to nikki haley on the floor of the Security Council today in effect threatening if not a trade war, a trade response to china if it doesnt stop trading with north korea. Is that a useful strategy to sort of take you know, focus your attention on china here . If you take what nikki haley, the ambassador to the United Nations said literally, what she said was we might cut off all of our trade with china because they trade with north korea. I think that that is not a sensible strategy. The u. S. Economy would go hurdling down the hill. Middle class americans would be dramatic and it would likely be counterproductive. So, i hope what she actually meant was we should explore what are called secondary sanction which are sanctions imposed on specific entities, on banks or Financial Institutions or businesses in china that do business with north korea. That is something that we should take another and harder look at going beyond what the Trump Administrations already done. For the sake of our viewers i want to show the percentage of u. S. Trade imports, i should say, from china, 19 of u. S. Imports from china. We just think about where you see that. You see it in clothes, you see it in electronics. Et cetera. So, youre really talking about steps far short of a full cut off or a trade war, right . Look, the language she used was broad and expansive. We will find out in the coming days whether she really meant to go that far, or whether she was suggesting something more conventional like secondary sanctions. I hope its the latter because what we need to do is focus like a laser beam on the actual entities that are supplying the north currency and economic growth. Not cut off all trade that could end up throwing our country into a we want to avoid that. Donald trump has been in office less than half a year at this point. The Obama Administration was in power for eight years. How much responsibility, certainly more than the Trump Administration for where we are today, but how much of a responsibility do you believe the Obama Administration should accept for where we are today with north korea . Well, i think the question in some ways is the wrong question because you had the clinton administration, then the bush administration, then the Obama Administration, then the Trump Administration. All of them faced the same bad set of choices and all of them grappled with it as best they could. And all along through each of those administrations, north korea moved forward. That was true under obama, its been true under trump. And, so, i think the fair thing for the president to stand up and do is level with the American People and say, this is tough, this is hard, and not just try to blame the guy who came before, which, you know, there is a real temptation to do. Lets set aside blame for a moment. The question is what works because a series of republican and democratic president s have tried this kind of same mix of incentives were talking about here, saying military options on the table even though in reality theyre not really because of the cost. Pressuring china, sanctions, et cetera, the offer of negotiations, why would that combination work today if it didnt work for obama or bush or clinton before . Well, there are a couple of factors that are different today than before. One is what we started this conversation talking about. North korea is creeping up to the line of having the capability to strike the continental United States. That means the United States is capability to look china in the eye and say, the consequences of what will happen to your interests in the region if that eventuality occurs are dramatic and not in your interest. So, their incentive to work with us should go up. I dont think that trump should give up on china at this point, but i do think he should be prepared to toe a tougher line with them. South korea wants negotiations. You were part of the team that engineered negotiations with another budding nuclear power, iran. Do you see negotiations as a path forward with north korea . I think that going back to the table with the right mix of pressure and engagement is a sensible thing to do, but we cant just revive old deals that north korea has already broken and we cant just run the same play book over. What we need to do is make sure its not just the United States sitting down at the table and trading with north korea, but that the chinese are at the table, too. The chinese like to say, you guys all work it out. Its time for them to participate, not just on the pressure side, but on the diplomacy side as well. I think if we tried Something Like that, who knows if it would work because north korea is the land of lousy options, but it would give us a better chance. As weve seen with his tweets and other public comments, donald trump likes to cajole pressure, influence with somewhat incendiary public comment. Based on your own dealings with china and sometimes sensitive negotiations, is that something that china responds to . I think china responds best to predictable strength. Telling them what the United States is going to do