Trump Rattled: Staff, Fed Chair, Fox News Conspiring Against Me | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC


LATER WE’RE JOINED BY THE IOWA TEACHER MAKING HEADLINES FOR TEACHER MAKING HEADLINES FOR CONFRONTING HER REPUBLICAN CONFRONTING HER REPUBLICAN SENATOR ABOUT GUN CONTROL. SENATOR ABOUT GUN CONTROL. WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH DONALD WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH DONALD TRUMP LASHING OUT INSISTING THAT TRUMP LASHING OUT INSISTING THAT WARNINGS OF A POTENTIAL WARNINGS OF A POTENTIAL RECESSION ARE PART OF SOME SORT RECESSION ARE PART OF SOME SORT OF CONSPIRACY TO HURT HIM OF CONSPIRACY TO HURT HIM PERSONALLY. PERSONALLY. NOW, WE KNOW TRUMP STRUGGLES TO NOW, WE KNOW TRUMP STRUGGLES TO TELL THE TRUTH. TELL THE TRUTH. THIS STORY SHOWS HOW HE MAY THIS STORY SHOWS HOW HE MAY ASSUME OTHERS ARE AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME OTHERS ARE AUTOMATICALLY TAKING THE SAME TACK. TAKING THE SAME TACK. HE TREATS EVERYTHING AS A KIND HE TREATS EVERYTHING AS A KIND OF GAME OR CON RATHER THAN OF GAME OR CON RATHER THAN ACKNOWLEDGING SOME OBJECTIVE ACKNOWLEDGING SOME OBJECTIVE REALITY. REALITY. AND THAT HELPS UNDERSTAND THESE AND THAT HELPS UNDERSTAND THESE HEADLINES. HEADLINES. TRUMP NOW AGITATED ABOUT TRUMP NOW AGITATED ABOUT ANYTHING GOING ON WHEN HE ANYTHING GOING ON WHEN HE DISCUSSES THE ECONOMY AND DARKLY DISCUSSES THE ECONOMY AND DARKLY SUGGESTING WARNINGS ABOUT A SUGGESTING WARNINGS ABOUT A POSSIBLE RECESSION STEM FROM POSSIBLE RECESSION STEM FROM CRITICS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY WHAT CRITICS TRYING TO TAKE AWAY WHAT HE SEES AS HIS CALLING CARD FOR HE SEES AS HIS CALLING CARD FOR REELECTION, ACCORDING TO “THE REELECTION, ACCORDING TO “THE NEW YORK TIMES” REPORTING. NEW YORK TIMES” REPORTING. SO WHO ARE THESE CRITICS? SO WHO ARE THESE CRITICS? IT’S A CONSPIRACY THEORY SO, IT’S A CONSPIRACY THEORY SO, REMEMBER, IT DOESN’T HAVE TO REMEMBER, IT DOESN’T HAVE TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. DONALD TRUMP BLAMING PEOPLE HE DONALD TRUMP BLAMING PEOPLE HE HIRED. HIRED. LIKE HIS OWN HAND PICKED FED LIKE HIS OWN HAND PICKED FED CHAIR, INTENTIONALLY ACTING CHAIR, INTENTIONALLY ACTING AGAINST HIM. AGAINST HIM. AND U.S. ALLIES. AND U.S. ALLIES. A WEIRD ARGUMENT SINCE MANY HAVE A WEIRD ARGUMENT SINCE MANY HAVE THEIR FORTUNATES PINNED TO OUR THEIR FORTUNATES PINNED TO OUR ECONOMY. ECONOMY. AND THERE IS THE IDEA THE MEDIA AND THERE IS THE IDEA THE MEDIA IS TRYING TO CREATE A RECESSION. IS TRYING TO CREATE A RECESSION. ALL OF THIS IS THE BACKDROP FOR ALL OF THIS IS THE BACKDROP FOR THESE COMMENTS. THESE COMMENTS.>>ARE YOU DOING ANY PLANNING OR>>ARE YOU DOING ANY PLANNING OR ARE YOU GOING TO BE DIRECTING ARE YOU GOING TO BE DIRECTING YOUR ADMINISTRATION TO PLAN FOR YOUR ADMINISTRATION TO PLAN FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECESSION? THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECESSION?>>I DON’T SEE A RECESSION.>>I DON’T SEE A RECESSION.>>BUT A LOT OF ECONOMISTS SAY>>BUT A LOT OF ECONOMISTS SAY YOU SHOULD BE REPAIRING FOR A YOU SHOULD BE REPAIRING FOR A RECESSION. RECESSION. NO PRESIDENT IS IMMUNE TO A NO PRESIDENT IS IMMUNE TO A RECESSION AND THAT IS NOW — FOR RECESSION AND THAT IS NOW — FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO BE DOING THE GOVERNMENT TO BE DOING SOMETHING — SOMETHING –>>HONESTLY I’M PREPARED FOR>>HONESTLY I’M PREPARED FOR EVERYTHING. EVERYTHING. I DON’T THINK WE’RE HAVING A I DON’T THINK WE’RE HAVING A RECESSION. RECESSION. WE’RE DOING TREMENDOUSLY WELL. WE’RE DOING TREMENDOUSLY WELL. MOST ECONOMISTS, PHIL, SAY WE’RE MOST ECONOMISTS, PHIL, SAY WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A RECESSION. NOT GOING TO HAVE A RECESSION.>>NO RECESSION, NO PLANNING FOR>>NO RECESSION, NO PLANNING FOR RECESSION, DON’T EVEN TALK ABOUT RECESSION, DON’T EVEN TALK ABOUT IT. IT. YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS TODAY, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THIS TODAY, THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN LIFE THERE ARE SOME THINGS IN LIFE THAT ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN THAT ARE MORE LIKELY TO HAPPEN IF YOU DO TALK AND THINK ABOUT IF YOU DO TALK AND THINK ABOUT THEM TOO MUCH. THEM TOO MUCH. LIKE GOING TO A KITCHEN, GOING LIKE GOING TO A KITCHEN, GOING TO MAYBE YOUR KITCHEN TO GET A TO MAYBE YOUR KITCHEN TO GET A SNACK RIGHT NOW. SNACK RIGHT NOW. I BET IF YOU KEEP THINKING ABOUT I BET IF YOU KEEP THINKING ABOUT IT AND IMAGINING IT OR TALKING IT AND IMAGINING IT OR TALKING ABOUT IT, YOU MIGHT FIND ABOUT IT, YOU MIGHT FIND YOURSELF GETTING UP, LETTING THE YOURSELF GETTING UP, LETTING THE NEWSCAST PLAY IN THE BACKGROUND, NEWSCAST PLAY IN THE BACKGROUND, AND GRABBING THAT SNACK THAT AND GRABBING THAT SNACK THAT YOU’VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT. YOU’VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT. BUT A MACROECONOMIC RECESSION IS BUT A MACROECONOMIC RECESSION IS NOT LIKE GETTING A SNACK. NOT LIKE GETTING A SNACK. NO SINGLE PERSON INCREASES ITS NO SINGLE PERSON INCREASES ITS LIKELIHOOD BY TALKING ABOUT IT. LIKELIHOOD BY TALKING ABOUT IT. NOT EVEN THE PRESIDENT. NOT EVEN THE PRESIDENT. SO AVOIDING TALKING ABOUT IT IN SO AVOIDING TALKING ABOUT IT IN THE HOPES THAT IT WILL GO AWAY, THE HOPES THAT IT WILL GO AWAY, AND THEN AVOIDING ANY PLANNING AND THEN AVOIDING ANY PLANNING ABOUT IT, THAT’S INEFFECTIVE AND ABOUT IT, THAT’S INEFFECTIVE AND PRETTY SHORT SIGHTED FOR THE PRETTY SHORT SIGHTED FOR THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. U.S. GOVERNMENT. AS FOR TRUMP’S CLAIM THAT YOU AS FOR TRUMP’S CLAIM THAT YOU JUST HEARD THERE, THAT JUST HEARD THERE, THAT ECONOMISTS DON’T EXPECT A ECONOMISTS DON’T EXPECT A RECESSION? RECESSION? WELL, ONE OUT OF FOUR DON’T. WELL, ONE OUT OF FOUR DON’T. THE OTHER 74% OF ECONOMISTS ARE THE OTHER 74% OF ECONOMISTS ARE NOW EXPECTING A RECESSION BY THE NOW EXPECTING A RECESSION BY THE END OF 2021 IN A NEW SURVEY OUT END OF 2021 IN A NEW SURVEY OUT TODAY. TODAY. TRUMP ALSO IN DENIAL ABOUT OTHER TRUMP ALSO IN DENIAL ABOUT OTHER DATA, THIS TIME A FOX NEWS POLL DATA, THIS TIME A FOX NEWS POLL THAT SHOWED HIM TRAILING HIS THAT SHOWED HIM TRAILING HIS CHALLENGERS. CHALLENGERS.>>FOX HAS CHANGED, AND MY WORST>>FOX HAS CHANGED, AND MY WORST POLLS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM FOX. POLLS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FROM FOX. THERE’S SOMETHING GOING ON AT THERE’S SOMETHING GOING ON AT FOX, I’LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, FOX, I’LL TELL YOU RIGHT NOW, AND I’M NOT HAPPY WITH IT. AND I’M NOT HAPPY WITH IT.>>THE FOX POLL, THEY HAVE YOU>>THE FOX POLL, THEY HAVE YOU UNDER WARREN — UNDER WARREN –>>I DON’T BELIEVE IT.>>I DON’T BELIEVE IT. I DON’T BELIEVE IT. I DON’T BELIEVE IT.>>OKAY, HE DOESN’T BELIEVE IT.>>OKAY, HE DOESN’T BELIEVE IT. YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE WHO KNOW DONALD TRUMP BEST DESCRIBE HIM DONALD TRUMP BEST DESCRIBE HIM AS A CON MAN. AS A CON MAN. THAT INCLUDES EVERYONE RANGING THAT INCLUDES EVERYONE RANGING FROM THE CURRENTLY INCARCERATED FROM THE CURRENTLY INCARCERATED FORMER LAWYER, MICHAEL COHEN, TO FORMER LAWYER, MICHAEL COHEN, TO HIS FORMER REALITY SHOW HIS FORMER REALITY SHOW COLLEAGUE WHICH HE BROUGHT COLLEAGUE WHICH HE BROUGHT FAMOUSLY TO THE WHITE HOUSE, FAMOUSLY TO THE WHITE HOUSE, OMAROSA, TO HIS FORMER OMAROSA, TO HIS FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR ANTHONY COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI WITH MORE ON TRUMP’S SCARAMUCCI WITH MORE ON TRUMP’S DEFEAT. DEFEAT. I HAVE MORE ON THAT SHORTLY. I HAVE MORE ON THAT SHORTLY. HE’S DENYING HIS OWN TEAMMATES. HE’S DENYING HIS OWN TEAMMATES. HE’S USED TO MAKING EVERYTHING HE’S USED TO MAKING EVERYTHING UP. UP. WHEN YOU SEE IT TAKEN TOGETHER, WHEN YOU SEE IT TAKEN TOGETHER, HE MAY NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT HE MAY NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE, THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE, INCLUDING IN HIS OWN GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING IN HIS OWN GOVERNMENT, WHO ACTUALLY WORK OFF THE WHO ACTUALLY WORK OFF THE EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE. JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING LOOKS BAD JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING LOOKS BAD FOR HIM DOESN’T AMOEBA IT’SMEAN FOR HIM DOESN’T AMOEBA IT’SMEAN A FAKE. A FAKE. JUST BECAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD FOR JUST BECAUSE IT LOOKS GOOD FOR HIM DOESN’T MEAN IT’S TRUE. HIM DOESN’T MEAN IT’S TRUE. TAKE THAT ALLEGEDLY LARGE UNION TAKE THAT ALLEGEDLY LARGE UNION CROWD AT TRUMP’S SPEECH IN CROWD AT TRUMP’S SPEECH IN PENNSYLVANIA. PENNSYLVANIA. IT LOOKED GOOD, IT WAS TOUTED. IT LOOKED GOOD, IT WAS TOUTED. NEW REPORTS SHOWING THOSE NEW REPORTS SHOWING THOSE WORKERS WERE EFFECTIVELY PAID TO WORKERS WERE EFFECTIVELY PAID TO BE THERE. BE THERE. THEY HAD TO GO TO THE SPEECH OR THEY HAD TO GO TO THE SPEECH OR THEY WOULD HAVE LOST PART OF THEY WOULD HAVE LOST PART OF THEIR PAYCHECK, WHICH IS THEIR PAYCHECK, WHICH IS ACTUALLY AN ECHO OF THE WAY ACTUALLY AN ECHO OF THE WAY TRUMP BUILT HIS VERY FIRST CROWD TRUMP BUILT HIS VERY FIRST CROWD AT TRUMP TOWER FOR THE CAMPAIGN, AT TRUMP TOWER FOR THE CAMPAIGN, PAYING ACTORS TO CHEER AND PAYING ACTORS TO CHEER AND IMPERSONATE SUPPORTERS. IMPERSONATE SUPPORTERS.>>>NOW, LET’S BE CLEAR.>>>NOW, LET’S BE CLEAR. PAYING ACTORS AT THAT FIRST PAYING ACTORS AT THAT FIRST RALLY WAS NOT A LONG-TERM PLAN. RALLY WAS NOT A LONG-TERM PLAN. IT WAS A CLASSIC FAKE IT TILL IT WAS A CLASSIC FAKE IT TILL YOU MAKE IT. YOU MAKE IT. AND TRUMP DID MAKE IT FOR A AND TRUMP DID MAKE IT FOR A WHILE. WHILE. THERE WERE BIG CROWDS THAT THERE WERE BIG CROWDS THAT OBVIOUSLY WERE NOT PAID. OBVIOUSLY WERE NOT PAID. THERE WAS AN ELECTORAL COLLEGE THERE WAS AN ELECTORAL COLLEGE VICTORY EVEN THOUGH HE DREW LESS VICTORY EVEN THOUGH HE DREW LESS VOTES THAN CLINTON. VOTES THAN CLINTON. NOW TRUMP DENIES FACTUAL BAD NOW TRUMP DENIES FACTUAL BAD NEWS IS AND LEANS INTO FAKING NEWS IS AND LEANS INTO FAKING GOOD NEWS. GOOD NEWS. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER TIME IS THE QUESTION IS WHETHER TIME IS RUNNING OUT ON THIS STRATEGY AND RUNNING OUT ON THIS STRATEGY AND HOW A RECESSION COULD UPEND WHAT HOW A RECESSION COULD UPEND WHAT LOOKS TO BE HIS PRECARIOUS LOOKS TO BE HIS PRECARIOUS POLITICAL FOOTING. POLITICAL FOOTING. I’M JOINED TONIGHT BY DANIELLE I’M JOINED TONIGHT BY DANIELLE MOODY MILLS HOST OF SIRIUS XM MOODY MILLS HOST OF SIRIUS XM SHOW. SHOW. EXECUTIVE PRODUCER OF NPR’S EXECUTIVE PRODUCER OF NPR’S LATINO USA, AND RICK STING L, LATINO USA, AND RICK STING L, MANAGING EDITOR OF TIME MANAGING EDITOR OF TIME MAGAZINE. MAGAZINE. NICE TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE IN NEW NICE TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE IN NEW YORK TOGETHER ON A SUMMER NIGHT. YORK TOGETHER ON A SUMMER NIGHT.>>IT’S GREAT TO BE HERE.>>IT’S GREAT TO BE HERE.>>WONDERFUL.>>WONDERFUL.>>IT IS A PARTY.>>IT IS A PARTY. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE WAY WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE WAY DONALD TRUMP IS COPING? DONALD TRUMP IS COPING?>>HE’S COPING LIKE THE>>HE’S COPING LIKE THE COMPULSIVE LIAR THAT HE IS, COMPULSIVE LIAR THAT HE IS, WHICH IS DENY, DENY, DENY, WHICH IS DENY, DENY, DENY, ADVERTISE TORT, DISTORT, ADVERTISE TORT, DISTORT, DISTORT. DISTORT. THAT’S WHAT HE DOES. THAT’S WHAT HE DOES. SO HE SETS IT UP SO IF SOMETHING SO HE SETS IT UP SO IF SOMETHING DOES GO WRONG WITH THE ECONOMY, DOES GO WRONG WITH THE ECONOMY, IF WE DO GO INTO A RECESSION, IF WE DO GO INTO A RECESSION, HE’S GOING TO HAVE BLAMED CHINA. HE’S GOING TO HAVE BLAMED CHINA. HE WILL HAVE BLAMED HIS HE WILL HAVE BLAMED HIS HAND-PICKED FEDERAL RESERVE HAND-PICKED FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN. CHAIRMAN. IT WILL BE EVERYONE ELSE’S FAULT IT WILL BE EVERYONE ELSE’S FAULT BUT DONALD TRUMP’S. BUT DONALD TRUMP’S. THIS IS WHAT HE DID WITH THE THIS IS WHAT HE DID WITH THE ELECTION IN 2016. ELECTION IN 2016. HE TOLD US THAT THE ELECTION WAS HE TOLD US THAT THE ELECTION WAS GOING TO BE RIGGED IF HE DIDN’T GOING TO BE RIGGED IF HE DIDN’T WIN. WIN. HE SAID THAT THERE WERE MILLIONS HE SAID THAT THERE WERE MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO WERE VOTING THAT OF PEOPLE WHO WERE VOTING THAT WERE NOT CITIZENS OF THE UNITED WERE NOT CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES, SO HE WAS LITERALLY STATES, SO HE WAS LITERALLY SETTING UP THE STAGE SO THAT IF, SETTING UP THE STAGE SO THAT IF, IN FACT, HE FAILED, THAT IT WAS IN FACT, HE FAILED, THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE ABOUT EVERYTHING GOING TO BE ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT ELSE OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY A DONALD TRUMP IS ACTUALLY A FAILURE. FAILURE.>>YOU MENTION THAT WHOLE>>YOU MENTION THAT WHOLE ATTEMPT TO NOT ONLY UNDERMINE ATTEMPT TO NOT ONLY UNDERMINE THE ECONOMIC REALITY, BUT THE THE ECONOMIC REALITY, BUT THE ACTUAL VOTING. ACTUAL VOTING. HE WAS BACK AT THAT. HE WAS BACK AT THAT. TAKE A LOOK. TAKE A LOOK.>>YOU HAVE A LOT OF VOTER>>YOU HAVE A LOT OF VOTER FRAUD. FRAUD. MANY, MANY PEOPLE VOTED THAT MANY, MANY PEOPLE VOTED THAT SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN VOTED. SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN VOTED. SOME PEOPLE VOTED MANY TIMES. SOME PEOPLE VOTED MANY TIMES. WHAT I’M SAYING IS WE NEED VOTER WHAT I’M SAYING IS WE NEED VOTER IDENTIFICATION. IDENTIFICATION. WE NEED VOTER I.D. WE NEED VOTER I.D.>>NOW, QUICK FACT CHECK BECAUSE>>NOW, QUICK FACT CHECK BECAUSE WE DON’T PLAY THAT STUFF WITHOUT WE DON’T PLAY THAT STUFF WITHOUT CONTEXT. CONTEXT. WE’LL SHOW YOU HERE. WE’LL SHOW YOU HERE. THE ACTUAL PERSON WHO RUNS THE THE ACTUAL PERSON WHO RUNS THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMITTEE CHAIR FEDERAL ELECTION COMMITTEE CHAIR SAYS ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE SAYS ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. WHATSOEVER. AND WE KNOW THAT. AND WE KNOW THAT. SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SEE THIS SO WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SEE THIS AND THIS PERIOD WHERE DONALD AND THIS PERIOD WHERE DONALD TRUMP IS SORT OF — AS FAR AS TRUMP IS SORT OF — AS FAR AS HE’S CONCERNED, HE’S POST HE’S CONCERNED, HE’S POST MUELLER. MUELLER. HE’S UNBRIDLED IN A CERTAIN WAY. HE’S UNBRIDLED IN A CERTAIN WAY. AND WHAT WE’RE SEEING IN THESE AND WHAT WE’RE SEEING IN THESE SORT OF MONTHS IS ANTI-REALITY SORT OF MONTHS IS ANTI-REALITY OR ANTI-MINORITY IN THE WAY HE’S OR ANTI-MINORITY IN THE WAY HE’S BEEN ORGANIZING POLITICALLY. BEEN ORGANIZING POLITICALLY.>>AND ALSO THE IDEA THAT WE SET>>AND ALSO THE IDEA THAT WE SET UP A COMPLETE AND TOTAL UP A COMPLETE AND TOTAL GASLIGHT, RIGHT? GASLIGHT, RIGHT? ONE OF THE PEOPLE — ONE OF THE ONE OF THE PEOPLE — ONE OF THE SHOOTERS, HIS MANIFESTO IN EL SHOOTERS, HIS MANIFESTO IN EL PASO SAID, INVASION, INVASION, PASO SAID, INVASION, INVASION, INVASION OVER AND OVER AGAIN. INVASION OVER AND OVER AGAIN. SO DONALD TRUMP FEEDS THIS SO DONALD TRUMP FEEDS THIS NARRATIVE. NARRATIVE. AND HE’S TELLING PEOPLE, THEY’RE AND HE’S TELLING PEOPLE, THEY’RE COMING TO VOTE ILLEGALLY. COMING TO VOTE ILLEGALLY. SO WHEN WE SEE LINES WRAPPED SO WHEN WE SEE LINES WRAPPED AROUND POLLING STATIONS OF BLACK AROUND POLLING STATIONS OF BLACK AND BROWN PEOPLE, OH, THEY MUST AND BROWN PEOPLE, OH, THEY MUST BE UP TO SOMETHING NEFARIOUS, BE UP TO SOMETHING NEFARIOUS, RIGHT? RIGHT? AND SO IT’S THIS IDEA THAT AS AND SO IT’S THIS IDEA THAT AS LONG AS HE CAN SET THE STAGE LONG AS HE CAN SET THE STAGE LIKE HE DID AT SHELL, THE LIKE HE DID AT SHELL, THE PICTURE LOOKS GOOD. PICTURE LOOKS GOOD. WE THEN ARE LEFT ON THE DEFENSE WE THEN ARE LEFT ON THE DEFENSE TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT TO TELL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT THE PICTURE IS A LIE, BUT THE THE PICTURE IS A LIE, BUT THE PICTURE IS ALREADY SNAPPED. PICTURE IS ALREADY SNAPPED.>>SO WHAT’S REALLY CRAZY –>>SO WHAT’S REALLY CRAZY — BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE UNION THING AS BIT ABOUT THE UNION THING AS WELL AS THIS NOTION THAT PEOPLE WELL AS THIS NOTION THAT PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO ARE NOT BORN IN THIS LIKE ME WHO ARE NOT BORN IN THIS COUNTRY AND WHO MAY BE NOT HERE COUNTRY AND WHO MAY BE NOT HERE WITH PAPERS, OR WITH A GREEN WITH PAPERS, OR WITH A GREEN CARD, WOULD BE RUSHING TO GO CARD, WOULD BE RUSHING TO GO VOTE. VOTE. YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW IF YOU TALK YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW IF YOU TALK TO ANY IMMIGRANT RIGHT NOW, WHAT TO ANY IMMIGRANT RIGHT NOW, WHAT THEY’RE NOT THINKING ABOUT IS THEY’RE NOT THINKING ABOUT IS OUTWARDLY DOING ANYTHING THAT OUTWARDLY DOING ANYTHING THAT COULD BE PERCEIVED TO BE IN ANY COULD BE PERCEIVED TO BE IN ANY WAY ILLEGAL. WAY ILLEGAL. SO THERE’S JUST THIS NOTION — SO THERE’S JUST THIS NOTION — AGAIN, HE HAS PAINTED US NOW AS AGAIN, HE HAS PAINTED US NOW AS IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE COMING HERE IMMIGRANTS WHO ARE COMING HERE CROSSING ILLEGALLY, THAT WE’RE CROSSING ILLEGALLY, THAT WE’RE TAKING OVER, AND NOW WE’RE GOING TAKING OVER, AND NOW WE’RE GOING TO TAKE OVER THE POLLS. TO TAKE OVER THE POLLS. AND THE POLLING BOOTH. AND THE POLLING BOOTH. SO NOW WE’RE GOING TO BE SHOT SO NOW WE’RE GOING TO BE SHOT BECAUSE WE’RE ATTEMPTING TO VOTE BECAUSE WE’RE ATTEMPTING TO VOTE AND THEY’RE GOING TO SEE US AS AND THEY’RE GOING TO SEE US AS INVADERS. INVADERS. AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT’S AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT’S REALLY CRAZY, ARI, TALKING ABOUT REALLY CRAZY, ARI, TALKING ABOUT THE UNION WORKERS WHO WERE PAID THE UNION WORKERS WHO WERE PAID TO SHOW UP, THIS WAS LIKE — TO SHOW UP, THIS WAS LIKE — WHEN I WAS GROWING UP AND WE WHEN I WAS GROWING UP AND WE WOULD GO TO MEXICO, THIS IS WHAT WOULD GO TO MEXICO, THIS IS WHAT WE HEARD WAS HAPPENING DURING WE HEARD WAS HAPPENING DURING THE — WHICH WAS IN POWER FOR 70 THE — WHICH WAS IN POWER FOR 70 SOMETHING YEARS IN MEXICO. SOMETHING YEARS IN MEXICO. IT WAS LIKE AN AUTOCRATIC IT WAS LIKE AN AUTOCRATIC CORRUPT RE JEAN. CORRUPT RE JEAN. WE WOULD HEAR, NO, WHAT THEY DO WE WOULD HEAR, NO, WHAT THEY DO IS PAY ALL THE PEOPLE TO COME IS PAY ALL THE PEOPLE TO COME OUT. OUT. I GREW UP HEARING THIS. I GREW UP HEARING THIS. AND JUST THINKING, LIKE, THAT AND JUST THINKING, LIKE, THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IN THE UNITED WOULD NEVER HAPPEN IN THE UNITED STATES. STATES. AND AT THIS POINT WHAT WE KNOW AND AT THIS POINT WHAT WE KNOW NOW IS THAT THOSE WORKERS NOW IS THAT THOSE WORKERS BASICALLY HAD TO SHOW UP IN BASICALLY HAD TO SHOW UP IN ORDER TO GET PAID TO MAKE THEIR ORDER TO GET PAID TO MAKE THEIR BILLS WHETHER OR NOT THEY LIKED BILLS WHETHER OR NOT THEY LIKED TRUMP OR NOT. TRUMP OR NOT. WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR COUNTRY THAT SOMEHOW THIS IS LIKE — AND THAT SOMEHOW THIS IS LIKE — AND IT’S OKAY, YOU KNOW. IT’S OKAY, YOU KNOW.>>YOU SAY THAT AND YOU SAY,>>YOU SAY THAT AND YOU SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, CAN IT HAPPEN WELL, YOU KNOW, CAN IT HAPPEN HERE? HERE? WHICH IS AN OLD ECHO ON A NUMBER WHICH IS AN OLD ECHO ON A NUMBER OF LEVELS WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT OF LEVELS WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT WE DEAL WITH, LARGE AND WHAT WE DEAL WITH, LARGE AND SMALL. SMALL. I WANT TO READ FROM THIS I WANT TO READ FROM THIS REPORTING BECAUSE THIS IS NOT REPORTING BECAUSE THIS IS NOT NORMAL. NORMAL. THIS SHOULD NOT BECOME A PART OF THIS SHOULD NOT BECOME A PART OF OUR CIVIC AND POLITICAL LIFE. OUR CIVIC AND POLITICAL LIFE. HEADLINE, SHELL WORKERS WOULD HEADLINE, SHELL WORKERS WOULD HAVE MISSED PAY IF THEY HAD HAVE MISSED PAY IF THEY HAD MISSED TRUMP SPEECH. MISSED TRUMP SPEECH. ONE WORKER SAID THEY DIDN’T WANT ONE WORKER SAID THEY DIDN’T WANT TO COME BUT THOUGHT IT WOULD TO COME BUT THOUGHT IT WOULD LOOK BAD TO MISS THIS DAY OF LOOK BAD TO MISS THIS DAY OF WORK AND FULL PAY. WORK AND FULL PAY. DOZENS TRIED TO LEAVE EARLY DOZENS TRIED TO LEAVE EARLY BEFORE HE FINISHED THE 3:00 P.M. BEFORE HE FINISHED THE 3:00 P.M. APPROACH. APPROACH. THEY WERE TOLD SECRET SERVICE THEY WERE TOLD SECRET SERVICE WOULDN’T LET THEM OUT OF THE WOULDN’T LET THEM OUT OF THE WAREHOUSE UNTIL TRUMP HAD LEFT WAREHOUSE UNTIL TRUMP HAD LEFT THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY.>>YIKES.>>YIKES. YIKES. YIKES. I DON’T KNOW, BECAUSE TO ME THE I DON’T KNOW, BECAUSE TO ME THE BICKER QUESTION IS THE GAME BICKER QUESTION IS THE GAME THAT’S BEING PLAYED WITH OUR THAT’S BEING PLAYED WITH OUR DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>THE GAME THAT’S BEING PLAYED>>THE GAME THAT’S BEING PLAYED WITH OUR DEMOCRACY. WITH OUR DEMOCRACY. AND JUST KIND OF LIKE THE AND JUST KIND OF LIKE THE REPORTING ON IT, THE REPORTING ON IT, THE NORMALIZATION OF IT WHICH WE’RE NORMALIZATION OF IT WHICH WE’RE CONSTANTLY SEEING, GUYS, THIS IS CONSTANTLY SEEING, GUYS, THIS IS NOT GOING TO LEAD US ANYPLACE NOT GOING TO LEAD US ANYPLACE POSITIVE ON ELECTION NIGHT. POSITIVE ON ELECTION NIGHT. JUST NOT GOING TO LEAD US TO JUST NOT GOING TO LEAD US TO ANYPLACE POSITIVE. ANYPLACE POSITIVE.>>IT’S A LITTLE LIKE THE OLD>>IT’S A LITTLE LIKE THE OLD SOVIET UNION WHERE YOU HAD TO SOVIET UNION WHERE YOU HAD TO SHOW UP WHEN THE LEADER OF THE SHOW UP WHEN THE LEADER OF THE SOVIET UNION WAS THERE OR YOU SOVIET UNION WAS THERE OR YOU WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN PAID. WOULDN’T HAVE BEEN PAID. THE THEME OF EVERYTHING — I’M THE THEME OF EVERYTHING — I’M TRYING TO UNITE EVERYTHING THAT TRYING TO UNITE EVERYTHING THAT WE’VE BEEN DISCUSSING, ARI. WE’VE BEEN DISCUSSING, ARI. THE THEME IS DATA, AND THE DATA THE THEME IS DATA, AND THE DATA THAT IS IGNORED BY PRESIDENT THAT IS IGNORED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP. TRUMP. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A RECESSION, WHAT POSSIBILITY OF A RECESSION, WHAT IS A RECESSION? IS A RECESSION? A RECESSION IS TWO CONSECUTIVE A RECESSION IS TWO CONSECUTIVE QUARTERS OF KROTING ECONOMY. QUARTERS OF KROTING ECONOMY. WE SAW THAT IN GERMANY WHICH IS WE SAW THAT IN GERMANY WHICH IS A MUCH HEALTHIER ECONOMY. A MUCH HEALTHIER ECONOMY. WE SAW FACTORY STARTS AT A WE SAW FACTORY STARTS AT A THREE-YEAR LOW. THREE-YEAR LOW. CONSUMER SPENDING PURCHASING CONSUMER SPENDING PURCHASING POWER AT A THREE-YEAR LOW. POWER AT A THREE-YEAR LOW. s ECONOMISTS DON’T PUT A FINGER s ECONOMISTS DON’T PUT A FINGER IN THE WIND, MAYBE IT’S GOING TO IN THE WIND, MAYBE IT’S GOING TO BE A RECESSION, MAYBE IT’S NOT. BE A RECESSION, MAYBE IT’S NOT. THEY’RE LOOKING AT DATA, WHAT THEY’RE LOOKING AT DATA, WHAT DONALD TRUMP IGNORES. DONALD TRUMP IGNORES. HIS PHILOSOPHY WITH DATA, THE HIS PHILOSOPHY WITH DATA, THE CHICO MARKS DATA. CHICO MARKS DATA. WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE, ME WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE, ME OR YOUR LYING EYES? OR YOUR LYING EYES? [ LAUGHTER ] [ LAUGHTER ]>>THE MARX BROTHERS?>>THE MARX BROTHERS?>>WHAT HE DOES, LIKE WHAT>>WHAT HE DOES, LIKE WHAT AUTOCRATS DO, THEY SAY IGNORE AUTOCRATS DO, THEY SAY IGNORE THE DATA, IGNORE EMPIRICAL THE DATA, IGNORE EMPIRICAL REALITY, PAY ATTENTION TO ME. REALITY, PAY ATTENTION TO ME. DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO THAT. DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO THAT. THAT’S WHAT HE’S DOING OVERS AND THAT’S WHAT HE’S DOING OVERS AND OVER. OVER.>>WHAT IS FOX NEWS GOING TO DO>>WHAT IS FOX NEWS GOING TO DO NOW? NOW? I MEAN, HE’S TAKING ON FOX NEWS. I MEAN, HE’S TAKING ON FOX NEWS. SO IS — FOX NEWS, THE SHOE IS SO IS — FOX NEWS, THE SHOE IS GOING TO BE REVERSED RIGHT NOW. GOING TO BE REVERSED RIGHT NOW. HE’S STARTING TO CRITICIZE FOX HE’S STARTING TO CRITICIZE FOX NEWS. NEWS. ARE THEY GOING TO DO A PRIMETIME ARE THEY GOING TO DO A PRIMETIME SPECIAL THAT’S LIKE, THE SPECIAL THAT’S LIKE, THE AMERICAN ECONOMY, GROWING AND AMERICAN ECONOMY, GROWING AND GROWING, JUST BECAUSE — GROWING, JUST BECAUSE –>>THAT’S — BUT THAT’S EXACTLY>>THAT’S — BUT THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT ALL OF THE ANCHORS THERE WHAT ALL OF THE ANCHORS THERE HAVE BEEN DOING. HAVE BEEN DOING. THEY’RE TELLING THE AMERICAN THEY’RE TELLING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT IT IS — I MEAN, I PEOPLE THAT IT IS — I MEAN, I TRY NOT TO, BUT THEY TELL THE TRY NOT TO, BUT THEY TELL THE AMERICAN PUBLIC THAT EVERYTHING AMERICAN PUBLIC THAT EVERYTHING IS OKAY, THE ECONOMY IS STRONG, IS OKAY, THE ECONOMY IS STRONG, IT’S THE MEDIA WHO IS AT FAULT. IT’S THE MEDIA WHO IS AT FAULT. IT’S THE LIBERAL MEDIA THAT IS IT’S THE LIBERAL MEDIA THAT IS TRYING TO MAKE THE ECONOMY WEAK TRYING TO MAKE THE ECONOMY WEAK SO THAT DONALD TRUMP DOESN’T WIN SO THAT DONALD TRUMP DOESN’T WIN REELECTION. REELECTION. AS IF A WEAK ECONOMY WOULD BE AS IF A WEAK ECONOMY WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. GOOD FOR THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. NO. NO. BUT IT’S THIS IDEA THAT THEY BUT IT’S THIS IDEA THAT THEY JUST CONTINUE TO REVERBERATE JUST CONTINUE TO REVERBERATE THESE CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND THESE CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND IT’S LIKE THEY ARE IN THIS IT’S LIKE THEY ARE IN THIS CLOSED LOOP. CLOSED LOOP.>>TO PICK UP ON RICHARD’S POINT>>TO PICK UP ON RICHARD’S POINT THAT CONNECTS WITH WHAT YOU’RE THAT CONNECTS WITH WHAT YOU’RE SAYING, THERE IS, ON THE ONE SAYING, THERE IS, ON THE ONE HAND, DATA AND HOW MUCH CAN YOU HAND, DATA AND HOW MUCH CAN YOU FIGHT THE NUMBERS AND THE FACTS FIGHT THE NUMBERS AND THE FACTS AND THE EVIDENCE. AND THE EVIDENCE. AND THEN THERE ARE THESE BUBBLE AND THEN THERE ARE THESE BUBBLE EVENTS. EVENTS. I MEAN, GEORGE SOROS WHO KNOWS I MEAN, GEORGE SOROS WHO KNOWS HIS WAY AROUND THE MARKETS HIS WAY AROUND THE MARKETS TALKED ABOUT THE FACT BUBBLES DO TALKED ABOUT THE FACT BUBBLES DO EXIST, AND A VERY POWERFUL EXIST, AND A VERY POWERFUL AMPLIFIED CON MAN CAN CONTRIBUTE AMPLIFIED CON MAN CAN CONTRIBUTE AS THE RATING AGENCIES CAN. AS THE RATING AGENCIES CAN. BUT THEY POP WHEN THERE ARE BUT THEY POP WHEN THERE ARE REALITY-INDUCING EVENTS. REALITY-INDUCING EVENTS. THAT IS WHY THE RECESSION BEYOND THAT IS WHY THE RECESSION BEYOND THE POLITICAL REASONS SCARES THE POLITICAL REASONS SCARES TRUMP BECAUSE YOU CAN’T BE A CON TRUMP BECAUSE YOU CAN’T BE A CON MAN IF YOU DON’T KNOW HOW TO MAN IF YOU DON’T KNOW HOW TO TRICK PEOPLE. TRICK PEOPLE. AND IT’S MUCH HARDER TO TRICK AND IT’S MUCH HARDER TO TRICK PEOPLE ABOUT, SAY, THE PEOPLE ABOUT, SAY, THE TEMPERATURE IN THIS ROOM, RIGHT, TEMPERATURE IN THIS ROOM, RIGHT, THAN IT IS ABOUT SOMETHING GOING THAN IT IS ABOUT SOMETHING GOING ON OVER THERE BECAUSE THERE ARE ON OVER THERE BECAUSE THERE ARE LIMITS TO THAT. LIMITS TO THAT. AND SO IT IS INTERESTING WHEN AND SO IT IS INTERESTING WHEN YOU SEE HIS OBSESSION WITH YOU SEE HIS OBSESSION WITH BRINGING ON PEOPLE WHO ARE BRINGING ON PEOPLE WHO ARE EFFECTIVELY — I DON’T MEAN TO EFFECTIVELY — I DON’T MEAN TO REDUCE THEM TO ONLY THIS, BUT AT REDUCE THEM TO ONLY THIS, BUT AT LEAST AS A MINIMUM ARE REALLY LEAST AS A MINIMUM ARE REALLY GOOD AT TELEVISION. GOOD AT TELEVISION. SO LARRY KUDLOW WHO WE ARE ABOUT SO LARRY KUDLOW WHO WE ARE ABOUT TO HEAR FROM INVOLVED IN THE TO HEAR FROM INVOLVED IN THE ECONOMICS, WHO HAS BEEN ON THIS ECONOMICS, WHO HAS BEEN ON THIS SHOW, WHO I THINK KNOWS SHOW, WHO I THINK KNOWS ECONOMICS AND IS GOOD ON ECONOMICS AND IS GOOD ON TELEVISION, BUT ALSO HAS A TRACK TELEVISION, BUT ALSO HAS A TRACK RECORD BOTH IN AND OUT OF RECORD BOTH IN AND OUT OF GOVERNMENT OF BOOSTERING THE GOVERNMENT OF BOOSTERING THE ECONOMY REGARDLESS OF THE DATA ECONOMY REGARDLESS OF THE DATA AND THE RECESSION, WHICH WORKED AND THE RECESSION, WHICH WORKED FOR HIM. FOR HIM. AND HE WAS CALLED OUT ON THIS A AND HE WAS CALLED OUT ON THIS A LAEL LAEL LITTLE BIT HERE. LITTLE BIT HERE. HE CURRENTLY WORKS FOR TRUMP. HE CURRENTLY WORKS FOR TRUMP. TAKE A LOOK. TAKE A LOOK.>>I TELL YOU WHAT, I SURE DON’T>>I TELL YOU WHAT, I SURE DON’T SEE A RECESSION. SEE A RECESSION. WE’RE DOING PRETTY DARN WELL IN WE’RE DOING PRETTY DARN WELL IN MY JUDGMENT. MY JUDGMENT. LET’S NOT BE AFRAID OF OPTIMISM. LET’S NOT BE AFRAID OF OPTIMISM. LET’S NOT BE AFRAID OF OPTIMISM. LET’S NOT BE AFRAID OF OPTIMISM.>>BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU ACTUALLY>>BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU ACTUALLY SAID THAT IN 2007 RIGHT BEFORE SAID THAT IN 2007 RIGHT BEFORE THE SECOND WORST DOWNTURN IN THE SECOND WORST DOWNTURN IN AMERICAN HISTORY. AMERICAN HISTORY. THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE. THIS IS WHAT YOU WROTE. THERE’S NO RECESSION COMING. THERE’S NO RECESSION COMING. THIS IS IN DECEMBER OF ’07. THIS IS IN DECEMBER OF ’07. THE PESSIMISTAS WERE WRONG. THE PESSIMISTAS WERE WRONG.>>I HAVE TO ASK YOU.>>I HAVE TO ASK YOU. WERE THE PESSIMISTAS WRONG? WERE THE PESSIMISTAS WRONG? NO. NO. TRUMP CLEARLY SAYS WHO DO I WANT TRUMP CLEARLY SAYS WHO DO I WANT IN THIS ECONOMIC ROLE? IN THIS ECONOMIC ROLE? AT LEAST SOMEONE WHO CAN GO ON AT LEAST SOMEONE WHO CAN GO ON TV AND SMOOTH THIS ALL OUT. TV AND SMOOTH THIS ALL OUT.>>WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR BUT>>WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR BUT FEAR ITSELF. FEAR ITSELF. THAT’S WHAT MR. KUDLOW IS THAT’S WHAT MR. KUDLOW IS SAYING. SAYING. OF COURSE, CONSUMER CONFIDENCE OF COURSE, CONSUMER CONFIDENCE IS PART OF THE ECONOMY AND THERE IS PART OF THE ECONOMY AND THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BOOSTING IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BOOSTING THE ECONOMY TO TRY TO INSTILL THE ECONOMY TO TRY TO INSTILL MORE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE. MORE CONSUMER CONFIDENCE. BUT LET’S PULL BACK FOR A BUT LET’S PULL BACK FOR A SECOND, ARI. SECOND, ARI. WE’RE IN THE 8th — THERE’S BEEN WE’RE IN THE 8th — THERE’S BEEN A TEN-YEAR ECONOMIC EXPANSION. A TEN-YEAR ECONOMIC EXPANSION. EIGHT YEARS OF THAT UNDER EIGHT YEARS OF THAT UNDER PRESIDENT OBAMA. PRESIDENT OBAMA. CAN THAT CONTINUE FOREVER? CAN THAT CONTINUE FOREVER? I GUESS IT COULD, BUT ALL I GUESS IT COULD, BUT ALL EXPANSIONS ALWAYS COME TO AN EXPANSIONS ALWAYS COME TO AN END. END. THE MUSIC BEGINS TO STOP. THE MUSIC BEGINS TO STOP. SO THAT’S WHAT WE SEE HAPPENING SO THAT’S WHAT WE SEE HAPPENING NOW. NOW. NOBODY IS ROOTING FOR IT. NOBODY IS ROOTING FOR IT. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE DATA BUT IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE DATA I WAS TALKING ABOUT, CHINA IS I WAS TALKING ABOUT, CHINA IS SLOWING DOWN, GERMANY IS SLOWING SLOWING DOWN, GERMANY IS SLOWING DOWN, THE U.K. IS SLOWING DOWN, DOWN, THE U.K. IS SLOWING DOWN, THIS IS A GLOBAL PHENOMENON. THIS IS A GLOBAL PHENOMENON. NOT JUST A U.S. PHENOMENON. NOT JUST A U.S. PHENOMENON. IT’S BENEFITED PEOPLE A LONG IT’S BENEFITED PEOPLE A LONG TIME. TIME.>>I’M ALMOST OUT OF TIME.>>I’M ALMOST OUT OF TIME. I’LL CLOSE WITH A ONE WORD I’LL CLOSE WITH A ONE WORD ANSWER WHEN IT COMES TO THE ANSWER WHEN IT COMES TO THE ECONOMY AND FUTURE OF AMERICAN ECONOMY AND FUTURE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY SI DEMOCRACY SI DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY. ONE WORD EACH. ONE WORD EACH. ARE YOU A PESSIMIST OR OPTIMIST? ARE YOU A PESSIMIST OR OPTIMIST?>>PESSIMISTA.>>PESSIMISTA.>>I’M AN IMMIGRANT.>>I’M AN IMMIGRANT. IF THE ECONOMY TURNS BAD HE’S IF THE ECONOMY TURNS BAD HE’S GOING TO COME AFTER PEOPLE LIKE GOING TO COME AFTER PEOPLE LIKE ME IN REELECTION. ME IN REELECTION.>>SO YOU’RE A PESSIMISTA.>>SO YOU’RE A PESSIMISTA.>>I TRY TO BE AN OPTIMISTA>>I TRY TO BE AN OPTIMISTA EVERY DAY. EVERY DAY.>>YOU PRONOUNCE IT BETTER THAN>>YOU PRONOUNCE IT BETTER THAN ME AND LARRY KUDLOW. ME AND LARRY KUDLOW.>>I’M A PESSIMISTA.>>I’M A PESSIMISTA. 74% OF ECONOMISTS ARE SAYING

PBS NewsHour full episode August 12, 2019


AMNA NAWAZ, PBS NEWSHOUR ANCHOR: Good evening. I’m Amna Nawaz. Judy Woodruff is away. On the “NewsHour” tonight: Protestors in Hong Kong bring one of the world’s
busiest airports to a standstill, as fears grow over a Chinese military crackdown. Then, new threats of extinction as the Trump
administration changes the rules of the Endangered Species Act. And on the ground at the Iowa state fair,
where butter sculptures and 2020 presidential hopefuls vie for voters’ attention. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I agree with what Biden
has to say, but I also agree with Warren and what Sanders has to say. So I’m right now, I’m kind of conflicted. (END VIDEO CLIP) AMNA NAWAZ: All that and more on tonight’s
“PBS NewsHour”. (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Air traffic in Hong Kong was brought
to a ground stop after a fourth day of protests inside the international airport. More than 150 flights were canceled. Thousands of anti-government demonstrators
occupied the terminal, holding signs and chanting calls for democratic reforms. They’re demanding the resignation of the territory’s
chief executive Carrie Lam, and an investigation into police use of force. We’ll have more on this after the news summary. The Trump administration finalized rollbacks
on the Nixon-era Endangered Species Act today. The changes end automatic end automatic endangered
specifies protections for those classified as threatened. They’ll also allow economic cost to factor
into whether or not a species should be protected. Conservation groups and at least 10 attorneys
general have warned the move could put more wildlife at risk for extinction. We’ll take a closer look at the impact of
today’s rollback later in the program. In economic news: a sell-off in the banking
and technology sectors caused stocks to plunge on Wall Street today. The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 391
points to close at 25,896. The Nasdaq fell more than 95 points, and the
S&P 500 slid 36. In Eastern China, meanwhile, the death toll
from a weekend typhoon has now risen to at least 45 people. Rescue workers are still evacuating residents
stranded in buildings after their streets were submerged by floodwaters. Crews have been working to clean up debris
left behind. Meanwhile, in southern India, days of torrential
rain and mudslides have now killed nearly 100 people and displaced 400,000 others. In the worst-hit state of Kerala, muddy water
filled the roads as rescue workers in boats helped people evacuate. At least one crocodile found refuge on the
roof of a submerged home. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) AJEET PATTANKUDI, RESCUED LOCAL (through translator):
It has been at least five to six days. Everybody is stuck in flooded villages. Animals and others all are stuck there. People are facing a lot of problems. Water has come from all directions. Water has entered all the houses. (END VIDEO CLIP) AMNA NAWAZ: Local officials in the state of
Karnataka said the flooding was the worst they’ve seen in 45 years. In Congo, two experimental drugs are showing
promise in the fight against Ebola. They’re part of a clinical trial that began
last November. The therapies are the first of their kind
to treat patients who’ve already contracted the highly contagious disease. People who received the drugs shortly after
becoming infected had a 90 percent survival rate. The Ebola outbreak in Congo killed more than
1,800 people over the past year. Back in this country, a friend of a gunman
who killed nine people outside of bar in Dayton, Ohio, told investigators he purchased the
body armor and ammunition that were used in the rampage. Federal prosecutors unsealed charges against
Ethan Kollie today. But they emphasized there was no evidence
Kollie knew about the shooter’s plans. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) BENJAMIN GLASSMAN, U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE SOUTHERN
DISTRICT OF OHIO: In the course of this ongoing investigation into the August 4th shooting,
anyone who is discovered to have any criminal culpability for any act that is ultimately
discovered through the investigation or contributed in any way to the events on August 4 is going
to be held criminally responsible. (END VIDEO CLIP) AMNA NAWAZ: Kollie was charged today with
lying on a federal firearms form used for an unrelated gun purchase. Also today, lawyers for comedian Bill Cosby
appeared before a Pennsylvania appeals court today, in a bid to overturn his sexual assault
conviction. They argued a judge denied Cosby a fair trial
by letting additional accusers testify in a case that concerned only one allegation. The 82-year-old Cosby is now serving a prison
sentence of three to 10 years for drugging and assaulting a woman in 2004. A decision on the appeal is not expected for
several months. Still to come on the “NewsHour”: how will
the Chinese government respond to protestors in Hong Kong shutting down a major airport;
questions and conspiracy theories in the wake of billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s
death; the Trump administration moves to radically reduce the amount of legal immigration to
the U.S.; Democratic hopefuls head to the storied Iowa state fair and our politics Monday
team examines the state of the race. Plus much more. (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Hong Kong’s airport was shut down
today, occupied by thousands of protesters. The authorities in Beijing again struck an
ominous note, comparing the mass protests to terrorism, and, as thousands of Chinese
security personnel mustered on Hong Kong’s border, Beijing declared there should be,
quote, no leniency or mercy for the protesters. Jonathan Miller of Independent Television
News reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JONATHAN MILLER, INDEPENDENT TELEVISION NEWS
REPORTER: In air thick with tear gas, inside an underground station, Hong Kong police last
night resorting to ever harsher tactics. These protestors had been attempting to flee. Across the harbor, outside a Kowloon police
station, a protester was shot in the eye with a (INAUDIBLE) from a police shot gun. Despite wearing protective goggles, her eyeball
was ruptured and there are fears she could lose her eye. Earlier in the same location, police fried
tear gas from inside the station. A battle ensued, as protestors laid siege. Then this. A policeman inside suffered burns to his legs. Today, an infuriated Beijing lashed out, branding
this terrorism. The state council, Chinas cabinet, ratcheting
up the ruthlessness of the rhetoric, leaving no room now to back down. These were serious and sinister crimes, it
said, protestors reckless. Things had reached what the spokesman called
a critical juncture. YANG GUANG, SPOKESMAN, HONG KONG AND MACAU
AFFAIRS OFFICE (through translator): Such violent crimes must be resolutely cracked
down on, in accordance with the law. No leniency, no mercy, we strongly support
the Hong Kong police as they enforce the law strictly to bring the criminals to justice
as soon as possible. JONATHAN MILLER: There’s been mounting alarm
in Hong Kong, over whether China might order military onto the streets. But today, communist party papers released
footage complete with sinister soundtrack, showing convoy of people’s armed police
heading to Shenzhen on Hong Kong’s northern border. These paramilitary under command of central
military council headed by President Xi Jinping himself have been used to put down protest,
often brutally, in other regions. Growing outrage over police brutality led
to thousands of demonstrators converging today on Hong Kong International Airport, one of
the busiest in the world, forcing the total cancellation of all flights in and out. It’s the protestors that were brutal today,
the police said, exhibiting weapons they said were confiscated. Most Hong Kongers won’t buy that now, the
trust is broken. There are 28 years still to go before China
can take full control of Hong Kong. But Beijing looks impatient to bring the territory
under its authoritarian aegis. Among Hong Kongers, banks and businesses,
a quiet but rising panic. (END VIDEOTAPE) (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: Attorney General William Barr
today sharply criticized the management of the Manhattan federal jail where wealthy financier
Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his cell this weekend. As John Yang reports, Epstein’s death does
not mean the end to the federal sex-trafficking investigation that led to his indictment. JOHN YANG, PBS NEWSHOUR CORRESPONDENT: Amna,
in his remarks today, the attorney general also pledged that any co-conspirators should
not rest easy. The victims, he said, deserve justice and
they will get it. So where does the case go now? Jessica Roth is a professor at Yeshiva University’s
Cardozo School of Law, and joins us from New York. Jessica Roth, thanks. What do prosecutors in the case of the United
States versus Jeffrey Epstein do now that Jeffrey Epstein is dead? JESSICA ROTH, YESHIVA UNIVERSITY: Well, the
case against Jeffrey Epstein himself will be dismissed because he’s now deceased and
you can’t proceed with a criminal case against a person who’s dead, but the overall criminal
investigation will continue. Over the weekend, U.S. attorney for the southern
district of New York, Geoff Berman issued a statement in which he made clear that the
criminal investigation would continue and he said that his office would continue to
stand for the victims, stand up for the victims, and, in particular, he pointed to the fact
that Jeffrey Epstein had been charged in one count of the indictment with conspiring with
others to engage in sex trafficking and that’s significant because the law of conspiracy
requires proof that two or more persons agreed to commit a crime. And what that means is that Mr. Berman was
prepared to prove in court that at least one other person and possibly others were engaged
in a criminal conspiracy with Jeffrey Epstein. JOHN YANG: Well, we know that in the Flor
— that highly criticized Florida non-prosecution agreement, there are named — were named four
potential co-conspirators who were not charged, and in this New York indictment, there were
three people cited though not named who also participated in this. Do you think we’re likely to see indictments
against those folks coming up in the coming days? JESSICA ROTH: I don’t know about the timeline,
but certainly from everything that’s been indicated by the U.S. attorney’s office and
what’s been publicly reported, it would seem that they have significant evidence against
other people. As you mentioned in the indictment, there
are people identified not by name but in terms of the role that they played. So, clearly, the U.S. attorney’s office has
evidence against those other people and they will be pursuing that investigation and looking
also at the evidence that was collected during the search of Jeffrey Epstein’s home that
was done on the day of his arrest to see what that yields at the involvement of co-conspirators
and accomplices. It’s been reported that his pilots have been
subpoenaed for their testimony, and they would have significant information about who was
else may have been involved in arranging the travel for the sex trafficking. So I think we need to be patient as the investigators
reorient to a case in which Jeffrey Epstein will not sit at the table, but Mr. Berman
made clear that the investigation is ongoing. JOHN YANG: And even without a conviction,
can prosecutors go after his assets or in this case, I guess, his estate? JESSICA ROTH: Yes. So there’s still a process in which the U.S.
attorney’s office, through its U.S. attorneys office, can go after assets that were used
to facilitate the crimes that have been alleged here. So, for example, his Manhattan town house,
allegedly, was involved — was used as a place where some of the unlawful activity occurred. If his properties in the Virgin Island were
involved. Those also could be sought through what’s
called a civil asset forfeiture proceeding. The advantage of that, first, is that it can
be handled by the U.S. attorney’s office, and any assets that were recovered distributed
to victims for restitution through the federal government. It also allows a proof by preponderance of
evidence standard which is a civil standard of proof rather than the criminal beyond a
reasonable doubt standard. It allows offers an advantage frankly, of
allowing the narrative of what unfolded in his crimes to be told, because much of the
same proof would be offered that would have been offered in a criminal trial against Jeffrey
Epstein. JOHN YANG: And, of course, this doesn’t do
anything to the civil lawsuits that might be coming from accusers? JESSICA ROTH: No, those can proceed as well. So, the accusers have multiple avenues through
which they can seek some measure of justice. None will be the same, of course, as actually
confronting Jeffrey Epstein in a criminal case. But through the civil lawsuits, they can pursue
his estate. As I mentioned, the civil asset forfeiture
proceedings against specific assets that were used to facilitate his crimes is another avenue
of potential relief, and then, of course, as we discussed a moment ago, there’s a possibility
of criminal proceedings against others who were his accomplices and co-conspirators. JOHN YANG: Jessica Roth of the Cardozo School
of Law, thank you very much. ROTH: Thank you. (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: The Trump administration announced
today that it plans to implement new immigration rules. As Yamiche Alcindor explains, it’s one of
the most aggressive steps yet to limit legal immigration. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) YAMICHE ALCINDOR, PBS WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT:
Today’s new rule from the Trump administration limits who will be eligible for a green card
in the United States. Under current law, immigrants are already
required to prove that they are not what the government deems a, quote, public charge. Today, Ken Cuccinelli, the acting head of
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, announced the plans. He said any immigrants who use– or who have
deemed likely to use a number of public benefits may not be eligible for legal status. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) KEN CUCCINELLI, ACTING DIRECTOR, U.S. CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES: The benefit to taxpayers is a long term benefit of seeking to ensure
that our immigration system is bringing people to join us as American citizens as legal permanent
residents first who can stand on their own two feet, who will not be reliant on the welfare
system, especially in the age of the modern welfare state which is so expansive and expensive
frankly. (END VIDEO CLIP) YAMICHE ALCINDOR: The new rule includes services
afforded to legal immigrants under current law, such as housing assistance, Medicaid
and food stamps. To break it all down, I’m joined by Theresa
Cardinal Brown. She is the director of immigration and cross
border policy at the Bipartisan Policy Center in Washington. Thanks so much, Theresa, for being here. Talk to me about how this will impact immigrants
and the legal immigration process in the United States and who will be most impacted by this
new rule. THERESA CARDINAL BROWN, BIPARTISAN POLICY
CENTER: Sure. So, the rule applies to those who are applying
to get green cards in the United States. And, so, one of the long-standing issues in
immigration laws as you mentioned is whether or not someone would become a public charge. That has been broadly defined as somebody
who has been mostly dependent on the government. It’s a criteria that has been, I’d say, used
sparingly, especially over the last couple of decades but has been a priority of this
administration to implement. So, it would look whether or not people who
are applying to be green cardholders have used public benefits that they might be eligible
for. It would apply to current immigrants or citizens
who are looking to sponsor others to come on green cards, and it would apply to some
non-immigrants who are looking to extend or change their status as well. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: What can you tell us about
how much immigrants use public benefits in comparison to native born Americans. THERESA CARDINAL BROWN: So, we did a literature
review a couple of years about who uses public benefits, and what we found is, in general,
individual immigrants use benefits less often and at lower rates than U.S. citizens do,
but some immigrant-headed households, particularly those with U.S. citizen children may use more
because the children are eligible for benefits that maybe the immigrant parents are not. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Critics of the new rule
say this is the Trump administration again unfairly targeting immigrants. There are talks there are going to be swift
legal challenges to this. How does this new rule really factor into
how the Trump administration has overall used its immigration agenda to target different
groups? THERESA CARDINAL BROWN: Well, particularly
its regulatory agenda has been about legal immigrants, and one of the things that we
have seen is that a lot of the regulatory changes that have been implemented have been
about reducing eligibility for legal immigration, reducing the number of people who can qualified
for legal immigration or slowing down the legal immigration process. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: You said the term public
charge had been kind of implemented and enforced sparingly. Tell us a little bit about the history of
the term public charge and how certain immigrant groups have been subject to that term and
what it’s meant overall and in the years coming. THERESA CARDINAL BROWN: Well, the idea of
preventing the poor or paupers from immigrating has been around basically since the beginning
of the republic. Initially when the United States was created,
states had control over who could immigrant and would look for people who they thought
might not be eligible to — able to work or support themselves. In the 1800s, Congress passed the sort of
uniform immigration rules, the Chinese Escalation Act that included this public charge rule. But, over the years, it has been very subjectively
enforced. So, for example, during the Ellis Island days,
they would look whether or not they thought somebody was physically able of performing
work, did they have family members already here, sponsors, did they bring any money with
them. So it was sort of on the fly. This has been a priority of this administration
to get a public charge rule published since the administration came in. An executive order was issued very early in
the presidency asking for this to be done. So, it’s new in that we don’t know exactly
how it’s going to be implemented. It’s still a relatively subjected standard,
especially that prospective looking part, is an immigrant likely to be become a public
charge? That’s where it’s a little more iffy because
they’re looking at things like, does the immigrant have a work history? What’s their education level? Do they have any health issues that might
affect whether or not they would become a public charge? We have to kind of see how that would be implemented,
but we’ve already seen some of these because consulates overseas have been implementing
some of this through the visa review process over the last year, already. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Now, I want to turn to a
major story from last week. Some 680 immigrants were arrested during immigration
raids at food processing centers in Mississippi. What goes into such raids and what legal consequences
if any might employers face? THERESA CARDINAL BROWN: So, a raid like that
is — that size and scope has probably been in process for many, many months. It probably was based on some information
that Immigration and Customs Enforcement received that those employers are employing undocumented
immigrants, then they also collaterally arrested undocumented immigrants they found on the
premises. Now, ICE will go through all that documents
that they found during those search warrants to see if they have enough evidence to proceed
with prosecutions of those employers. So, we may see some prosecutions, but historically,
it’s been much more difficult to prosecute employers for knowingly hiring undocumented
immigrants than it has been to arrest the undocumented immigrants themselves and see
them deported. YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Well, lots of immigration
news. Thanks so much for joining us, Theresa Cardinal
Brown of the Bipartisan Policy Center. THERESA CARDINAL BROWN: Thank you. (END VIDEOTAPE) AMNA NAWAZ: With six months before the first-in-the-nation
Iowa caucuses, more than 20 presidential hopefuls descended on the Hawkeye State this weekend. As Lisa Desjardins reports, voters were navigating
crowds of people and the crowded candidate field. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) LISA DESJARDINS, PBS NEWSHOUR CORRESPONDENT:
Welcome to the Iowa state fair, a mix of high political stakes and high blood sugar all
on a stick, or on a soapbox. JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Hello,
Iowa! JOHN DELANEY (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
You have a very important choice to make. SEN. CORY BOOKER (D-NJ), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
It’s going to be a test for all of us. SEN. BERNIE SANDERS (I-VT), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
This is the moment we bring our people together. REP. TULSI GABBARD (D-HI), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
That’s why I’m here asking for your support. LISA DESJARDINS: The soapbox, where candidates
each get 20 minutes, has never held more presidential weight. Twenty-three contenders, including one GOP
challenger to President Trump, will come and go throughout the fair. And with each one comes a walking mosh pit
of press attention. None more so than former Vice President Joe
Biden, who barely had room at his own press conference. Biden has been here before, in failed runs
in 1988 and 2008. But he’s never had the lead in Iowa until
now. And it’s a large, nearly ten-point lead. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Go Joe! LISA DESJARDINS: His supporters feel they
know him. They trust him. LASHA ROBERTS: I like Joe Biden. I enjoyed him when he was with Obama and stuff,
and so I think he would definitely be a good candidate for sure. LISA DESJARDINS: But opponents question if
Biden sparks enough passion. How do you do that? JOE BIDEN: Look at the polls. So far, so good. I do it by being me. Look, no one’s ever including reporters cover
me all the time. No one’s ever doubted I mean what I say. The problem is sometimes I say all that I
mean. MATT PAUL, IOWA DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: It’s
everything. LISA DESJARDINS: Matt Paul has deep roots
with the Democratic Party in Iowa. He ran Hillary Clinton’s winning Iowa campaign
in 2016. Despite Biden’s early lead, Paul says the
state is still up for grabs. MATT PAUL: He’s popular here, but he has work
to do. He’s got to be here more. I think he’s got to talk about the future. LISA DESJARDINS: Some voters are more blunt
about Biden. TAYLOR WYSS: If he was the primary candidate,
I would still vote for him. But I don’t want him to be the candidate. I want someone new and fresh. SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
Good morning, good morning. LISA DESJARDINS: Among those angling as new
and fresh is California Senator Kamala Harris, third in Iowa polls. Her staff is energetic and her fair crowd
was large, but she dipped in the last poll here, and admits she’s still building. KAMALA HARRIS: We have over 65 staff in Iowa. And, you know, there are people in this race
who have had national profiles for many years. I’m still introducing myself to people. SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
2020 is our big chance. LISA DESJARDINS: Quickly surging here is Massachusetts
Senator Elizabeth Warren, now second in the Iowa polls, and captain of what many see as
the best organized ground game in the state, with fired-up volunteers like Joie Otting. JOIE OTTING: I think it’s important that we
just take a new, almost radical — not to call Elizabeth Warren radical — but take
a big change in direction. LISA DESJARDINS: This is a problem for Bernie
Sanders. BERNIE SANDERS: Let me make a major announcement:
pretty good. LISA DESJARDINS: The Vermont senator is still
popular in Iowa, but losing the most ground to Warren. Over one million people will come to the Iowa
state fair. And that is a prime political audience, especially
for the many Democrats trying to break into the top tier. The problem: there are just so many candidates. And they’re seemingly everywhere — flipping
pork, pouring beer, and counting corn kernels. Voters are overwhelmed. MISSY PRICE: I’m a registered Democrat. I’m an open-ticket voter, but I have no
clue what I’m going to do. UNIDENTIFIED MAE: Buttigieg. Biden. GRANT WALLER: Biden. I like Beto, but we’ll see how it goes with
that. KEVIN CAVALLIN: I agree with what Biden has
to say. But I also agree with Warren and what Sanders
has to say. So, I’m right now, I’m kind of conflicted. LISA DESJARDINS: And thus, candidates are
self-separating in groups. The Midwesterners. How do you break out? SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR (D-MN), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
I think you do it the old fashioned way. You just keep reaching out to people and you
meet people. REP. TIM RYAN (D-OH), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: When
people hear what I have to say, especially coming from Ohio and being in Iowa, it’s very
similar culturally. LISA DESJARDINS: Those focused on personal
contact. SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND (D-NY), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
I’ve had a lot of town halls, lots of events at breweries, and it makes a difference because
people can get to know me, I can get to know them, make sure I’m lifting up their voices. TULSI GABBARD: I’m really focused on is
do what we’re doing out here today really getting down into communities here in Iowa
and New Hampshire and other parts of the country. JULIAN CASTRO (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
I believe that as the race gets smaller and smaller, people pay more attention to the
candidates. LISA DESJARDINS: And the I-can-get-it-done
policy folks. ANDREW YANG (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: The
way we break out is by just keep hammering the message the American people that we need
solutions not sound bites, and that it’s not their imagination. JOHN DELANEY: When the field shrinks, they’re
going to start focusing on ideas, who’s got the best ideas, who’s the best person to beat
Trump. And that’s when I think I can break through. JOHN HICKENLOOPER (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE:
I’ve just got to keep finding fresh ways to talk about what we did in Colorado, and
most importantly, how we brought people together. LISA DESJARDINS: And then there’s New Jersey
Senator Cory Booker, who says he’s already rising in less-noticed metrics like endorsements
and staff. CORY BOOKER: The people that have gone on
are people more like me, the people like Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama or Bill Clinton, are
people who were considered long shots this far out. But what were they were doing was they were
building incredible organizations here in Iowa. LISA DESJARDINS: There’s another issue for
Democrats in Iowa, beating President Trump in a state he won by nine points. DAN PUTNEY: I like Trump. I like Trump. He’s just… He’s just a guy. He’s not a politician. He’s just a guy like — like me. LISA DESJARDINS: Here, the move by Democrats
to the left for the primary is pushing some away. PATRICIA PUTNEY: They’re so liberal. They just don’t even want to move on in this
world. They want everything to be socialism. They want everything to be calm and nice and
everybody loves everybody. But you know sometimes you got to get out
and get a little aggressive. LISA DESJARDINS: At the Iowa state fair this
week, scenes of whirling Americana, rows of fried foods and some 40,000 prize ribbons. But, for candidates — far less reward. Traditionally, just the top three finishers
in Iowa are thought to have a real shot at the nomination. The fair marks the end of summer for the state,
but it’s the beginning of the real heat in the race for president. For the “PBS NewsHour”, I’m Lisa Desjardins
at the Iowa state fair in Des Moines. (END VIDEOTAPE) AMNA NAWAZ: Of course, the Iowa state fair
stretches on until next Sunday (AUDIO GAP). We’re here now for our “Politics Monday”
segment. I’m joined by Shawna Thomas and Tamara Keith. Thanks to you both for being here. (CROSSTALK) SHAWNA THOMAS, VICE NEWS: Good with you. AMNA NAWAZ: So, no fried food, no butter sculptures,
but a lot of politics to talk about. SHAWNA THOMAS: Yes. AMNA NAWAZ: The Iowa state fair, Tam, is supposed
to be an opportunity for the candidates to break away from the pack, take a chance to
shine if they can or kind of continue in the middle and fight for air. Did anyone stand out to you over the last
few days? TAMARA KEITH, NPR: So, I was there. I was technically on vacation. I did eat fried foods but also — I can’t
turn off — SHAWNA THOMAS: You played political tourist. TAMARA KEITH: I played political tourist. You can’t turn it off. SHAWNA THOMAS: And so, what I saw is that
candidates like Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren who are not at the very top in the
polls drew very large crowds of very interested people who came early and stayed late and
watched their speeches. In fact, for Warren, when she was speaking
at the soap box, you actually couldn’t walk past the entire grand passageway or whatever
it’s called. The big road in the middle of the fairgrounds
was just completely congested with people who had stopped to watch her speak. And so, that — and that sort of reflects
what you’ve seen in the polls, which is that Elizabeth Warren, you know, taking as many
selfies as she has to take at every event, has begun to sort of notch things up in Iowa,
I believe, in the latest Iowa poll. She’s in seconds behind Joe Biden. AMNA NAWAZ: Shawna, every selfie matters at
this stage but it’s worth reminding people still over six months away before anyone in
Iowa casts a vote. How much does this matter, this cycle? SHAWNA THOMAS: I mean, how much does the Iowa
state fair matter in any cycle? AMNA NAWAZ: Ever, yes. SHAWNA THOMAS: The thing is, what our correspondent
on Vice News was telling me and she was out there as well was there was so much media
there that she was confused as to whether the candidates were actually able to speak
to Iowans one on one. And so, yes, you have “The Des Moines Register”
soapbox. We all enjoy seeing that. It’s a good way to get for a candidate to
get their stump speech out there. But also, the point of the Iowa state fair
in visiting sort of historically has been to try to have those one-on-one interactions
with Iowans. AMNA NAWAZ: Right. SHAWNA THOMAS: And the sort of like, and the
thing is, you know, what one guy told us was like, all Iowans are here. It’s not just a Democratic Party event. It’s not some special interest event. You could run into anyone, but it’s also kind
of hard apparently to do with the amount of media that’s there. But hopefully, some of them took advantage
of having conversations with people who would not necessarily be able to see them or want
them to see them like at a general Democratic event or something like that. AMNA NAWAZ: So, they want to get as much as
attention as they can. SHAWNA THOMAS: Yes. AMNA NAWAZ: Not all attention is good attention,
though. One of the story lines we’ve been talking
about is how former Vice President Joe Biden has done so far in some of these events. I want to play for you, guys, just a couple
of quick sound bytes. They’re from two different events. One from Thursday, one from Saturday, but
these are the kinds of comments from Mr. Biden that are getting attention right now. Take a listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOE BIDEN: Poor kids are just as bright and
just as talented as white kids, wealthy kids, black kids, Asian kids. (APPLAUSE) JOE BIDEN: I watched what happened to those
kids from Parkland came up to see me when I was vice president. (END VIDEO CLIP) AMNA NAWAZ: So, you know, Tam, we’re calling
these as gaffes in this conversation, right? He misspeaks. He corrects himself. Sometimes he has to come back and correct
himself a little later. Is it fair criticism of him right now? TAMARA KEITH: It is Joe Biden. Joe Biden has called himself a gaffe machine. He — this is sort of a trademark. He does this. He’s done this his entire political career. When he announced that he was going to run
for president, that he was running for president, you knew that this was going to happen and
it has continued to happen all along. One thing that’s been sort of puzzling to
me is why this weekend is the weekend that everyone started to talk about, well, will
Joe Biden’s gaffes matter? And I think that the way they could matter
is if voters decide that it’s an indicator of something larger, if it taps into a concern
that voters have perhaps about his age or some other thing like that. But that Joe Biden would say the wrong words
or stumble is not new. SHAWNA THOMAS: Yes. AMNA NAWAZ: What do you think, Shawna? SHAWNA THOMAS: But I think the thing is, when
he said the wrong words and stumbled historically when we both covered him before, it’s Uncle
Joe. It’s, like, OK, it’s Joe Biden, he’s great,
look, whatever. Much like in some ways the awkward touching
and that kind of thing. But when you are the frontrunner for — to
be president and everyone thinks you may actually have a shot at getting the Democratic nomination,
everyone is going to pay even more attention to every little stumble, and I do think that
is going to get worse. Now, some of why this has been highlighted
is Trump’s team is the one who sort of pushed this narrative event. I am interested to see if like a lower tier
presidential candidate goes along this narrative, like a one who’s actually on the Democratic
side, because, of course, President Trump is going to push this. He wants to beat Biden. He thinks Biden is the guy to beat. But does — do the Cory Bookers of the world
or does someone else start trying to talk about Joe Biden’s age and play these gaffes
or anything like that, does it cause Democratic infighting? And I think that’s something to be more worried
more about at this stage with Biden. AMNA NAWAZ: You mentioned President Trump,
but I want to ask you about something else. Over the weekend, he retweeted a post from
a comedian linking the Clintons to the death of Jeffrey Epstein, the accused sex trafficker
in jail this weekend. We’re not showing it here because it is a
conspiracy theory. It’s baseless. It traces back years, just some far right
conspiracy theories. Shawna, of all the things the president could
have been tweeting about this weekend, why this? SHAWNA THOMAS: Because he — I mean, I can’t
get into the president’s head and I can’t pretend to be in the president’s head, but
he saw something, it attacked the Clintons, he is still attacking the Clintons, people
still cheer “lock her up” at his events, at his campaign events. And, you know what? He pressed retweet. And this is just what he does. He has spread other conspiracy theories. We can go all the way back to Barack Obama’s
birth certificate. Now, yes, he could have been tweetings about
other things like, hey, does the Bureau of Prisons have staffing problems? What is going on there? There are some real issues with Epstein and
will his victims be able to be able to see justice, and that kind of thing. But, you know, this is what the president
likes to do and now we’re talking about it. AMNA NAWAZ: Tammy, with 63 million Twitter
followers, there’s — you know, I have been in countries where conspiracy theories and
misinformation campaigns are very active, it has an impact. Do you worry about that here? Is there concern? TAMARA KEITH: We are also in a country where
conspiracy theories have been very active especially in recent years, especially with
social media, and President Trump has at times retweeted or otherwise trafficked in conspiracy
theories. So, that he’s doing this now is not really
out of character. It’s something that he does. And I think that we are in a time in this
country where conspiracy theories, for whatever reason, are particularly sticky, and especially
on the right but not entirely on the right, also very much on the left conspiracy theories
have taken hold. And so, this is — this is sort of — this
is where we are. SHAWNA THOMAS: And the question really — I
mean, the larger question that comes out of this conspiracy thing is what do we do about
social media? And are we going to hold social media companies
accountable for the spread of things that are not true? And this is something that Congress has been
talking about and they have been trying to tackle it, but they haven’t done anything
yet. I think this reiterates that that conversation
is really important. AMNA NAWAZ: Another conversation to have at
another time. SHAWNA THOMAS: There will be so many. AMNA NAWAZ: Shawna Thomas of “Vice News”,
Tamara Keith of NPR, thanks to you both. TAMARA KEITH: You’re welcome. SHAWNA THOMAS: Thanks. (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: The Trump administration is making
some of the broadest changes in years to the Endangered Species Act, the landmark law signed
by President Richard Nixon that’s been credited with saving iconic species like the bald eagle
and the grizzly bear. William Brangham explores what today’s changes
could mean. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) WILLIAM BRANGHAM, PBS NEWSHOUR CORRESPONDENT:
That’s right, Amna. The Endangered Species Act currently protects
about 1,600 species in the U.S. by limiting the activities that could harm those species. And it’s been overwhelmingly successful in
protecting those plants and animals. But the act has been a target for Republican
lawmakers and industry groups for years. They argue these protections cost too many
jobs and too much money. Now, the Trump administration is proposing
changes that one Democratic lawmaker referred to as taking a wrecking ball to the act. Joining me now is “New York Times” environmental
reporter Lisa Friedman. Lisa Friedman, welcome back to the “NewsHour”. LISA FRIEDMAN, ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTER, THE
NEW YORK TIMES: Thanks so much for having me. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Before we get to the administration’s
proposed changes, what can we say — what species can we credit are alive today because
of the Endangered Species Act? LISA FRIEDMAN: The Endangered Species Act
has helped to save from extinction some of the most well-known plant and animal species
in the country, the bald eagle, the grizzly bear, the humpback whale, are all species
that owe a tremendous amount to the protection of the Endangered Species Act. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: As I mentioned before, the
Republican lawmakers for decades have hated this law, wanted to dial it back. Industry groups said the same, saying it’s
too costly, it’s not really helping as much as it is hurting our industries. What is the Trump administration proposing
with these new changes? LISA FRIEDMAN: There are a number of changes
in the final rules that were issued today. A number of them are ones that environmental
groups fear will severely weaken protections for plant and animal species. I list just two of the big ones for now. One of them is a measure that would weaken
the ability of scientists to protect species against the threats of climate change. Another is a phrase that would introduce the
ability of the federal government to include economic analysis. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: An analysis, meaning if
we’re going to protect X species that might cost us Y amount of money. LISA FRIEDMAN: Absolutely right. Currently, the way the law reads, scientists
can only consider one thing when they’re deciding whether or not to list species as
threatened or endangered, the science. Is it threatened? Should it be listed? That language is going to be eliminated, and
what replaces it will give the federal government the ability to conduct analyses just as you
described to find out whether listing a species will cost money, will cost money and perhaps
lost development. The Interior Department has insisted that
this won’t change anything, that decisions will still be made purely on the basis of
science. They just want to have the information and
be able to know the information when these listing possibilities come up. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: These changes are coming
amidst a lot of news about endangered species. We saw the U.N. a few months ago put out this
report indicating that upwards of a million plant and animal species globally could be
threatened if we don’t change our ways. LISA FRIEDMAN: Yes. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Help me understand what
the administration is arguing here. Are they saying, here in the U.S., we are
doing endangered species just fine or are they saying we can do it in a better way? What are they arguing? LISA FRIEDMAN: Yes. I think, you know, what we heard from the
administration is it’s possible to both be stewards of the environment while also cutting
red tape, and their argument is that that is what they’re doing with this regulation
today. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Is there a sense that if
these changes go through, any particular species that might be impacted? LISA FRIEDMAN: You know, one of the ones we
hear about a lot are species that are affected by climate change and, you know, one that
comes to mind easily is the polar bear. The polar bear habitat is going to be affected
dramatically by climate change. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Their sea ice and their
habitat disappears year after year. LISA FRIEDMAN: Exactly. Some of these changes are far into the future. Whether this new regulation hamstrings scientists’
ability to take action to protect these species is something that the environmental groups
are very worried about. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: We know these are proposed
rules, probably going to be some lawsuits, right? What’s the future look like? LISA FRIEDMAN: Today, we heard from the attorneys
general of Massachusetts and California, they have vowed to sue. Senator Udall, who you mentioned, said that
he’s going to be looking at legislative measures to block this in Congress. It seems with the makeup of this Congress,
it’s going to be very hard to pass anything that would block this legislatively. So, I think the — some of these questions
about whether this regulation will stand the test of time are going to be answered in the
courts. WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Lisa Friedman of “The New
York Times,” thank you. LISA FRIEDMAN: Thank you. (END VIDEOTAPE) AMNA NAWAZ: Nancy Armour is a sports columnist
for “USA Today”. In her latest piece, Armour said, quote: Simone
Biles isn’t just best gymnast of her time, she’s an athlete for the ages. She joins me now from Chicago. Nancy, thanks for being with us. So, the triple-double is two flips with three
twists. Just how big a deal is this move? NANCY ARMOUR, SPORTS COLUMNIST, USA TODAY:
It is huge. It’s the — the physics of it alone are really
unbelievable, almost. I mean, consider the fact that she is turning
herself end over end twice, but at the same time, she is twisting her body around three
times. You have to have the physics of that exactly
right or you basically will stop in the air and kind of plop to the ground. And she also has to know exactly where she
is in the air, otherwise, she could do real damage if she’s off at all. The power and the strength that it takes to
do this is really nothing short of amazing, and, obviously, this is why it’s taken so
long for a woman to even try it, let alone land it like she did. AMNA NAWAZ: You wrote in your column, she
got so much height that if there was an SUV parked on the floor, she would have cleared
it. And it’s worth noting it’s one of two
record-breaking moves she made, right? NANCY ARMOUR: Yes, she also did a double-double
off, dismount off a balance beam, which is a double-twisting double summersault, and
what makes that so amazing is she’s basically at a complete standstill before she does it. So, imagine that you are trying to dunk a
basketball from flat feet. It’s not exactly comparable but pretty close. So, what she’s doing, the power and the strength
that she has to get these moves, it’s unmatched, and not just in her sport, I would say in
pretty much any sport. AMNA NAWAZ: And it’s worth noting, that
little interview piece we just heard from her which was just days prior to her giving
this performance. I mean, the fact that she is out there, still
competing for USA Gymnastics, speaking out so bravely about the abuse she said she suffered,
and then giving performances like this, what does that say to you about Simone Biles? NANCY ARMOUS: She’s not only an amazing athlete,
she’s an amazing person. And Simone recognizes the power that she has
and influence she has. She’s the best thing that USA gymnastics has
going and has had going for the last couple of years. And she picks her spots and she picks what
she wants to say and how she wants to say it, but she recognizes that she has an influence
and that she can hold USA Gymnastics’ feet to the fire and USOC and even Congress, because
she is the best gymnast in the history for sport and she’s been failed, and somebody
has to answer that, and she continues to point that out and demand that they do right not
just by her but the other hundreds of women who were abused by Larry Nassar. AMNA NAWAZ: Nancy, there’s a reason the move
from this weekend has gone viral. People know that they are watching greatness
when they see it go by. You wrote about this in your column. You compared it to Mohammed Ali’s Rumble
in the Jungle, Serena Williams winning the Australian Open when she was pregnant. You mentioned Simone Biles being one of the
best gymnasts of all time. Is it fair to say she’s one of the best athletes
of all time? NANCY ARMOUR: I think so. I was struck last night that this is going
to be one of these things — and I’ve seen her do many spectacular things, many of them. But this is one of those things that a decade
from now, two decades from now, I’ll be able to picture it in my mind, if somebody
says Simone Biles’ triple-double, or what was the best move you ever saw Simone Biles
do, this will immediately come to mind. And I think that is the mark of an athlete
who has transcended not just in their own sports but across sports. And if she doesn’t qualify, then I don’t know
who does. AMNA NAWAZ: We’re all lucky to watch that
greatness in action. Nancy Armour of “USA Today”, thank you
so much. NANCY ARMOUR: Thanks for having me. (BREAK) AMNA NAWAZ: “Star Wars” creator George
Lucas and “Game of Thrones” author George R.R. Martin have cited him as an influence
on their work, helping them imagine what an adventure story might look like. Now, N.C. Wyeth, who led a family of American art royalty,
gets a new look in an exhibition of his illustrations and paintings. Jeffrey Brown reports for our ongoing arts
and culture series, “Canvas.” (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEFFREY BROWN, PBS NEWSHOUR CORRESPONDENT:
The beautiful Brandywine River Valley in Pennsylvania: inspiration and home to Newell Convers better
known as N.C. Wyeth. Today, it’s also home to the Brandywine River
Museum of Art, in Chadds Ford, which is giving Wyeth a new look. It was Robert Louis Stevenson who wrote the
beloved adventure tale, “Treasure Island.” But for millions of American, beginning in
the early 20th century, it was Wyeth who created the lasting images of pirates and much more. CHRISTINE PODMANICZKY, CO-CURATOR, “N.C. WYETH: NEW PERSPECTIVES”: The personal paintings,
the illustrations, he did mural work, he did advertising work. So, his reach into the different aspects of
visual culture is so broad. JEFFREY BROWN: Christine Podmaniczky is co-curator
of the exhibition, “N.C. Wyeth: New Perspectives.” The goal here: to present a more well-rounded
portrait of an artist who painted scenes of rural life here and in coastal Maine, where
he had a residence, but who remains best known for his book illustrations, the smaller reproductions
of his large-scale paintings for such classic children’s stories as “Robin Hood”, “Last
of the Mohicans”, “King Arthur”. Wyeth’s genius, says Podmaniczky, was to find
just the right moment in the story to bring to life. As when young Jim Hawkins first leaves home
in treasure island. CHRISTINE PODMANICZKY: I said goodbye to mother
and the cove. That’s all Stevenson writes — JEFFREY BROWN: That’s it? CHRISTINE PODMANICZKY: That’s it. JEFFREY BROWN: One line? CHRISTINE PODMANICKZY: That’s it. All he writes about Jim Hawkins leaving home,
going off on this exploit where he’s to search for treasure. But when you look at the painting, you see
how much N.C. Wyeth has brought here in the form of emotion. First of all, the characters themselves, the
look on Jim Hawkins face. But his use of shadow, the sharp lines, the
sort of cloud over the mother, posture, all sorts of things heighten the sense of what’s
going on. JEFFREY BROWN: Wyeth’s first breakthrough,
in 1902, was a cover for the “Saturday Evening Post,” imagery of an already past and mythic
American west. He created magazine advertisements, including
for “Cream of Wheat”. It was a time before television and our own
screen-saturated lives, the golden age of illustration, and Wyeth was at its forefront. The commissions allowed him to buy property
here in Pennsylvania and to support the other part of his life for which he became best
known: as patriarch of an American art family dynasty, father of five children, three of
them painters, most famously the youngest, Andrew. Andrew Wyeth would become one of the biggest
names in 20th century American art, also focusing on his hometown of Chadds Ford and summer
home in Maine, including the celebrated Christina’s World from 1948. Andrew’s son, N.C.’s grandson, is Jamie
Wyeth. This is the grounds of your childhood, huh? JAMIE WYETH, PAINTER/GRANDSON, N.C. WYETH: Yes, my grandfather’s orchard and
whatnot, and then my aunt used this and studio. JEFFREY BROWN: Jamie now 73 and also a prominent
painter, first learned to draw in the grand studio N.C. built here. Jamie never knew his grandfather, who died
in 1945, age 62, in a car accident at a railroad crossing. The studio is owned by the Brandywine Museum. This is pretty much the way it was when you
were a kid? JAMIE WYETH: Totally, it hasn’t been changed
at all. It’s as if he walked out of it yesterday. JEFFREY BROWN: He painted this giant mural
for a Wilmington bank. JAMIE WYETH: My father told me that he would
watch his father walk up, put a brush stroke on, and walk back to see the visual effect. JEFFREY BROWN: So, he’d go up and back and
up and back. JAMIE WYETH: Back and forth, yes, putting
them in — I mean, it’s pretty loosely and thinly done when you get up to it, but to
do this expression and then get back knowing this thing would be 50 feet from the viewers,
and whatnot. JEFFREY BROWN: All around, the collection
of items he gathered for his book illustrations. JAMIE WYETH: Coming to this studio was magical
to me because here, it was full of costumes and cutlasses and flintlocks, and a lot of
his illustrations were still in the back room here. So I’d go through them for hours. JEFFREY BROWN: This was like the amusement
park in a way. JAMIE WYETH: Oh, my God, it was just magical. My father, of course, I would pump him and
ask him about N.C. Wyeth and he said, he wanted the paintings
to leap out of the page as you read them, to grab you by the neck. And they sure do. JEFFREY BROWN: As the show makes clear, though,
N.C. also had larger ambitions: to be taken seriously as a fine artist, rather than just
a successful commercial illustrator. Much of the exhibition’s second floor displays
the more personal paintings Wyeth created largely for himself, as well as two from his
late-in-life, first solo exhibition in a New York gallery. Among those: island funeral, which uses paint
Wyeth made from dyes he received from the nearby DuPont Company CHRISTINE PODMANICZKY: Ands that’s how he
gets these beautiful, deep, sort of jewel-like tones here. There’s a lot of tension going on here between
the old-fashioned bird’s eye view, the new cutting-edge dyes, the death of an island
patriarch. Well, N.C. Wyeth is in his late 50’s at this point, he
is already been publicized, if you will, as the patriarch of his own family. So there are thoughts, I think, of mortality
here. JEFFREY BROWN: There are also signs of Wyeth,
a traditional artist, flicking at some of the more modern painting techniques of his
time. CHRISTINE PODMANICZKY: This is one of the
most fascinating paintings as far as technique goes because you have him here trying to capture
the light on this chain mail or armor, and it’s just a magnificent piece of painting. JEFFREY BROWN: And grandson Jamie goes so
far to see in this exhibition an unusual kind of group show all by one painter. JAMIE WYETH: He tried so many different techniques,
so many different approaches. Some are very Cezanne-like, broken color,
impressionistic, tried them all, which is wonderful, I guess, you know? There’s a wonderful little self- portrait
of him looking. It’s just teeny and just very delicately done. JEFFREY BROWN: Painting, Jamie says, has been
the family passion. JAMIE WYETH: It was sort of like another world,
the comparing the three generations and so forth. And I happen to adore their work. I mean, these two individuals, very different
individuals, very different approaches to painting — I mean, what a thing to build
on. JEFFREY BROWN: The elder Wyeth himself, though,
never achieved the recognition he craved. JAMIE WYETH: He looked at it and thought his
life had just been doing these children’s books. It was hard for me to conceive that, though. I mean, he had to have looked at — I remember
my mother, she said when she first met him, she was very young and said, oh, Mr. Wyeth,
I love your illustrations, your “Treasure Island”, and he said, you’ll grow out of
that. JEFFREY BROWN: Really? JAMIE WYETH: Uh-huh. And he was wrong. JEFFREY BROWN: “N.C. Wyeth: New Perspectives” is at the Brandywine
River Museum of Art through September 15th. For the “PBS NewsHour”, I’m Jeffrey
Brown in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania. (END VIDEOTAPE) AMNA NAWAZ: The exhibit moves next to the
Portland Museum of Art in Maine and, in 2020, the Taft Museum of Art in Cincinnati. And that’s the “NewsHour” for tonight. I’m Amna Nawaz. Join us online and again here tomorrow evening. For all of us here at the “PBS NewsHour”,
thank you. We’ll see you soon. END

Which Countries Are Still Truly Communist?


This episode is brought to you by Skillshare. The first 1,000 people to sign up using the
link in the description will get their first 2 months free. Communism is an economic and social system
in which most property and resources are collectively owned by a classless society and not by individual
citizens. It was founded by two German political philosophers,
Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, who met in the second half of the 19th century. They discovered that they had similar principles
and in 1848, wrote and published The Communist Manifesto, which became the foundation for
Communism… Communism became the dominant political philosophy
for many countries across Asia, Eastern Europe, Africa, and South America, and in the late
19th century, it also began to develop in the old Soviet Union. But in 1991, when the Soviet Union disbanded,
Russia constituted itself as a semi-presidential republic. Communism still exists in a number of countries,
but in many cases it’s a legacy of the past and has lost much of the doctrine it originally
came with. So where is communism still being practiced? And is it the communism that Marx and Engels
proposed? That’s what we’ll find out, in this episode
of the Infographics Show: Which Countries Are Really Truly Still Communist? Communism envisaged common ownership of all
land and capital, and the dissolving of the coercive power of the state. In such a society, social relations were to
be regulated on the fairest of all principles: from each according to his ability, to each
according to his needs. Differences between manual and intellectual
labor and between rural and urban life were to disappear, opening up the way for unlimited
development of human potential. The rise of capitalism in the 20th century
disrupted communist principles, and so many countries either turned to alternative political
frameworks or allowed the philosophy to blend with a new cultural climate. So how many countries are still officially
communist? When we started to research this subject,
we first discovered that there are several countries with multiple political parties,
and some have had leaders who are affiliated with their nation’s communist party. These countries are not considered truly communist
because of the presence of other political parties, nor is the communist party empowered
by the constitution. These countries are Nepal, Guyana, and Moldova,
who have all had ruling communist parties in recent years. In terms of true communist states left today,
there are five that most experts consider communist, and those are: Vietnam, Laos, North
Korea, China, and Cuba. These countries adhere to different levels
of commitment when it comes to living by communist principles. Let’s take a look at them one by one. Socialist Republic of Vietnam – Following
the First Indochina War, Vietnam was split up at a conference in 1954. North Vietnam established itself as a communist
state, supported by the Soviet Union, while South Vietnam was democratic and backed by
America. Then followed two decades of the war we know
as the Vietnam War, which is also the Second Indochina War, and in 1976, Vietnam was unified
to become a communist country. Technically Vietnam is still a communist country,
with one-party rule, the Communist Party of Vietnam, under Marxist-Leninist governance,
but like many other communist countries, Vietnam has in recent decades moved toward a market
economy that has seen some of its socialist values disrupted by capitalism. In fact Vietnam is now one of the world’s
fastest growing economies, and is on track to becoming a modern, industrialized nation
by 2020. Despite these economic reforms and adoption
of capitalist values, human rights and freedom of speech are still limited in the country. All news media are under control of the government,
and there are heavy penalties for criticizing the government or broaching politically sensitive
topics. Vietnam continues to shift in both policy
and culture, and it’s not unimaginable that it will veer fully away from communism sometime
in the next couple of decades. Lao People’s Democratic Republic – Laos,
officially the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, became a communist country in 1975, following
a revolution supported by Vietnam and the Soviet Union. The government in Lao is largely run by military
generals who support a one-party system that is grounded in Marxist ideals. Media outlet, The economist, published an
article in 2016, stating that “Laos has what may be the world’s most closed political
system after North Korea, and that for the few visiting media, the communist official
appointed as spokesman for the occasion responded to most questions by blinking.” But Lao is changing and has been heavily influenced
by democratic ideology, both via tourism and trade. Many aspects of business and culture have
changed in the country over the last three decades. Is Lao truly a communist state, when there
is a stock exchange and a Private Sector that is fast expanding to be the most productive
part of Laos’s economy? Though Lao is ruled by a communist party,
as far back as 1988 the country began allowing some forms of private ownership, as well as
joining the World Trade Organization in 2013. And in 2009, the Obama administration declared
that Laos had “ceased to be a Marxist-Leninist country.” So Lao is on the list, but the verdict is
still out there and things seem to be rapidly changing for this South East Asian Country. Democratic People’s Republic of North Korea
– Korea was occupied by the Japanese in World War II and divided after the war into a Russian-dominated
north and an American-occupied south. North Korea did not become a communist country
until 1948 when South Korea declared its independence, leaving the north to declare its own sovereignty
soon after, when Korean communist leader Kim Il-Sung was installed as leader. Getting clear information on North Korea is
not easy as the state has full control of all media. Though most of the world sees North Korea
as a communist state, the country itself does not, and the ruling Kim family has always
promoted their own doctrine based on the concept of ‘juche’, which means self-reliance. Juche was first introduced in the mid 1950’s
bringing with it Korean nationalism as a core value within the countries leadership strategy. Juche became official state policy in the
1970’s. So is North Korea really a communist country
or is this a western misinterpretation of the way this secretive country is governed? In 2009, North Korea’s constitution was
changed to remove all mention of the Marxist and Leninist ideals, the foundations of communism,
and the word communism was also removed from the text. What we do know is that North Korea has a
very questionable human rights record and many strict controls…According to the South
Korean government estimates and Human Rights Watch, between 150,000 and 200,000 North Koreans
live in prison camps; only government and military officials are able to own motor vehicles;
all televisions are tuned to state-controlled domestic programming, and there is no Internet
other than a closed domestic network. It’s not easy to get a clear picture of
North Korea, but one person who may know more is ex basketball player Dennis Rodman, who
is a frequent visitor to the country and has met with President Kim Jong-Un on a number
of occasions. The People’s Republic of China – In 1949
Mao Zedong took control of China and declared the nation as the People’s Republic of China,
a communist country. China has remained communist since that date,
although economic reforms have been in place for several years and there is debate over
how long China can continue to declare itself communist. The Chinese Communist Party or CCP has revolutionized
many things for the country in recent years. Most notably, it has made China the world’s
second largest economy. It has also strengthened China, especially
in the South China Sea, where it has challenged America’s hold. And China’s presence in the Indian Ocean
has expanded by re-building the ports of Sri Lanka, and by developing the China Pakistan
Economic Corridor. The underpinning of all of these activities
has been the expansion of a capitalist economy that continues to grow year after year. Some of the communist principles have clearly
been eroded, and in 2004 the country’s constitution was changed to recognize private property. So what makes China truly communist? The Chinese government still controls major
aspects of society and the economy. Nearly all Chinese banks are state-owned,
which means the government decides which businesses and individuals are lent money. Chinese media companies are entirely state-owned
and virtually all of the land in the country still belongs to the government. So though communism is at the core of the
Chinese political system, the CCP is not really a communist party in the conventional sense,
as it’s now motivated by the same market drivers as the majority of democracies in
capitalist states. Republic of Cuba – Cuba is perhaps best
known for the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, a 13-day confrontation between the United States
and the Soviet Union concerning American ballistic missile deployment in Italy and Turkey. It was a nerve wracking time that could have
led to full-scale nuclear war. Cuba became a fully communist country in 1961,
following a revolution that led to a government takeover by Fidel Castro and his associates. Cuba continues as a one-party communist state
under President Miguel Diaz-Canel, who very recently took over for Raúl Castro, who succeeded
his brother in 2008. The government has a monopoly on the majority
of economic activity within centralized state enterprises. And there are restrictions to the freedoms
of the press, assembly, and speech. In 2016, the Cuban Committee for Human Rights
and National Reconciliation reported 9,125 arbitrary detentions in the first 10 months
of the year, and there was a crack down on digital media, and the emerging private sector,
by temporarily halting the issuance of business licenses, for new private restaurants in Havana. There have been changes in Cuba in more recent
times including increased engagement with the United States under President Barack Obama. This resulted in relations between the two
nations becoming more relaxed and travel restrictions loosened during Obama’s second term. However in June 2017, President Donald Trump
tightened travel restrictions on Cuba. From our research we found that most of the
experts agree, these five countries are still communist. However, there is clearly divided opinion
on this subject and even within these five countries, there is a lot of deviation from
the original communist economic and social systems that Marx and Engels initially proposed. We often get asked how we make our videos. The short answer is, we use Adobe After Effects
and Adobe Illustrator. But if you want to know how to use this software,
skillshare offers over 20,000 classes, and more than 700 of them are in Animation. You can learn the basics of animating in After
Effects from the friendly folks over at Kurzgesagt. They cover topics such as setting up your
project, positioning, animating, and creating shapes from vector layers. Skillshare is an online learning community
offering classes in leadership, photography, productivity, and more. Premium Membership will give you unlimited
access to topics that will improve your skills, and in the process, your life! The first 1,000 people to use the promo code
infographics16 or to visit the the link in the description will receive 2 months of Skillshare
absolutely free! Join skillshare and start learning today! Will these countries continue operating under
communist ideology or will things change as new ways of living and systems of governance
are adopted? Let us know your thoughts in the comments! Also, be sure to check out our other video
called Top 10 Weakest Militaries in the World! Thanks for watching, and, as always, don’t
forget to like, share, and subscribe. See you next time!

Global Ethics Forum: The Return of Marco Polo’s World, with Robert D. Kaplan


(bright music) – Our guest this
morning is the acclaimed political affairs journalist
and author Robert Kaplan. It is a pleasure to welcome
him back to this podium. He will be discussing his latest
book, which is a collection of essays written between
2001 and the present, entitled “The Return
of Marco Polo’s World: War, Strategy, and
American Interests in the Twenty-first Century.” – This is a collection of essays that deals with
basically two things, the state of the world
as it is on the ground beyond the media
headlines, and what America should do about it and
what the American role should be about it. In talking about the state
of the world, what I mean is, what are the processes that
are going on right under our noses and how the United
States is reacting to them. What I’m gonna confine
my talk to this morning, is essentially, will be
in the spirit of the lead, anchoring essay of
this collection, “The Return of
Marco Polo’s World.” I use Marco Polo’s journey as
a geographical framing device for Eurasia today, and
there’s a reason for that. Because if you look at the
route of Marco Polo’s journey, you see the pathways of
the Tang and Yuan dynasties of the medieval era in
China, which is the period when Marco Polo traveled
during the Yuan Dynasty. If you look at the pathways
and the routes and the plans for China’s Belt
and Road Initiative, you see the Yuan Dynasty. What China is doing
with Belt and Road is very much in keeping with
their own imperial tradition, and we’ll get into that because
it’s one of the main themes of this whole collection
is that while empire may be a dirty word
on college campuses, you cannot understand
the processes going on in the world today
without seriously and dispassionately
looking at empire. And I don’t mean the British,
French, and European ones, I mean the Indian,
Chinese, Persian, Seljuk, Ottoman empires. Let me get started. It’s not true that technology
has defeated geography. What’s happened is something
much more subtle and complex. It’s that technology
has shrunk geography and distilled geography so
that the world is more anxious, more claustrophobic,
more nervous, smaller
than ever before. Every place interacts with
each other as never before. The crises zones in the South
China Sea, the East China Sea, the Baltic Sea base in
Ukraine, the Black Sea, the Persian Gulf all have
an ability now to affect each other that never
existed before in history. We tend to think of
interconnectivity
as a positive thing, it connects markets, creates
an enlightened global culture, et cetera, that’s true. But in a geopolitical sense, interconnectivity is
very destabilizing. For instance, I was
at Davos in January, and the markets were
at their top peak. This was before the disruptions of the later part of January. Yet nobody was happy there
because everybody sensed that our world is more
geopolitically fragile than it’s ever been. They just couldn’t explain why. What I am trying to do here in this lead essay
is explain why. Think of the world
on a taut string. If you pluck one part of it,
the whole network vibrates. That’s the world. Take the word Eurasia. As recently as 20 years
ago, Eurasia meant nothing. It was too big to mean anything, from Portugal to
Indonesia, too big, Portugal to Korea, too big. But what’s happened because
of the way technology has been shrinking geography,
we can now honestly talk about a cohering Eurasian
system of rivalry, trade, development, and conflict
that never existed before. So Eurasia as a word
has a meaning that
it never did before. To give you an example
of what I mean, let me take just two countries. Look at India and China. India and China are
two radically different world civilizations that were
separated by the high wall of the Himalayas and the
Palmyras and the Karakorums, that had mostly
very little to do with each other
throughout history. Yes, Buddhism spread
from India to China in middle antiquity, and
the Opium Wars united India and China in the
same zone of conflict in the mid-19th century. But those were
aberrations, generally. India and China
were very separate. Now look at today’s world. India has an intercontinental
ballistic missile system that targets cities in
China, China has fighter jets on the Tibetan Plateau
that can include the Indian subcontinent
or parts of it in their arc of operations,
you have Indian warships increasingly in the
South China Sea, and you have Chinese warships,
especially submarines, the most aggressive
kind of warship all over the Indian Ocean. You have China building,
or helping to build, or at least helping to
finance, state-of-the-art ports throughout the Indian
Ocean, to the east of India, to the west of India, in
Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Gwadar in Pakistan,
Bagamoyo in Tanzania, and the Chinese are building
a 155-acre military base in Djibouti at the
mouth of the Red Sea. China is in the process
of building a commercial throughput seaborne
empire as though it were the early stages of the
British East India Company or the Dutch East India Company. That’s China. India and China are
now connected in a
very new geography of rivalry that never
existed before in history. So, rather than
defeat geography, technology has been building
new kinds of geographies. India and China are just one
example that you can play out around the world in terms
of how every crisis and zone is interacting with
every other one. Think of China moving
vertically south towards the Indian Ocean,
building or helping to develop these ports that I spoke of,
and think of India moving east and west along
the Indian Ocean, competing with China for oil
and natural gas fields in Iran and competing with China
in Myanmar for influence because Myanmar has a
long border with India. I remember some years ago,
about 10 years ago now, American diplomats
were very perplexed, and one of them said to me, “Why is India, a
democratic country, “giving military aid to Myanmar, “a brutally repressive
military dictatorship?” I said to them, “Have you spoken
to the Indians about this, “their national
security advisor? “Because of geography,
they don’t have the luxury “to stand on
moralistic ceremony. “They have to engage with
Myanmar, or else China will make “it a satellite, and America
is simply too far away.” This is where you
get India and China competing with each other. And where does China’s
imperial dream begin from? It begins in the
South China Sea. American diplomats can talk
hours on end to the Chinese and tell them, you should not
be doing what you’re doing in the South China Sea, and the
Chinese will listen politely and, rightly ignore
these Americans, because from the point of
view of China’s geography, China’s history, and China’s
goals, China is doing exactly what it needs to be doing
in the South China Sea. China is doing nothing different
in the South China Sea, and this was told to me by
Chinese military officers, than what the Americans did
in the greater Caribbean in the 19th and
early 20th centuries. The South China Sea
is China’s Caribbean, and the Chinese think of this
consciously in this term. If you think about it, America
moved into the Caribbean in a big way after
it consolidated the
dry land portion of temperate zone North America. The last battle in the Indian
Wars was fought in 1890. By 1895 American foreign policy was focused on the Caribbean. In other words,
conquer the dry land, then the big adjacent
sea next to it. Because the Caribbean
bordered not just Mexico and the Gulf Coast but
the northern fringe
of South America, where most people
actually lived, strategic control of the
Caribbean gave the United States effective strategic control
of the whole hemisphere. With control of the hemisphere,
it was able to affect the balance of power in
the other hemisphere, and that is what
the two World Wars and the Cold War were all about. It all began in the Caribbean. Now, for China in
the South China Sea, China gets several things
from the South China Sea, parity with the US
Navy, or even dominance over the US Navy; it
gives China greater access to the Pacific, it
softens up Taiwan, because Taiwan is the
northern cork in the bottle to the South China Sea; and it
allows China unimpeded access finally to the Indian
Ocean, which is the world’s global energy interstate,
because the oil and natural gas are in one end of the Indian
Ocean in the Arabian Peninsula, the Iranian Plateau, and the
customers are at the other end, the great middle-class
conurbations of Coastal China, South Korea, Japan,
Singapore, and elsewhere. China is at war with
the United States in the South China Sea. There’s only one problem,
the Americans don’t know it. That’s because the
Chinese conception of war is different than the
Western conception of war. The Western conception of
war is you shoot, you fight. The Chinese conception
of war is win without ever having to fight,
because if you have to fight, that indicates that you’ve made a strategic miscalculation
somewhere along the way. So what the Chinese are doing
is hundreds of micro-steps, take an island atoll here,
build a runway there, move an oil rig into
disputed waters there, after there’s complaints,
pull the oil rig out, but take another atoll
six months later. Just keep moving
like that, in a way that doesn’t generate page-one
news but which over time, 10 or 15 years, one
day we’ll all wake up to a different world
in the South China Sea. That, in fact, is what is
happening, because the Chinese are dead set against any
conflict with the US Navy because they know
they will lose. They may not lose in 15 years
at the rate they’re going, but they’ll lose now. It all starts with
the Caribbean. But then you have
to ask the question, why is China going to
sea in the first place in such a big way,
developing such a big navy in the South China Sea
and the East China Sea? China does not have very
much of a naval tradition. In the early 15th
century, it’s true, in the Ming Dynasty, under
treasure fleet Admiral Zheng He, the Chinese sailed as far
as the Horn of Africa. But that was an aberration. That was really not
part of their tradition, and they withdrew the treasure
fleets when they had trouble with the Mongols in
the north-central
part of their country. China never went to sea because it never
felt secure on land. China has the luxury now to
engage, to focus so heavily on the South and East China
seas and the Indian Ocean, precisely because they
are more secure on land than they’ve ever been, and they’re becoming more
secure and more secure on land. Why is that? That’s where we get
into One Belt, One Road, or Belt and Road Initiative. The Belt and Road Initiative
does several things that nobody reports
about in the newspapers. The first thing, it’s
a branding operation for what the Chinese
have already built in terms of asphalt roads,
railways, oil and gas pipelines across Central Asia to get
at the gas from Turkmenistan, the oil from Kazakhstan so
that China is less dependent on the Strait of Malacca,
which is narrow and vulnerable, for oil deliveries. So it’s a branding operation
for what has already been accomplished, essentially. The second thing it is, these
pathways across Central Asia link China with Iran. Iran, with a population of
80 million, highly educated, fronting not just one
hydrocarbon-rich region, the Persian Gulf, but
two, the Caspian Sea, is the organizing principle
of both the Middle East and Central Asia. China is investing
heavily in Iran. It’s building railways in Iran. It’s mining for
minerals in Iran. The Chinese-Iranian relationship
is becoming deeply organic, and China-plus-Iran
is an unbeatable
combination in Eurasia. The state that loses
out the most is Russia because China is beating
the pants off Russia in former Soviet, Russian
lingua franca-speaking Central Asia, and is
poised to infiltrate into the Russian Far East while Putin is
obsessed with the West. I never bought the argument
that Putin’s a great strategist or tactician at all. The other thing One
Belt, One Road is, it’s a way to deal with
China’s internal demons. One of the biggest
of those demons are the Muslim-Turkic Uyghur
minority in Western China. This is a minority
that is Muslim, that does not feel
itself part of Han China. The Chinese are very
worried about them. What China does, what One
Belt, One Road accomplishes is it deepens
China’s relationship with these other Turkic
Muslim states to the west of the Uyghurs so the
Uyghurs can never use them as a rear base in any future
imaginable insurgency. The second thing it does,
because the Uyghurs live in Western China,
One Belt, One Road is economically
developing Western China so the Uyghur standard
of living can rise and, as a result, they may
have less of an incentive to rebel in future
years and decades. So One Belt, One Road
does all of these things. Again, this is the
process that’s happening in front of our eyes. At the same time, we
have the Middle East. Let me talk a few minutes
about the Middle East. Why has the Middle
East been so tumultuous over the past quarter-century,
whatever time frame you want to use on it? It’s because of a basic
fact that goes unreported, that, for the first
time in modern history, the Middle East is in
a post-imperial phase. The Ottoman Turkish Empire,
which ruled from Algeria to Mesopotamia, is gone. When the Ottomans ruled, whether
you were a Jew or an Arab, a Sunni or a Shia,
you owed loyalty to the Turkish sultan
in Constantinople. That didn’t solve every
ethnic and group problem, but it certainly alleviated it. That’s gone. The British and French
imperial mandate systems, which provided order and
stability in the Levant, principally Syria and Iraq,
went away in the late 1940s. The American and Soviet Cold
War systems in the Middle East, which Oxford historian
John Darwin called imperial in all but name,
essentially went away. The Soviet system
went away in 1991. The Russians have come back, but in much more limited fashion compared to what was Soviet
influence in Damascus, Baghdad, and many other places. In terms of American power,
American power for a long list of reasons that we could
spend all day talking about has dissipated over
the last 20 years. America is not what it
was in the Middle East, and it’s not only because of
the Iraq War or Afghanistan. It’s because the Middle East
is no longer run uniformly by stable autocratic systems
where there was only one phone number, one fax
machine, one president with one or two advisors
you had to deal with in order to deal with a crisis. Now you have to lobby dozens
of people in many places. It’s not impossible to do,
it’s just harder to do. It’s an irony that the
very weakening of autocracy has also weakened American
power in the region. So the Middle East is
left to its own devices. The result of that is the rise
and jockeying for position of regional hegemons Iran,
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and, to a
lesser extent, Egypt. Iran really has an
advantage, because it has, of all these places, the
greatest imperial tradition. If you look at a map of
where Iran has influence from the Eastern
Mediterranean, Lebanon all the way through
Central Afghanistan where the Iranian rial is
the unofficial currency, you have a map, essentially, of most Persian-speaking
empires going back to antiquity. You look at the map of the
Achaemenids, the Sassanids, the Medes, the Parthians, you see exactly where
Iran is influential today. The ayatollahs are nothing
but the latest incarnation of Persian imperialism. This is a reason why the
Iranians are so brilliant at working with proxy
armies, proxy militias, because the real day-to-day
business of imperialism going deep back in
history is not conquest, it’s working with
local military factions in order to get your
own business done, to delegate through locals and
bring them into your system. The Marines, Army Special
Forces, Green Berets, that’s what they do
most of the time. They do it very well, but
they don’t do it as well as the Iranians have done it
with their militias in Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere. So there’s a particular
cultural genius to the way that the Iranians
operate in the Middle East. The Saudis promised victory
in Yemen in two months in 2015, they’re really
bogged down there. The Saudis promised the quick
knockout punch with Qatar over a year ago,
they never got it. Yes, a lot of it is
due to the impetuosity of the crown prince. But, again, Saudi
Arabia is a country with no imperial tradition,
no real history to draw upon in terms of projecting power, and especially military
power, in this way. So we have a process of China
and Iran overlying Eurasia, we have a post-imperial
world in the Middle East. So what about the United
States at the end of the day? All right, very quickly. The United States is a naval
power, that’s what it is, that’s who we are. Why do I say that? Because there’s a moral taboo
against using nuclear weapons, so the fact that we
have a nuclear arsenal
may be necessary, but it doesn’t help us
on a day-to-day basis. As far as land forces
go, and I’m talking about hard power here, in
terms of land forces, you move 15,000 or
20,000 US Army or Marines from one part of
the world to another or from the United States,
outside the United States, that’s front-page
news, it’s an editorial in “The New York Times,” it’s
arguments among columnists. But you move an aircraft
carrier strike group, which can incinerate
several big cities with the firepower it has
on it, which has thousands of sailors, you move that
aircraft carrier strike group from one part of the
world to another, and it’s public knowledge, there
is nothing secret about it. No news, nobody cares. Maybe a page-five story
somewhere for naval wonks. This is why the Navy is
such a powerful instrument, because you can
do things with it. You can signal, you
can move troops around, you can suddenly move
three carrier battle groups off the Korean Peninsula
whereas three weeks before you had only one, and it’s not
a sexy news story in any way. So we’re a naval power, and
naval power throughout history has generally been
organized around free trade and advancing some
form of civil society. Land powers tend to
be more conservative. Everyone says
America is like Rome. It’s more like Venice. We’re much more like imperial
Venice in that respect. That’s what we are,
that’s our brand. We’re a naval power which
supports free trade. With our warships we
keep the sea lines of communication open,
the choke points open, and access to hydrocarbons
for our allies open. It’s a benign influence,
and it goes with promoting, not forcibly imposing democracy, but supporting the gradual
expansion of civil society. But if you play around
with that American brand, you have nothing, essentially. You stop supporting free
trade in the general sense, you send out signals that
you’re not especially interested in advancing the march
of civil society, you lose everything in a way. You especially lose, and here
I’ll conclude, in Eurasia, because we are not in Eurasia. We can’t have a Belt and Road to compete with
China in Eurasia. What we offer Eurasia
is a vision of trade, of civil society,
of rule of law, and that’s a very
attractive vision, especially coming from a
country half a world away that has no territorial
ambitions on Eurasia. It makes it very attractive. But this is hard to do when
you voluntarily give up or seriously weaken
the American brand. I’ll end here, thank you. (audience applauding) (light music) – [Announcer] For
more on this program and other Carnegie Ethics
Studio productions, visit carnegiecouncil.org. There you can find video
highlights, transcripts, audio recordings, and
other multimedia resources on global ethics. This program is made possible
by the Carnegie Ethics Studio and viewers like you.

Business Mogul Steve Madden: Trump Is Clueless On The Economy | The Beat With Ari Melber | MSNBC


YOU’VE BEEN THERE DONE IT, YOU KNOW HIM AND GIVE US EXTRA KNOW HIM AND GIVE US EXTRA INSIGHTS. INSIGHTS. THANK YOU FOR COMING THROUGH. THANK YOU FOR COMING THROUGH.>>MY PLEASURE.>>MY PLEASURE.>>I WANT TO GET INTO SOMETHING>>I WANT TO GET INTO SOMETHING WITH ANOTHER SPECIAL GUEST. WITH ANOTHER SPECIAL GUEST. YOU’VE HEARD ALL ABOUT THE YOU’VE HEARD ALL ABOUT THE JIRTS, MARKETS, TRUMP RECESSION JIRTS, MARKETS, TRUMP RECESSION TALK. TALK. THERE’S NO STABLE LEADERSHIP THERE’S NO STABLE LEADERSHIP FROM THE WHITE HOUSE WITH FROM THE WHITE HOUSE WITH GROWING SIGNS OF POTENTIAL GROWING SIGNS OF POTENTIAL RECESSION AND TRUMP IS FLIP RECESSION AND TRUMP IS FLIP FLOPPING ON HIS OWN PLANS WHAT FLOPPING ON HIS OWN PLANS WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT. TO DO ABOUT IT.>>PAYROLL TAXES, I’VE BEEN>>PAYROLL TAXES, I’VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT PAYROLL TAXES FOR THINKING ABOUT PAYROLL TAXES FOR A LONG TIME. A LONG TIME. WHETHER OR NOT WE DO IT NOW OR WHETHER OR NOT WE DO IT NOW OR NOT IS — IT’S NOT BEING DONE NOT IS — IT’S NOT BEING DONE BECAUSE OF RECESSION. BECAUSE OF RECESSION.>>PAYROLL TAX CUT WHICH IS>>PAYROLL TAX CUT WHICH IS AIMED. AIMED.>>I’M NOT LOOKING AT A TAX CUT>>I’M NOT LOOKING AT A TAX CUT NOW. NOW. WE DON’T NEED IT. WE DON’T NEED IT.>>OKAY.>>OKAY. TUESDAY YES, WEDNESDAY NO. TUESDAY YES, WEDNESDAY NO. HE DID THE SAME THING ON AN HE DID THE SAME THING ON AN ISSUE THAT WOULD BENEFIT MOSTLY ISSUE THAT WOULD BENEFIT MOSTLY NO ONE OTHER THAN THE VERY RICH. NO ONE OTHER THAN THE VERY RICH. WHICH IS SOMETHING THEY CALL WHICH IS SOMETHING THEY CALL INDEXING OF THE CAPITAL GAINS INDEXING OF THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX. TAX.>>SO WE’RE TALKING ABOUT>>SO WE’RE TALKING ABOUT INDEXING AND WE’RE ALWAYS INDEXING AND WE’RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT THE CAPITAL GAINS LOOKING AT THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX. TAX.>>HAVE THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY>>HAVE THE EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY TO INDEX CAPITAL GAINS? TO INDEX CAPITAL GAINS?>>I’M NOT LOOKING TO DO>>I’M NOT LOOKING TO DO INDEXING. INDEXING. I DON’T WANT TO DO THAT. I DON’T WANT TO DO THAT.>>WHY SO MUCH CONTRADICTION IN>>WHY SO MUCH CONTRADICTION IN THE OPEN? THE OPEN? THERE ARE REPORTS RECENT TRUMP THERE ARE REPORTS RECENT TRUMP IS PRIVATELY TELLING PEOPLE HE’S IS PRIVATELY TELLING PEOPLE HE’S RATTLED ABOUT THIS POTENTIAL RATTLED ABOUT THIS POTENTIAL RECESSION WHICH MIGHT AFFECT HIS RECESSION WHICH MIGHT AFFECT HIS THINKING AS HE JUMPS BACK AND THINKING AS HE JUMPS BACK AND FORTH WHAT HE MIGHT DO AND FORTH WHAT HE MIGHT DO AND WORRIED THAT HE COULD LOSE THE WORRIED THAT HE COULD LOSE THE ELECTION OVER IT, BUT THEN IN ELECTION OVER IT, BUT THEN IN PUBLIC HE DENIES IT ALL. PUBLIC HE DENIES IT ALL.>>THE FAKE NEWS OF WHICH MANY>>THE FAKE NEWS OF WHICH MANY OF YOU ARE MEMBERS, HAS TRIED TO OF YOU ARE MEMBERS, HAS TRIED TO CONVINCE THE PUBLICING TO HAVE A CONVINCE THE PUBLICING TO HAVE A RECESSION. RECESSION. LET’S HAVE A RECESSION. LET’S HAVE A RECESSION. THE UNITED STATES IS DOING THE UNITED STATES IS DOING PHENOMENONALLY WELL. PHENOMENONALLY WELL.>>WE ALWAYS LOOK FOR NEW AND>>WE ALWAYS LOOK FOR NEW AND INTERESTING VOICES. INTERESTING VOICES. FIRST TIME GUEST IS SOMEONE YOU FIRST TIME GUEST IS SOMEONE YOU HAVE CERTAINLY HEARD OF, A HAVE CERTAINLY HEARD OF, A BUSINESSMAN AND ENTREPRENEUR, A BUSINESSMAN AND ENTREPRENEUR, A FASHION DESIGNER STEVE MADDEN FASHION DESIGNER STEVE MADDEN FOUNDER AND FORMER CEO OF THE FOUNDER AND FORMER CEO OF THE COMPANY THAT BEARS HIS NAME. COMPANY THAT BEARS HIS NAME. NICE TO SEE YOU. NICE TO SEE YOU.>>IT’S GOOD TO BE HERE.>>IT’S GOOD TO BE HERE.>>YOU ARE FOLLOWING ONE OF THE>>YOU ARE FOLLOWING ONE OF THE RULES IN TECH WHICH IS THE MORE RULES IN TECH WHICH IS THE MORE SUCCESSFUL YOU ARE, THE LESS YOU SUCCESSFUL YOU ARE, THE LESS YOU HAVE TO DRESS UP. HAVE TO DRESS UP.>>I LIKE IT.>>I LIKE IT. IF TRUMP WOULD GIVE ME A JOB IN IF TRUMP WOULD GIVE ME A JOB IN HIS ADMINISTRATION, I WOULD WORK HIS ADMINISTRATION, I WOULD WORK IN THE ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT, I IN THE ECONOMICS DEPARTMENT, I MIGHT TAKE OFF MY HAT. MIGHT TAKE OFF MY HAT.>>YOU WOULD TAKE OFF YOUR HAT>>YOU WOULD TAKE OFF YOUR HAT FOR THAT PUBLIC SERVICE. FOR THAT PUBLIC SERVICE.>>NEEDS A LITTLE HELP.>>NEEDS A LITTLE HELP.>>CLAIMS TO BE A DEALMAKER.>>CLAIMS TO BE A DEALMAKER.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>YOU ARE ACTUALLY KNOWN TO BE>>YOU ARE ACTUALLY KNOWN TO BE A DEALMAKER. A DEALMAKER.>>YES.>>YES.>>ASSESS HIM ON WHAT WE JUST>>ASSESS HIM ON WHAT WE JUST SAW. SAW. DOES THAT BACK AND FORTH MATTER DOES THAT BACK AND FORTH MATTER TO THE ECONOMY? TO THE ECONOMY? DOES IT HURT ANYTHING? DOES IT HURT ANYTHING? DOES IT HELP WHEN HE GOES WE DOES IT HELP WHEN HE GOES WE NIGHT DO THIS OR THAT? NIGHT DO THIS OR THAT?>>I THINK THAT HE GOT HIMSELF>>I THINK THAT HE GOT HIMSELF IN OVER HIS HEAD WITH CHINA. IN OVER HIS HEAD WITH CHINA. AND YOU KNOW, HE’S NEGOTIATING AND YOU KNOW, HE’S NEGOTIATING AGAINST A GUY THAT’S PRESIDENT AGAINST A GUY THAT’S PRESIDENT FOR LIFE. FOR LIFE. AND TRUMP IS ONLY PRESIDENT FOR AND TRUMP IS ONLY PRESIDENT FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS. ANOTHER TWO YEARS. SO HE’S GOT NOT AS MUCH LEVER SO HE’S GOT NOT AS MUCH LEVER AND AS THE OTHER GUY. AND AS THE OTHER GUY. I THINK THE CHINESE THING IS I THINK THE CHINESE THING IS HURTING THE ECONOMY. HURTING THE ECONOMY. THE TARIFFS ARE HURTING THE THE TARIFFS ARE HURTING THE ECONOMY. ECONOMY. THEY’RE FORCING PRICES UP. THEY’RE FORCING PRICES UP. PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LOSE THEIR PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LOSE THEIR JOBS. JOBS. IT’S JUST TERRIBLE FOR THE IT’S JUST TERRIBLE FOR THE ECONOMY. ECONOMY.>>IS ALL KNOW, WHAT’S WHERE THE>>IS ALL KNOW, WHAT’S WHERE THE ECONOMICS MEET THE POLITICS. ECONOMICS MEET THE POLITICS. WHAT ARE THE TWO THINGS KNOW WHAT ARE THE TWO THINGS KNOW THAT TRUMP DID? THAT TRUMP DID? I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE TWEETS. TWEETS. WHAT HAS HE DONE REGARDING THE WHAT HAS HE DONE REGARDING THE ECONOMY? ECONOMY? EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE WAS A BIG EVERYBODY KNOWS THERE WAS A BIG TAX CUT MOSTLY TO THE TOP AND TAX CUT MOSTLY TO THE TOP AND THERE’S A TRADE WAR ON. THERE’S A TRADE WAR ON.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>YOU’RE SAYING THE TRADE WAR>>YOU’RE SAYING THE TRADE WAR DOESN’T HELP AMERICANS. DOESN’T HELP AMERICANS.>>THE TRADE WAR IS HURTING>>THE TRADE WAR IS HURTING AMERICANS. AMERICANS. IT REALLY IS. IT REALLY IS. SO MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE FROM OUR SO MUCH OF WHAT WE HAVE FROM OUR iPHONE TO OUR STEVE MADDEN SHOES iPHONE TO OUR STEVE MADDEN SHOES COMES FROM CHINA. COMES FROM CHINA. NOT ALL MY GOODS COME FROM CHINA NOT ALL MY GOODS COME FROM CHINA BUT IT’S JUST GOING TO FORCE BUT IT’S JUST GOING TO FORCE PRICES UP. PRICES UP. IT’S GOING TO SQUEEZE MARGINS, IT’S GOING TO SQUEEZE MARGINS, COST JOBS. COST JOBS. IT’S A TERRIBLE THING. IT’S A TERRIBLE THING. DISRUPT SUPPLY CHAINS. DISRUPT SUPPLY CHAINS.>>WE NEVER KNOW WHEN YOU>>WE NEVER KNOW WHEN YOU MENTION YOUR NAME WHETHER YOU’RE MENTION YOUR NAME WHETHER YOU’RE SELF-PROMOTING OR PLUGGING YOUR SELF-PROMOTING OR PLUGGING YOUR BUSINESS. BUSINESS. WE CAN’T TELL THE DIFFERENCE. WE CAN’T TELL THE DIFFERENCE.>>YOU KNOW, I’M DOING ALL OF>>YOU KNOW, I’M DOING ALL OF IT. IT.>>IT’S ALL ONE AND THE SAME.>>IT’S ALL ONE AND THE SAME.>>WHAT ABOUT THE PUSHBACK>>WHAT ABOUT THE PUSHBACK SOMEONE WOULD SAY, ARI’S TALKING SOMEONE WOULD SAY, ARI’S TALKING TO RICH STEVE MADDEN WHO HAS A TO RICH STEVE MADDEN WHO HAS A BUSINESS INTEREST IN CHINA AND BUSINESS INTEREST IN CHINA AND COUGH YOURS HE DOESN’T LIKE THE COUGH YOURS HE DOESN’T LIKE THE TARIFF WAR. TARIFF WAR. IF WE BEAT CHINA, IF TRUMP WINS IF WE BEAT CHINA, IF TRUMP WINS HIS AIDES AND HIS ECONOMICS AIDS HIS AIDES AND HIS ECONOMICS AIDS WOULD SAY WE’RE GOING TO BEAT WOULD SAY WE’RE GOING TO BEAT CHINA AND IN THE LONG RUN WE’RE CHINA AND IN THE LONG RUN WE’RE GOING TO GET MORE SHOES MADE GOING TO GET MORE SHOES MADE HERE INSTEAD OF ELSEWHERE. HERE INSTEAD OF ELSEWHERE.>>WE’RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY>>WE’RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY SHOES IN AMERICA BUT WE HAVE SHOES IN AMERICA BUT WE HAVE OTHER JOBS IN AMERICA. OTHER JOBS IN AMERICA. WE HAVE DESIGN JOBS, MARKETING WE HAVE DESIGN JOBS, MARKETING JOBS. JOBS. WE HAVE RETAIL JOBS. WE HAVE RETAIL JOBS. CREATIVE JOBS. CREATIVE JOBS. IT’S SHIFTED. IT’S SHIFTED. WE JUST DON’T HAVE THE HANDS WE JUST DON’T HAVE THE HANDS THAT MAKE THE SHOES NOW. THAT MAKE THE SHOES NOW. THEY’RE MADE OFFSHORE. THEY’RE MADE OFFSHORE.>>AND YOU’RE SAYING I WANT TO>>AND YOU’RE SAYING I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR. BE VERY CLEAR. EVEN IF YOU ENVISION A FAN EVEN IF YOU ENVISION A FAN FICTION VIDEO GAME MAGA UNIVERSE FICTION VIDEO GAME MAGA UNIVERSE WHERE TRUMP BEAT KLEIN, YOU’RE WHERE TRUMP BEAT KLEIN, YOU’RE SAYING THOSE SHOES WOULDN’T COME SAYING THOSE SHOES WOULDN’T COME BACK TO AMERICA. BACK TO AMERICA.>>NO, WE’RE GOING TO MOVE>>NO, WE’RE GOING TO MOVE PRODUCTION TO MEXICO OR VIETNAM PRODUCTION TO MEXICO OR VIETNAM OR TO AFRICA. OR TO AFRICA. THINGS LIKE THAT. THINGS LIKE THAT.>>YOU’RE A BOSS.>>YOU’RE A BOSS. YOU’RE FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM YOU’RE FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM BOSS. BOSS.>>YES, YES.>>YES, YES.>>YOU KNOW.>>YOU KNOW.>>SOMETIMES.>>SOMETIMES. YES. YES.>>YOU KNOW.>>YOU KNOW.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>BOSSES HAVE TO BE HELD>>BOSSES HAVE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE SOMETIMES. ACCOUNTABLE SOMETIMES.>>YES, YES.>>YES, YES.>>WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE POLLING>>WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE POLLING ON SOME OF THIS STUFF, IT’S ON SOME OF THIS STUFF, IT’S ALWAYS POLARIZED AND RED AND ALWAYS POLARIZED AND RED AND BLUE. BLUE. THERE IS AN OVERWHELMING THERE IS AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT SAY IF MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT SAY IF THERE IS A RECESSION AND TRUMP’S THERE IS A RECESSION AND TRUMP’S WORRIED ABOUT IT, 69% OF PEOPLE WORRIED ABOUT IT, 69% OF PEOPLE SAY THEY WOULD HOLD TRUMP SAY THEY WOULD HOLD TRUMP ACCOUNTABLE. ACCOUNTABLE. IS THAT WHAT YOU THINK WOULD IS THAT WHAT YOU THINK WOULD HAPPEN? HAPPEN?>>OF COURSE.>>OF COURSE. HE’S IN CHARGE. HE’S IN CHARGE. SO HE’S GOING TO BE HELD SO HE’S GOING TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. ACCOUNTABLE. I THINK IT WILL HURT HIM. I THINK IT WILL HURT HIM. IF HE’S WATCHING, I IMPLORE HIM IF HE’S WATCHING, I IMPLORE HIM TO END THESE TARIFFS. TO END THESE TARIFFS. IT’S JUST — IT’S REALLY HURTFUL IT’S JUST — IT’S REALLY HURTFUL AND IT’S CAUSING SO MUCH CHAOS, AND IT’S CAUSING SO MUCH CHAOS, DISRUPTING SUPPLY COMANZ. DISRUPTING SUPPLY COMANZ. IT’S GOING TO CAUSE RECESSION. IT’S GOING TO CAUSE RECESSION.>>IS CHINA OUTSMARTING HIM OR>>IS CHINA OUTSMARTING HIM OR THEY JUST HAVE MORE MORE RUNWAY? THEY JUST HAVE MORE MORE RUNWAY? THEY HAVE MORE TIME. THEY HAVE MORE TIME. WE ARE ON A POLITICAL CALENDAR. WE ARE ON A POLITICAL CALENDAR.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>YOU’RE DEALING WITH WHATEVER>>YOU’RE DEALING WITH WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, AN YOU WANT TO CALL IT, AN AUTOCRATIC COUNTRY. AUTOCRATIC COUNTRY.>>IT’S DIFFERENT.>>IT’S DIFFERENT.>>THEY DON’T HAVE A TIME LIMIT>>THEY DON’T HAVE A TIME LIMIT TO FIGHT HIM OUT. TO FIGHT HIM OUT.>>YES, HE’S TRYING TO DO>>YES, HE’S TRYING TO DO SOMETHING, HE’S TRYING TO HELP SOMETHING, HE’S TRYING TO HELP THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO DO THE PRESIDENT IS TRYING TO DO SOMETHING. SOMETHING. OKAY? OKAY? BUT HE NEGOTIATING WITH THE BUT HE NEGOTIATING WITH THE CHINESE LIKE HE’S NEGOTIATING CHINESE LIKE HE’S NEGOTIATING WITH SOMEONE FROM BROOKLYN IS WITH SOMEONE FROM BROOKLYN IS NOT GOING TO WORK. NOT GOING TO WORK. IT’S JUST NOT GOING TO WORK. IT’S JUST NOT GOING TO WORK.>>BARBARA REZ SOUNDS LIKE>>BARBARA REZ SOUNDS LIKE SOMEONE FROM BROOKLYN. SOMEONE FROM BROOKLYN.>>MAYBE.>>MAYBE.>>NOW WE’LL TALK ABOUT THE>>NOW WE’LL TALK ABOUT THE PREDICTIONS. PREDICTIONS. YOU KNOW BETTER THAN SOME, THE YOU KNOW BETTER THAN SOME, THE MARKETS ALL OVER THE PLACE. MARKETS ALL OVER THE PLACE. MICK MULVANEY IS PRIVATELY MICK MULVANEY IS PRIVATELY TELLING IT THE SORT OF TELLING IT THE SORT OF REPUBLICAN DONOR CLASS, LOOK, BE REPUBLICAN DONOR CLASS, LOOK, BE READY FOR A QUOTE MODERATE AND READY FOR A QUOTE MODERATE AND SHORT RECESSION. SHORT RECESSION. IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE BRACING FOR? IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE BRACING FOR?>>I’M GOOD AT PREDICTING HEEL>>I’M GOOD AT PREDICTING HEEL HEIGHTS. HEIGHTS. I JUST HOPE THERE’S NOT A I JUST HOPE THERE’S NOT A RECESSION. RECESSION. YOU KNOW, AND I DON’T WANT TO YOU KNOW, AND I DON’T WANT TO SEE A RECESSION JUST BECAUSE IT SEE A RECESSION JUST BECAUSE IT HURTS THE PRESIDENT. HURTS THE PRESIDENT. WE DON’T WANT THAT. WE DON’T WANT THAT. BUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE’S BUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HE’S DOING COULD BE CREATING A DOING COULD BE CREATING A RECESSION. RECESSION.>>LIKE THE OTHER THAN THE TRADE>>LIKE THE OTHER THAN THE TRADE WAR. WAR.>>LIKE THE TARIFFS LIKE THE>>LIKE THE TARIFFS LIKE THE DEFICIT IS OUT OF CONTROL. DEFICIT IS OUT OF CONTROL. IT’S CRAZY. IT’S CRAZY. AND THE TWEETS. AND THE TWEETS. THE TWEETS ARE HURTING. THE TWEETS ARE HURTING. THE FLIP-FLOPPING AND THE TWEETS THE FLIP-FLOPPING AND THE TWEETS ARE HURT TOO. ARE HURT TOO. THE TWEETS ARE REALLY HURTING THE TWEETS ARE REALLY HURTING BECAUSE IT UNDERMINES SORT OF BECAUSE IT UNDERMINES SORT OF CONFIDENCE AND THINGS. CONFIDENCE AND THINGS. I KNOW HE KNOWS BETTER AND I I KNOW HE KNOWS BETTER AND I HOPE HE STOPS DOING IT. HOPE HE STOPS DOING IT.>>YOU SAY YOU HOPE HE’S>>YOU SAY YOU HOPE HE’S WATCHING. WATCHING. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT HIM. WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT HIM.>>I HAVE HIM A COUPLE OF TIMES.>>I HAVE HIM A COUPLE OF TIMES. I HAVEN’T MET HIM. I HAVEN’T MET HIM. I WAS A JUDGE ON THE BEAUTY I WAS A JUDGE ON THE BEAUTY PAGEANT LIKE TEN YEARS AGO OR PAGEANT LIKE TEN YEARS AGO OR SOMETHING. SOMETHING. I THINK HE MEANS WELL. I THINK HE MEANS WELL. I JUST THINK HE’S MISGUIDED AND I JUST THINK HE’S MISGUIDED AND HE REALLY NEEDS HELP. HE REALLY NEEDS HELP. HE NEEDS TO GET SOME SMART GUYS HE NEEDS TO GET SOME SMART GUYS AROUND HIM. AROUND HIM.>>HE MEANS WELL ON WHAT?>>HE MEANS WELL ON WHAT? A LOT OF PEOPLE DON’T FEEL LIKE A LOT OF PEOPLE DON’T FEEL LIKE HE MEANS WELL ON CHARLOTTESVILLE HE MEANS WELL ON CHARLOTTESVILLE OR CHILDREN IN CAGES. OR CHILDREN IN CAGES.>>HE’S MADE SOME MISTAKES.>>HE’S MADE SOME MISTAKES. I’M NOT DEFENDING HIM. I’M NOT DEFENDING HIM. I THINK WHEN HE WAKES UP, HE I THINK WHEN HE WAKES UP, HE MEANS TO DO WELL BUT I THINK MEANS TO DO WELL BUT I THINK HE’S MISGUIDED. HE’S MISGUIDED. AND I THINK THAT HE JUST NEEDS AND I THINK THAT HE JUST NEEDS SMART PEOPLE AROUND HIM. SMART PEOPLE AROUND HIM.>>YOU KNOW HOW YOU TALK?>>YOU KNOW HOW YOU TALK? YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT HIM THE WAY YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT HIM THE WAY A LOT OF PEOPLE TALK ABOUT HIM A LOT OF PEOPLE TALK ABOUT HIM IN WASHINGTON, D.C. INCLUDING IN WASHINGTON, D.C. INCLUDING REPUBLICANS. REPUBLICANS. THEY TALK ABOUT HIM LIKE HE’S THEY TALK ABOUT HIM LIKE HE’S 12, LIKE MEANS WELL BUT NEEDS 12, LIKE MEANS WELL BUT NEEDS GUIDANCE. GUIDANCE. HE’S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED HE’S THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. STATES.>>WE HAVE THE SMARTEST PEOPLE>>WE HAVE THE SMARTEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD IN AMERICA. IN THE WORLD IN AMERICA. THE HEAD OF GOLDMAN SACHS. THE HEAD OF GOLDMAN SACHS. GET SOME OF THOSE FINANCIAL GUYS GET SOME OF THOSE FINANCIAL GUYS AND SURROUND YOURSELF WITH THEM AND SURROUND YOURSELF WITH THEM AND TRY TO MAKE A GOOD DEAL. AND TRY TO MAKE A GOOD DEAL.>>I GOT A FINAL QUESTION FOR>>I GOT A FINAL QUESTION FOR YOU OFF POLITICS. YOU OFF POLITICS. LAST QUESTION, WHAT’S THE LAST QUESTION, WHAT’S THE BIGGEST ADVICE YOU GIVE SOMEONE BIGGEST ADVICE YOU GIVE SOMEONE WATCHING ABOUT PERSONAL FINANCE, WATCHING ABOUT PERSONAL FINANCE, PERSONAL PLANNING HOW TO LIVE PERSONAL PLANNING HOW TO LIVE YOUR LIFE RESPONSIBLY. YOUR LIFE RESPONSIBLY.>>SO YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THE>>SO YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I WOULD SAY MOST IMPORTANT THING I WOULD SAY JUST NOT AN ANSWER TO YOUR JUST NOT AN ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS. QUESTION IS.>>I LOVE THAT.>>I LOVE THAT.>>TO YOUNG PEOPLE, I WANT TO>>TO YOUNG PEOPLE, I WANT TO SAY, WHEN YOU GO TO WORK, TRY TO SAY, WHEN YOU GO TO WORK, TRY TO DO SOMETHING YOU LOVE DOING. DO SOMETHING YOU LOVE DOING. DON’T DO IT FOR THE MONEY. DON’T DO IT FOR THE MONEY. DO IT BECAUSE YOU LOVE DOING IT. DO IT BECAUSE YOU LOVE DOING IT.>>DON’T DO IT FOR THE PAPER.>>DON’T DO IT FOR THE PAPER.>>DON’T DO IT FOR THE MONEY.>>DON’T DO IT FOR THE MONEY. DO IT BECAUSE YOU LOVE DOING IT DO IT BECAUSE YOU LOVE DOING IT AND THE MONEY WILL FOLLOW

Donald Trump Grapples With Self-Inflicted Economic Wounds As Markets Plunge | The Last Word | MSNBC


WE WILL TRY TO PRY ALL OF THE SECRETS OF THE RIDE AROUND THE SECRETS OF THE RIDE AROUND THE LAKE OUT OF SENATOR MICHAEL LAKE OUT OF SENATOR MICHAEL BENNET AT THE END OF THIS00 HOUR BENNET AT THE END OF THIS00 HOUR BUT WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH THE BUT WE BEGIN TONIGHT WITH THE NEW PHRASE THAT DONALD TRUMP HAD NEW PHRASE THAT DONALD TRUMP HAD TO LEARN TODAY. TO LEARN TODAY. THE HARD WAY. THE HARD WAY. INVERTED YIELD CURVE. INVERTED YIELD CURVE. TODAY, THE DAY AFTER PRESIDENT TODAY, THE DAY AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP ADMITTED THAT HE HAS BEEN TRUMP ADMITTED THAT HE HAS BEEN LYING ABOUT HIS TARIFFS AND THAT LYING ABOUT HIS TARIFFS AND THAT HIS TARIFFS HAVE, IN FACT, COST HIS TARIFFS HAVE, IN FACT, COST AMERICAN CONSUMERS BILLIONS UPON AMERICAN CONSUMERS BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS OF BILLIONS UPON BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, THE STOCK MARKET DOLLARS, THE STOCK MARKET CRASHED. CRASHED. THE STOCK MARKET DROPPED 800 THE STOCK MARKET DROPPED 800 POINTS TODAY. POINTS TODAY. THE LAST TIME THE STOCK MARKET THE LAST TIME THE STOCK MARKET DROPPED 800 POINTS, THE DROPPED 800 POINTS, THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY LITERALLY GOT ON HIS KNEES AND LITERALLY GOT ON HIS KNEES AND PRAYED TO NANCY PELOSI. PRAYED TO NANCY PELOSI. THIS REALLY HAPPENED. THIS REALLY HAPPENED. IN THE LAST YEAR OF THE BUSH IN THE LAST YEAR OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IN 2008, THE ADMINISTRATION IN 2008, THE REPUBLICAN SECRETARY OF THE REPUBLICAN SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, HANK PAULSON, WAS SO TREASURY, HANK PAULSON, WAS SO RATTLED BY A DROP OF 800 POINTS RATTLED BY A DROP OF 800 POINTS IN THE STOCK MARKET IN THE MIDST IN THE STOCK MARKET IN THE MIDST OF THE BANKING CRISIS THAT HE OF THE BANKING CRISIS THAT HE LITERALLY GOT ON HIS KNEES WITH LITERALLY GOT ON HIS KNEES WITH HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI AND HOUSE SPEAKER NANCY PELOSI AND PRAYED TO HER TO PASS THE BANK PRAYED TO HER TO PASS THE BANK BAILOUT BILL. BAILOUT BILL. PRAYED TO HER TO HELP TAKE THIS PRAYED TO HER TO HELP TAKE THIS DECISIVE ACTION WITH THE BUSH DECISIVE ACTION WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO PREVENT ADMINISTRATION TO PREVENT POSSIBLY THE COLLAPSE OF OUR POSSIBLY THE COLLAPSE OF OUR BANKING SYSTEM AND POSSIBLY THE BANKING SYSTEM AND POSSIBLY THE COLLAPSE OF OUR ECONOMY THAT COLLAPSE OF OUR ECONOMY THAT VERY WEEK. VERY WEEK. SO DEMOCRATS ONCE AGAIN TOOK SO DEMOCRATS ONCE AGAIN TOOK ACTION TO SAVE THE ECONOMY. ACTION TO SAVE THE ECONOMY. WHILE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS WHILE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS ARE ACTUALLY PLAYING GAMES WITH ARE ACTUALLY PLAYING GAMES WITH THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION AND WITH THE LEGISLATION. AND WITH THE LEGISLATION. NOT NANCY PELOSI. NOT NANCY PELOSI. SHE HELPED GET THAT JOB DONE. SHE HELPED GET THAT JOB DONE. THE SAME DAY THAT HANK PAULSON THE SAME DAY THAT HANK PAULSON GOT ON HIS KNEES TO PRAY TO GOT ON HIS KNEES TO PRAY TO NANCY PELOSI, PRESIDENT GEORGE NANCY PELOSI, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH TOLD PRESIDENTIAL W. BUSH TOLD PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES BARACK OBAMA AND JOHN CANDIDATES BARACK OBAMA AND JOHN McCAIN IN A PRIVATE MEETING, McCAIN IN A PRIVATE MEETING, “THIS SUCKER COULD GO DOWN.” “THIS SUCKER COULD GO DOWN.” MEANING THE ECONOMY OF THE MEANING THE ECONOMY OF THE UNITED STATES. UNITED STATES. OF AMERICA COULD GO DOWN. OF AMERICA COULD GO DOWN. COLLAPSE. COLLAPSE. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEN AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEN AND NOW IS THERE IS NOT ONE NOW IS THERE IS NOT ONE COMPETENT PERSON WORKING IN THE COMPETENT PERSON WORKING IN THE WHITE HOUSE OR THE TRUMP WHITE HOUSE OR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO KNOWS WHAT TO ADMINISTRATION WHO KNOWS WHAT TO DO NOW THAT WE HAVE SIGNED THAT DO NOW THAT WE HAVE SIGNED THAT AN ECONOMIC CRISIS MAY BE AN ECONOMIC CRISIS MAY BE APPROACHING. APPROACHING. THERE IS NOT ONE WORKING ON THERE IS NOT ONE WORKING ON ECONOMIC POLICY IN THE TREASURY ECONOMIC POLICY IN THE TREASURY OR TRUMP WHITE HOUSE WHO KNOWS OR TRUMP WHITE HOUSE WHO KNOWS AS MUCH ABOUT ECONOMIC POLICY AS AS MUCH ABOUT ECONOMIC POLICY AS THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WHO SAID IN 2008 “THIS SUCKER COULD SAID IN 2008 “THIS SUCKER COULD GO DOWN.” GO DOWN.” IT IS NOT EASY TO BE LESS IT IS NOT EASY TO BE LESS ECONOMICALLY LITERATE IN GEORGE ECONOMICALLY LITERATE IN GEORGE W. BUSH BUT EVERYONE IN TRUMP W. BUSH BUT EVERYONE IN TRUMP WORLD KNOWS LESS ABOUT ECONOMIC WORLD KNOWS LESS ABOUT ECONOMIC POLICY THAN GEORGE W. BUSH POLICY THAN GEORGE W. BUSH INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP’S FAKE INCLUDING DONALD TRUMP’S FAKE ECONOMIC ADVISER LARRY KUDLOW ECONOMIC ADVISER LARRY KUDLOW WHO USED TO PLAY AN ECONOMIST ON WHO USED TO PLAY AN ECONOMIST ON TV BUT DOES NOT HAVE A DEGREE IN TV BUT DOES NOT HAVE A DEGREE IN ECONOMICS. ECONOMICS. HE DOES NOT HAVE A PH.D. IN HE DOES NOT HAVE A PH.D. IN ANYTHING OR A MASTER’S DEGREE. ANYTHING OR A MASTER’S DEGREE. THE MINIMAL REQUIREMENT FOR THE MINIMAL REQUIREMENT FOR CALLING YOURSELF AN ECONOMIST IS CALLING YOURSELF AN ECONOMIST IS A GRADUATE DEGREE IN ECONOMICS. A GRADUATE DEGREE IN ECONOMICS. PREFERABLY A PH.D. PREFERABLY A PH.D. THAT’S THE MINIMUM. THAT’S THE MINIMUM. EVERYTHING LARRY KUDLOW HAS SAID EVERYTHING LARRY KUDLOW HAS SAID WHILE PRETENDING TO BE AN WHILE PRETENDING TO BE AN ECONOMIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIST IN THE WHITE HOUSE CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING LARRY CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING LARRY KUDLOW USED TO SAY WHEN HE WAS KUDLOW USED TO SAY WHEN HE WAS PRETENDING TO BE AN ECONOMIST ON PRETENDING TO BE AN ECONOMIST ON CNBC. CNBC. AND SO THE ECONOMIC BUFFOONERY AND SO THE ECONOMIC BUFFOONERY OF DONALD TRUMP AND INCOMPETENT OF DONALD TRUMP AND INCOMPETENT BAND OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS IS BAND OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS IS CATCHING UP WITH THEM. CATCHING UP WITH THEM. YESTERDAY THE STOCK MARKET YESTERDAY THE STOCK MARKET RALLIED A BIT AFTER DONALD TRUMP RALLIED A BIT AFTER DONALD TRUMP ANNOUNCED THAT HE WAS ONCE AGAIN ANNOUNCED THAT HE WAS ONCE AGAIN DELAYING IMPOSING MORE TARIFFS DELAYING IMPOSING MORE TARIFFS ON CHINA THAT HE HAD BEEN ON CHINA THAT HE HAD BEEN THREATENING TO IMPOSE BUT WHEN THREATENING TO IMPOSE BUT WHEN DONALD TRUMP EXPLAINED WHY HE DONALD TRUMP EXPLAINED WHY HE WAS DELAYING THOSE TARIFFS UNTIL WAS DELAYING THOSE TARIFFS UNTIL AFTER THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING AFTER THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON, EVEN HE COULD NOT FIGURE SEASON, EVEN HE COULD NOT FIGURE OUT A WAY TO CONTINUE TO PRETEND OUT A WAY TO CONTINUE TO PRETEND THAT ANYONE OTHER THAN AMERICAN THAT ANYONE OTHER THAN AMERICAN CONSUMERS ARE ACTUALLY PAYING CONSUMERS ARE ACTUALLY PAYING THE TRUMP TARIFFS. THE TRUMP TARIFFS. THE PRESIDENT SAID YESTERDAY, THE PRESIDENT SAID YESTERDAY, “WE ARE DOING THIS FOR THE “WE ARE DOING THIS FOR THE CHRISTMAS SEASON. CHRISTMAS SEASON. JUST IN CASE SOME OF THE TARIFFS JUST IN CASE SOME OF THE TARIFFS WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON U.S. WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON U.S. CONSUMERS.” CONSUMERS.” “JUST IN CASE.” “JUST IN CASE.” “THE CHRISTMAS SEASON.” “THE CHRISTMAS SEASON.” HE WASN’T FINISHED. HE WASN’T FINISHED. “JUST IN CASE THEY MIGHT HAVE AN “JUST IN CASE THEY MIGHT HAVE AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE, WHAT WE’VE IMPACT ON PEOPLE, WHAT WE’VE DONE IS WE’VE DELAYED IT SO THEY DONE IS WE’VE DELAYED IT SO THEY WON’T BE RELEVANT FOR THE WON’T BE RELEVANT FOR THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON.” CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON.” “AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE.” “AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE.” DONALD TRUMP IS NOT TRYING TO DONALD TRUMP IS NOT TRYING TO PRESERVE THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING PRESERVE THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON IN CHINA. SEASON IN CHINA. HE IS DELAYING HIS TARIFFS SO HE IS DELAYING HIS TARIFFS SO HIS TARIFFS WILL NOT MAKE HIS TARIFFS WILL NOT MAKE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON IN THE CHRISTMAS SHOPPING SEASON IN THE UNITED STATES MUCH MORE EXPENSE UNITED STATES MUCH MORE EXPENSE EXPENSIVE AND HAVE, QUOTE, AN EXPENSIVE AND HAVE, QUOTE, AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE. IMPACT ON PEOPLE. WE’RE NEVER GOING TO SEE THOSE WE’RE NEVER GOING TO SEE THOSE TARIFFS BECAUSE IF DONALD TRUMP TARIFFS BECAUSE IF DONALD TRUMP IS AFRAID OF HIS TARIFFS HAVING IS AFRAID OF HIS TARIFFS HAVING AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE DURING THE AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE DURING THE CHRISTMAS SEASON, HE IS GOING TO CHRISTMAS SEASON, HE IS GOING TO BE VERY AFRAID OF HIS TARIFFS BE VERY AFRAID OF HIS TARIFFS HAVING AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE HAVING AN IMPACT ON PEOPLE DURING ELECTION SEASON WHICH DURING ELECTION SEASON WHICH COMES RIGHT AFTER CHRISTMAS COMES RIGHT AFTER CHRISTMAS SEASON. SEASON. IT WAS OVERLY OPTIMISTIC OF THE IT WAS OVERLY OPTIMISTIC OF THE STOCK MARKET YESTERDAY TO RALLY STOCK MARKET YESTERDAY TO RALLY EVEN A LITTLE BIT OVER DONALD EVEN A LITTLE BIT OVER DONALD TRUMP’S DELAY OF HIS LATEST TRUMP’S DELAY OF HIS LATEST ROUND OF TARIFFS THAT ARE ROUND OF TARIFFS THAT ARE HARMFUL TO AMERICAN CONSUMERS HARMFUL TO AMERICAN CONSUMERS AND THE STOCK MARKET SEEMED TO AND THE STOCK MARKET SEEMED TO REALIZE THAT TODAY. REALIZE THAT TODAY. TODAY, THE STOCK MARKET GOT A TODAY, THE STOCK MARKET GOT A RUDE AWAKENING ABOUT JUST HOW RUDE AWAKENING ABOUT JUST HOW UNSOUND THE NEANDERTHAL ECONOMIC UNSOUND THE NEANDERTHAL ECONOMIC POLICIES OF THE TRUMP WHITE POLICIES OF THE TRUMP WHITE HOUSE ARE FOR AMERICA AND THE HOUSE ARE FOR AMERICA AND THE WORLD, AND IT SHOULD HAVE COME WORLD, AND IT SHOULD HAVE COME AS NO SURPRISE TO WALL STREET. AS NO SURPRISE TO WALL STREET. WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT THE GIANT TRUMP TAX CUTS FOR THE THE GIANT TRUMP TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH DID NOT HAVE LONG-TERM RICH DID NOT HAVE LONG-TERM STIMULATIVE EFFECT FOR THE STIMULATIVE EFFECT FOR THE ECONOMY. ECONOMY. WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT THE GIANT TRUMP TAX CUTS FOR THE THE GIANT TRUMP TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH HAD ALREADY DESTABILIZED RICH HAD ALREADY DESTABILIZED FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FINANCING FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FINANCING CREATING THE LARGEST DEFICIT IN CREATING THE LARGEST DEFICIT IN HISTORY, AND IT’S GETTING HISTORY, AND IT’S GETTING LARGER. LARGER. THIS YEAR’S TRUMP DEFICIT IS THIS YEAR’S TRUMP DEFICIT IS GOING TO BE AT LEAST A TRILLION GOING TO BE AT LEAST A TRILLION DOLLARS. DOLLARS. THAT MEANS THE NATIONAL DEBT IS THAT MEANS THE NATIONAL DEBT IS GOING TO GO UP BY OVER A GOING TO GO UP BY OVER A TRILLION DOLLARS THIS YEAR. TRILLION DOLLARS THIS YEAR. THAT MEANS INTEREST ON THE THAT MEANS INTEREST ON THE NATIONAL DEBT, WHICH IS PAID OUT NATIONAL DEBT, WHICH IS PAID OUT OF THE FEDERAL TREASURY, IS OF THE FEDERAL TREASURY, IS GOING TO SKYROCKET. GOING TO SKYROCKET. WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT WALL STREET ALREADY KNEW THAT TRUMP ECONOMIC POLICIES WERE TRUMP ECONOMIC POLICIES WERE UNSUSTAINABLE, BUT WALL STREET UNSUSTAINABLE, BUT WALL STREET HAS A LONG AND FLAWLESS HISTORY HAS A LONG AND FLAWLESS HISTORY OF BEING BLINDED BY GREED AND OF BEING BLINDED BY GREED AND ALWAYS WAKES UP LATE IN THE ALWAYS WAKES UP LATE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE CRISIS. MIDDLE OF THE CRISIS. AND SO TODAY IT TOOK A NEW SET AND SO TODAY IT TOOK A NEW SET OF NUMBERS TO TERRIFY WALL OF NUMBERS TO TERRIFY WALL STREET AND PUSH THE STOCK MARKET STREET AND PUSH THE STOCK MARKET OFF A CLIFF. OFF A CLIFF. AND THOSE NEW NUMBERS CREATED AND THOSE NEW NUMBERS CREATED SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE SEEN SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE EVERY RECESSION OF THE BEFORE EVERY RECESSION OF THE LAST 60 YEARS. LAST 60 YEARS. EVERY SINGLE TIME WE’VE HAD A EVERY SINGLE TIME WE’VE HAD A RECESSION, BEFORE THAT RECESSION, BEFORE THAT RECESSION, WE SAW AN INVERTED RECESSION, WE SAW AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE. YIELD CURVE. IF YOU’RE HEARING THAT PHRASE IF YOU’RE HEARING THAT PHRASE FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, SO IS FOR THE FIRST TIME TODAY, SO IS DONALD TRUMP. DONALD TRUMP. IN THE BOND MARKET, LONG-TERM IN THE BOND MARKET, LONG-TERM U.S. BONDS ALWAYS PAY HIGHER U.S. BONDS ALWAYS PAY HIGHER INTEREST RATES THAN SHORT-TERM INTEREST RATES THAN SHORT-TERM U.S. BONDS, BUT IN THE RARE U.S. BONDS, BUT IN THE RARE CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE LONG-TERM CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE THE LONG-TERM BONDS OFFER A LOWER INTEREST BONDS OFFER A LOWER INTEREST RATE THAN SHORT-TERM BONDS, THAT RATE THAN SHORT-TERM BONDS, THAT MEANS THE LONG-TERM BONDS WILL MEANS THE LONG-TERM BONDS WILL YIELD LESS OF A RETURN THAN THE YIELD LESS OF A RETURN THAN THE SHORT-TERM BONDS. SHORT-TERM BONDS. AND THAT IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS AN AND THAT IS WHAT IS KNOWN AS AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE, AND NO ONE INVERTED YIELD CURVE, AND NO ONE ON WALL STREET COULD PRETEND ON WALL STREET COULD PRETEND THAT THAT IS ANYTHING BUT A SIGN THAT THAT IS ANYTHING BUT A SIGN OF DISASTER. OF DISASTER. BY THIS AFTERNOON, DONALD TRUMP BY THIS AFTERNOON, DONALD TRUMP ISSUED A TWEET ABOUT THE ISSUED A TWEET ABOUT THE INVERTED YIELD CURVE, PROBABLY INVERTED YIELD CURVE, PROBABLY JUST TO SHOW THAT HE KNOWS THOSE JUST TO SHOW THAT HE KNOWS THOSE WORDS. WORDS. THERE WAS NO INDICATION IN THE THERE WAS NO INDICATION IN THE TWEET THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS ANY TWEET THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS ANY IDEA WHAT AN INVERTED YIELD IDEA WHAT AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE IS, WHAT THOSE WORDS MEAN. CURVE IS, WHAT THOSE WORDS MEAN. HE JUST TWEETED IN THE MIDDLE OF HE JUST TWEETED IN THE MIDDLE OF A TWEET, INCOHERENT TWEET, IN A TWEET, INCOHERENT TWEET, IN CAPITAL LETTERS, “CRAZY INVERTED CAPITAL LETTERS, “CRAZY INVERTED YIELD CURVE!” YIELD CURVE!” JUST WANTED WALL STREET TO KNOW JUST WANTED WALL STREET TO KNOW THAT HE KNEW THAT THERE WAS AN THAT HE KNEW THAT THERE WAS AN INVERTED YIELD CURVE OR SOMEONE INVERTED YIELD CURVE OR SOMEONE HAD TOLD HIM THAT. HAD TOLD HIM THAT. BUT WALL STREET KNOWS JUST HOW BUT WALL STREET KNOWS JUST HOW IGNORANT DONALD TRUMP IS. IGNORANT DONALD TRUMP IS. WALL STREET HAS ALWAYS KNOWN WALL STREET HAS ALWAYS KNOWN THAT. THAT. THEY KNOW THAT BETTER THAN MOST THEY KNOW THAT BETTER THAN MOST OF AMERICA, AND WALL STREET OF AMERICA, AND WALL STREET KNOWS THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE KNOWS THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE RESPONSIBLE ADULT IN THE TRUMP RESPONSIBLE ADULT IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO WHEN THE ADMINISTRATION WHO WHEN THE SITUATION CALLS FOR IT CAN GET SITUATION CALLS FOR IT CAN GET ON HIS KNEES AND PRAY TO NANCY ON HIS KNEES AND PRAY TO NANCY PELOSI. PELOSI. WALL STREET KNOWS THAT THERE IS WALL STREET KNOWS THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE RESPONSIBLE ADULT NOT A SINGLE RESPONSIBLE ADULT IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WHO HAS ANY IDEA WHAT TO PRAY FOR, HAS ANY IDEA WHAT TO PRAY FOR, WHO HAS ANY IDEA WHAT TO DO, WHO HAS ANY IDEA WHAT TO DO, WHAT ACTION TO TAKE, AND WALL WHAT ACTION TO TAKE, AND WALL STREET KNOWS THAT THERE IS NOT A STREET KNOWS THAT THERE IS NOT A SINGLE PERSON IN THE TRUMP SINGLE PERSON IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WITH THE COURAGE ADMINISTRATION WITH THE COURAGE TO BRING THIS PRESIDENT BAD TO BRING THIS PRESIDENT BAD NEWS. NEWS. AND SO NO ONE WILL EVER WALK AND SO NO ONE WILL EVER WALK INTO THE TRUMP OVAL OFFICE AND INTO THE TRUMP OVAL OFFICE AND SAY WHAT GEORGE W. BUSH COULD SAY WHAT GEORGE W. BUSH COULD SAY IN A MOMENT OF CRISIS IN THE

Donald Trump And America’s Waning Global Influence | Deadline | MSNBC


“DEADLINE: WHITE HOUSE” STARTS NOW. NOW.>>>HI, EVERYONE, IT’S 4:00 IN>>>HI, EVERYONE, IT’S 4:00 IN NEW YORK. NEW YORK. WITH WARNING SIGNS FLASHING RED WITH WARNING SIGNS FLASHING RED THAT THE ECONOMY COULD BE HEED THAT THE ECONOMY COULD BE HEED FOR TURMOIL. FOR TURMOIL. THE DOW CLOSING OVER 800 POINTS THE DOW CLOSING OVER 800 POINTS DOWN TODAY AS DONALD TRUMP’S DOWN TODAY AS DONALD TRUMP’S POLITICAL WEAKNESS, FOREIGN POLITICAL WEAKNESS, FOREIGN POLICY CLUELESSNESS AND POLICY CLUELESSNESS AND ABDICATION OF AMERICAN ABDICATION OF AMERICAN LEADERSHIP ON THE WORLD STAGE IS LEADERSHIP ON THE WORLD STAGE IS ON FULL AND STARK DISPLAY. ON FULL AND STARK DISPLAY. THE WORLD’S EYES ON HONG KONG. THE WORLD’S EYES ON HONG KONG. PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS SPILLED PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS SPILLED THE STREETS ON THE FOURTH DAY OF THE STREETS ON THE FOURTH DAY OF ESCALATING TENSIONS THERE. ESCALATING TENSIONS THERE. THE KIND OF STANDOFF AMERICA THE KIND OF STANDOFF AMERICA USED TO TAKE A CLEAR STAND ON USED TO TAKE A CLEAR STAND ON THE SIDE OF PRO-DEMOCRACY THE SIDE OF PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. FORCES. TODAY IT’S UNCLEAR WHERE THE TODAY IT’S UNCLEAR WHERE THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT COMES DOWN. AMERICAN PRESIDENT COMES DOWN. POLITICO REPORTS THIS — POLITICO REPORTS THIS — LAWMAKERS AND GOVERNMENT LAWMAKERS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ACROSS WASHINGTON, OFFICIALS ACROSS WASHINGTON, INCLUDING SON INCLUDING SON INCLUDING SOME OF PRESIDENT’S INCLUDING SOME OF PRESIDENT’S DONALD TRUMP’S ADVISERS ARE DONALD TRUMP’S ADVISERS ARE GROWING INCREASINGLY ALARMED GROWING INCREASINGLY ALARMED WITH WHAT’S DPG ONGOING ON IN HO WITH WHAT’S DPG ONGOING ON IN HO KONG. KONG. MORE THAN THE MOST, INCLUDING MORE THAN THE MOST, INCLUDING TRUMP. TRUMP. UNLIKE MOST PRESIDENTS HE SHOWS UNLIKE MOST PRESIDENTS HE SHOWS FONDNESS FOR AUTHORITARIAN FONDNESS FOR AUTHORITARIAN LEADERS AND LITTLE INTEREST FOR LEADERS AND LITTLE INTEREST FOR PROMOTING HUMAN RIGHTS OR PROMOTING HUMAN RIGHTS OR DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY. “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WRITES, “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WRITES, VIOLENCE CASE LATES AND OLD VIOLENCE CASE LATES AND OLD ANIMOSITIES REKINDLED ACROSS ANIMOSITIES REKINDLED ACROSS ASIA, WASHINGTON HAS CHOSEN ASIA, WASHINGTON HAS CHOSEN INACTION AND GOVERNMENTS ARE INACTION AND GOVERNMENTS ARE IGNORING THE TRUMP IGNORING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S MILD ADMONITION ADMINISTRATION’S MILD ADMONITION AND CALLS FOR CALM. AND CALLS FOR CALM. THE INABILITY OR UNWILLINGNESS THE INABILITY OR UNWILLINGNESS OF WASHINGTON TO HELP DEFUSE THE OF WASHINGTON TO HELP DEFUSE THE FLASH POINTS IS ONE OF THE FLASH POINTS IS ONE OF THE CLEAREST SIGNS YET OF THE CLEAREST SIGNS YET OF THE EROSION OF AMERICAN POWER AND EROSION OF AMERICAN POWER AND GLOBAL INFLUENCE UNDER MR. GLOBAL INFLUENCE UNDER MR. TRUMP, WHO HAS STUCK TO HIS TRUMP, WHO HAS STUCK TO HIS AMERICA FIRST IDEA OF AMERICA FIRST IDEA OF DISENGAGEMENT. DISENGAGEMENT. HERE’S THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION HERE’S THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO WHAT ADDTRATION OFFICIAL TO WHAT ADDTRATION OFFICIAL DESCRIBES TO POLITICO AS, QUOTE, DESCRIBES TO POLITICO AS, QUOTE, AS CLOSE TO A TIANANMEN SQUARE AS CLOSE TO A TIANANMEN SQUARE POTENTIALLY THAT YOU’RE BOGGOING POTENTIALLY THAT YOU’RE BOGGOING GET IN A MODERN AGE. GET IN A MODERN AGE.>>IT’S A VERY TRICKY SITUATION.>>IT’S A VERY TRICKY SITUATION. I THINK IT WILL WORK OUT AND I I THINK IT WILL WORK OUT AND I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR LIBERTY. HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR LIBERTY. I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR EVERYBODY, INCLUDING CHINA. EVERYBODY, INCLUDING CHINA. I WORK IT WORKS OUT EQUALLY. I WORK IT WORKS OUT EQUALLY. I HOPE NOBODY GETS HURT. I HOPE NOBODY GETS HURT. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED.>>VERY TRICKY SITUATION.>>VERY TRICKY SITUATION. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. MY, HOW FAR WE’VE COME FROM A MY, HOW FAR WE’VE COME FROM A SHINING CITY ON A HILL. SHINING CITY ON A HILL. AND YESTERDAY HIS FIRST PUBLIC AND YESTERDAY HIS FIRST PUBLIC EVENT SINCE TENSIONS IN HONG EVENT SINCE TENSIONS IN HONG KONG ERUPTED, THE PRESIDENT HAD KONG ERUPTED, THE PRESIDENT HAD A LOT OF THINGS OTHER THAN THE A LOT OF THINGS OTHER THAN THE PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTEST ON HIS PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTEST ON HIS MIND. MIND.>>I THINK WE’RE LOOKING DID ALL>>I THINK WE’RE LOOKING DID ALL OVER IN OHIO, IN NORTH CAROLINA, OVER IN OHIO, IN NORTH CAROLINA, IN SOUTH CAROLINA, FLORIDA. IN SOUTH CAROLINA, FLORIDA. WE JUST GOT NUMBERS IN FLORIDA. WE JUST GOT NUMBERS IN FLORIDA. LOOKING FANTASTICALLY GOOD. LOOKING FANTASTICALLY GOOD. I GOT SUED ON A THING CALLED I GOT SUED ON A THING CALLED EMOLUMENTS. EMOLUMENTS. EVER HEARD OF IT? EVER HEARD OF IT? NOBODY HEARD OF IT BEFORE. NOBODY HEARD OF IT BEFORE. NOBODY LOOKS AT OBAMA GETTING NOBODY LOOKS AT OBAMA GETTING $16 MILLION FOR A BOOK. $16 MILLION FOR A BOOK. EVEN THOUGH NOBODY IN HISTORY EVEN THOUGH NOBODY IN HISTORY GOT THAT MUCH FOR A BOOK. GOT THAT MUCH FOR A BOOK. THEY SAID DON’T WORRY ABOUT THE THEY SAID DON’T WORRY ABOUT THE RAIN. RAIN. DO WE HAVE UMBRELLAS? DO WE HAVE UMBRELLAS? UMBRELLAS WORK VERY WELL. UMBRELLAS WORK VERY WELL. ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY’RE MADE IN ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY’RE MADE IN AMERICA. AMERICA. I ALWAYS LOVE TRUCKS. I ALWAYS LOVE TRUCKS. I STILL DO. I STILL DO. NOTHING CHANGES. NOTHING CHANGES. SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT BECOME SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT BECOME PRESIDENT BUT NOTHING CHANGES. PRESIDENT BUT NOTHING CHANGES. I STILL LOVE TRUCKS. I STILL LOVE TRUCKS.>>WORLD IS ON FIRE AND TRUMP IS>>WORLD IS ON FIRE AND TRUMP IS MUSING PUBLICLY ABOUT HIS POLL MUSING PUBLICLY ABOUT HIS POLL NUMBERS IN BATTLEGROUND STATES, NUMBERS IN BATTLEGROUND STATES, HIS LOVE OF UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS HIS LOVE OF UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS AND PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BOOK DEAL. AND PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BOOK DEAL. THAT’S WHERE WE START WITH SOME THAT’S WHERE WE START WITH SOME OF OUR FAVORITE REPORTERS AND OF OUR FAVORITE REPORTERS AND FRIEND. FRIEND. THE WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR THE WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR “L.A. TIMES,” RICK STENGEL WHO “L.A. TIMES,” RICK STENGEL WHO WORKED IN PRESIDENT OBAMA’S WORKED IN PRESIDENT OBAMA’S STATE DEPARTMENT AND FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT AND FORMER MANAGING EDITOR AT “TIME” MANAGING EDITOR AT “TIME” MAGAZINE, EUGENE ROBINSON FROM MAGAZINE, EUGENE ROBINSON FROM “THE WASHINGTON POST,” AND ALSO “THE WASHINGTON POST,” AND ALSO JOINING US FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF JOINING US FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VICE PRESIDENTS JOE BIDEN, AL TO VICE PRESIDENTS JOE BIDEN, AL GORE. GORE. I HAVE TO START WITH YOU, RICK I HAVE TO START WITH YOU, RICK STENGEL. STENGEL. SO MUCH OF WHAT TRUMP DOES I SO MUCH OF WHAT TRUMP DOES I WOULD PUT IN THE CATEGORY OF WOULD PUT IN THE CATEGORY OF STUPID HUMAN TRICKS. STUPID HUMAN TRICKS. HE SAYS SUCH DUMB THINS BUT HE SAYS SUCH DUMB THINS BUT THERE ARE NOT LIVES AT STAKE OR THERE ARE NOT LIVES AT STAKE OR CONSEQUENCES. CONSEQUENCES. THIS IS A MOMENT EVERY AMERICAN THIS IS A MOMENT EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT, I WOULD THINK, IF YOU PRESIDENT, I WOULD THINK, IF YOU JUDGE THEIR RECORDS AND THE WAY JUDGE THEIR RECORDS AND THE WAY THEY RESPONDED, WOULD BE THEY RESPONDED, WOULD BE STANDING UP MORE FORCEFULLY IN STANDING UP MORE FORCEFULLY IN THE WAY THE OTHER DEMOCRATS IN THE WAY THE OTHER DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS HAVE BEEN DOING WITH CONGRESS HAVE BEEN DOING WITH THE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. THE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE BACK IN THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE BACK IN THE SITUATION ROOM, NOT GIVING A THE SITUATION ROOM, NOT GIVING A CAMPAIGN RALLY. CAMPAIGN RALLY.>>YES, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL>>YES, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS TALK ABOUT FOREIGN SCIENTISTS TALK ABOUT FOREIGN POLICY ALONG A CONTINUUM BETWEEN POLICY ALONG A CONTINUUM BETWEEN REALISM AND IDEALISM. REALISM AND IDEALISM. JOHN ADAMS WAS THE ORIGINAL JOHN ADAMS WAS THE ORIGINAL REALIST. REALIST. WE DON’T GO IN SEARCH OF WE DON’T GO IN SEARCH OF MONSTERS THAT DESTROY. MONSTERS THAT DESTROY. EVER SINCE BILL WILSON WAS EVER SINCE BILL WILSON WAS PRESIDENT, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT HAD TO INCORPORATE PRESIDENT HAD TO INCORPORATE IDEALISM IN THEIR FOREIGN IDEALISM IN THEIR FOREIGN POLICY. POLICY. SO WHEN SOMETHING IS HAPPENING SO WHEN SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN HONG KONG, EVERY AMERICAN IN HONG KONG, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT UNTIL NOW WOULD SAY WE PRESIDENT UNTIL NOW WOULD SAY WE SIDE WITH THE PEOPLE OF HONG SIDE WITH THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG IN THE PURSUIT OF LIBERTY KONG IN THE PURSUIT OF LIBERTY AND HUMAN RIGHTS. AND HUMAN RIGHTS. THAT WAS THE CITY ON A HILL THAT THAT WAS THE CITY ON A HILL THAT AMERICA REPRESENTED FOR PEOPLE AMERICA REPRESENTED FOR PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD. AROUND THE WORLD. AS MY OLD BOSS JOHN KERRY USED AS MY OLD BOSS JOHN KERRY USED TO SAY, PEOPLE DON’T WAKE UP AT TO SAY, PEOPLE DON’T WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRIED THAT WE’RE NIGHT WORRIED THAT WE’RE INVOLVED. INVOLVED. THEY WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRYING THEY WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRYING WE’RE NOT INVOLVED. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED. IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND WHEREVER WE LEAVE AND WITHDRAW, WHEREVER WE LEAVE AND WITHDRAW, AS WE ARE DOING NOW, THEY’RE AS WE ARE DOING NOW, THEY’RE NEVER REPLACED BY A BETTER NEVER REPLACED BY A BETTER ACTOR. ACTOR.>>LET ME STOP YOU.>>LET ME STOP YOU. IS THAT STILL TRUE? IS THAT STILL TRUE?>>I THINK IT IS TRUE.>>I THINK IT IS TRUE. THERE ARE NO OTHER ACTORS, NOT THERE ARE NO OTHER ACTORS, NOT BETTER ACTS. BETTER ACTS. WHEN WILBUR ROSS SAID IT’S AN WHEN WILBUR ROSS SAID IT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER THE FOREIGN INTERNAL MATTER THE FOREIGN MINISTER OF RUSSIA AND CHINA MINISTER OF RUSSIA AND CHINA WERE DANCING UP AND DOWN. WERE DANCING UP AND DOWN. WHAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT, BECAUSE WHAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT, BECAUSE TRUMP DOESN’T UNDERSTAND T. HE’S TRUMP DOESN’T UNDERSTAND T. HE’S MOVING US TO A SPHERE OF MOVING US TO A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE WORLD. INFLUENCE WORLD. THAT’S THE 19th CENTURY WHERE NO THAT’S THE 19th CENTURY WHERE NO MATTER WHAT YOU DID WAS ODIOUS MATTER WHAT YOU DID WAS ODIOUS OR AGGRESSIVE, IN YOUR SPHERE OF OR AGGRESSIVE, IN YOUR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, WE’RE NOT GOING TO INFLUENCE, WE’RE NOT GOING TO MESS IT. MESS IT. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT. THAT’S TRUMP AND WHAT RUSSIA AND THAT’S TRUMP AND WHAT RUSSIA AND CHINA WANT AND WILBUR ROSS SAY CHINA WANT AND WILBUR ROSS SAY WE DO TODAY. WE DO TODAY. EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT SINCE EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT SINCE WILSON WAS HAVING A HEART ATTACK WILSON WAS HAVING A HEART ATTACK TODAY AND IT’S NOT WHAT AMERICA TODAY AND IT’S NOT WHAT AMERICA SHOULD REPRESENT AROUND THE SHOULD REPRESENT AROUND THE WORLD. WORLD. THERE AND IT ENDS UP IN WORLD THERE AND IT ENDS UP IN WORLD WAR I, WHERE IT HAD. WAR I, WHERE IT HAD. AND IN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, AND IN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, AS YOU SAID, THE ADMINISTRATION AS YOU SAID, THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD HAVE DEVELOPED A RESPONSE. WOULD HAVE DEVELOPED A RESPONSE. FIRST OF ALL, THERE WOULD HAVE FIRST OF ALL, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN DAILY WHITE HOUSE BEEN DAILY WHITE HOUSE BRIEFINGS. BRIEFINGS. WITH THE BRIEFINGS THE PRESS WITH THE BRIEFINGS THE PRESS SECRETARY WOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED SECRETARY WOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED ABOUT THE HONG KONG ABOUT THE HONG KONG DEMONSTRATIONS. DEMONSTRATIONS. THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A CAREFULLY WRITTEN AND MODULATED CAREFULLY WRITTEN AND MODULATED STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF HUMAN STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. RIGHTS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROCESS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROCESS. EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT IT WAS, WHAT THE IT WAS, WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION WAS. ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION WAS. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN STATED BY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN STATED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY OR PERHAPS THE PRESS SECRETARY OR PERHAPS BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. THIS IS JUST, TWEET THIS, BABBLE THIS IS JUST, TWEET THIS, BABBLE THAT. THAT. IT’S INCREDIBLE. IT’S INCREDIBLE.>>IT’S WORSE THAN THAT.>>IT’S WORSE THAN THAT. THE REPORTING THAT I CITED SITES THE REPORTING THAT I CITED SITES POMPEO, OUR COUNTRY’S SECRETARY POMPEO, OUR COUNTRY’S SECRETARY OF STATE, WHO SHOULD BE IF OF STATE, WHO SHOULD BE IF NOTHING ELSE A SAFETY NET FOR NOTHING ELSE A SAFETY NET FOR OTHER WORLD LEADERS AND OTHER WORLD LEADERS AND COUNTRIES IN CRISIS, HE WAS, COUNTRIES IN CRISIS, HE WAS, QUOTE, AFRAID TO GET AHEAD OF QUOTE, AFRAID TO GET AHEAD OF TRUMP. TRUMP. IT’S NOT EVEN THAT. IT’S NOT EVEN THAT. IT’S ACCOMMODATING TRUMP’S IT’S ACCOMMODATING TRUMP’S AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AS THE OR AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AS THE OR THING SUGGESTS. THING SUGGESTS.>>HE HAS AN AFFINITY FOR>>HE HAS AN AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AND SEEMS NOT TO CARE DICTATORS AND SEEMS NOT TO CARE IF JOHNNY COMES IN AND MOWS DOWN IF JOHNNY COMES IN AND MOWS DOWN THE PROTESTERS AND GENERALLY THE PROTESTERS AND GENERALLY THINK THAT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER THINK THAT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER FOR CHINA TO DEAL WITH HOWEVER FOR CHINA TO DEAL WITH HOWEVER IT CHOOSES. IT CHOOSES. IT’S A SCARY THING TO THINK IT’S A SCARY THING TO THINK THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BELIEVES AND TENDS UNITED STATES BELIEVES AND TENDS TO ACT ON BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE TO ACT ON BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE WHAT HE BELIEVES. WHAT HE BELIEVES.>>ELI, I’M SO RELUCTANT TO SORT>>ELI, I’M SO RELUCTANT TO SORT OF ASKING QUESTIONS IN THE FRAME OF ASKING QUESTIONS IN THE FRAME OF THE LOWERING OF THE BAR BUT OF THE LOWERING OF THE BAR BUT I’M GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. I’M GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. YESTERDAY OSTENSIBLY AN EVENT YESTERDAY OSTENSIBLY AN EVENT ABOUT ENERGY, CLEARLY HE’S NOT ABOUT ENERGY, CLEARLY HE’S NOT CAPABLE OF DOING ANYTHING AN CAPABLE OF DOING ANYTHING AN EVENT IS OSTENSIBLY ABOUT. EVENT IS OSTENSIBLY ABOUT. HE STANDS UP AND OPENS HIS MOUTH HE STANDS UP AND OPENS HIS MOUTH AND WHAT STILL IS VOWED IS AND WHAT STILL IS VOWED IS WHAT’S ON HIS MIND, POLL WHAT’S ON HIS MIND, POLL NUMBERS, OBAMA’S BIG BOOK DEAL, NUMBERS, OBAMA’S BIG BOOK DEAL, UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS. UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS. IS ANYTHING ELSE — AM I MISSING IS ANYTHING ELSE — AM I MISSING ANYTHING? ANYTHING? IS ANYTHING HAPPENING BACK AT IS ANYTHING HAPPENING BACK AT THE WHITE HOUSE? THE WHITE HOUSE?>>YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALKED>>YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT EVERYBODY THAT WORKS IN ABOUT EVERYBODY THAT WORKS IN THE BUILDING WHO IS JUST THERE THE BUILDING WHO IS JUST THERE TO SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE TO SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. THEY RECOGNIZE THAT AND THAT THEY RECOGNIZE THAT AND THAT MEANS NOT CONFLICTING WITH HIM MEANS NOT CONFLICTING WITH HIM OR GIVING HIM ADVICE OR OR GIVING HIM ADVICE OR CONSTRUCTION HE CONSTRUCTION HE INSTRUCTION HE DOESN’T WANT TO INSTRUCTION HE DOESN’T WANT TO HEAR. HEAR. RACKS BY THE RACKS BY THE REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON ECONOMY AND MANUFACTURING, AS ECONOMY AND MANUFACTURING, AS BELIEVABLE AS INFRASTRUCTURE BELIEVABLE AS INFRASTRUCTURE WHEN THEY THREW THAT TERMINOLOGY WHEN THEY THREW THAT TERMINOLOGY AROUND. AROUND. BUT THAT’S HOW THE PRESIDENT IS, BUT THAT’S HOW THE PRESIDENT IS, HIS STREAM OF CONSCIOUS. HIS STREAM OF CONSCIOUS. IT’S ABOUT HIM. IT’S ABOUT HIM. LAST WEEK I WAS ON AIR FORCE ONE LAST WEEK I WAS ON AIR FORCE ONE IN THE POOL AND WE WENT TO IN THE POOL AND WE WENT TO DAYTON AND EL PASO WITH THE DAYTON AND EL PASO WITH THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. WE DIDN’T SEE A LOT OF HIM UNTIL WE DIDN’T SEE A LOT OF HIM UNTIL THE END BUT YOU COULD JUST TELL THE END BUT YOU COULD JUST TELL AFTER THE FACT WHAT HE SAID TO AFTER THE FACT WHAT HE SAID TO US ON THE PLANE OFF THE RECORD US ON THE PLANE OFF THE RECORD AND FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AND FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND REPORTING THAT’S COME OUT AT THE REPORTING THAT’S COME OUT AT THE END THAT WAS A DAY AND WHAT WAS END THAT WAS A DAY AND WHAT WAS ON THE PRESIDENT’S MIND WAS NOT ON THE PRESIDENT’S MIND WAS NOT CONSOLING THE COMMUNITY AS MUCH CONSOLING THE COMMUNITY AS MUCH AS HOW HE WAS RECEIVED BY THE AS HOW HE WAS RECEIVED BY THE COMMUNITIES. COMMUNITIES. THAT’S WHAT HE TALKED ABOUT. THAT’S WHAT HE TALKED ABOUT. THAT’S THE FIRST THING HE SAID THAT’S THE FIRST THING HE SAID WHEN ASKED BY OUR REPORTER, WHAT WHEN ASKED BY OUR REPORTER, WHAT HAS TODAY BEEN LIKE? HAS TODAY BEEN LIKE? THEY HAVE A TREMENDOUS RESPECT THEY HAVE A TREMENDOUS RESPECT FOR THE PRESIDENCY. FOR THE PRESIDENCY. HE’S ALWAYS THE CENTRAL HE’S ALWAYS THE CENTRAL CHARACTER IN HIS DRAMA HE’S CHARACTER IN HIS DRAMA HE’S TALKING ABOUT AND THAT’S THE TALKING ABOUT AND THAT’S THE SAME WAY HE APPROACHES FOREIGN SAME WAY HE APPROACHES FOREIGN POLICY. POLICY. THERE’S A CRISIS IN KASHMIR THERE’S A CRISIS IN KASHMIR BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN SIMMERING AND THE PRESIDENT SIMMERING AND THE PRESIDENT THINKS HE CAN MODERATE THIS. THINKS HE CAN MODERATE THIS. HE THINKS IF HE’S INVOLVED, CAN HE THINKS IF HE’S INVOLVED, CAN HE SOLVE ANY GLOBAL PROBLEM, HE SOLVE ANY GLOBAL PROBLEM, WHETHER IT’S TENSIONS IN THAT WHETHER IT’S TENSIONS IN THAT REGION. REGION. WHETHER IT’S GETTING KIM JONG-UN WHETHER IT’S GETTING KIM JONG-UN TO GIVE UP HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM. TO GIVE UP HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM. HE BELIEVES IF HE’S INVOLVED, HE HE BELIEVES IF HE’S INVOLVED, HE CAN FIX IT LIKE TRADE WARS HE CAN FIX IT LIKE TRADE WARS HE SAID ARE GOOD AND EASY TO WIN. SAID ARE GOOD AND EASY TO WIN. IF HE’S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, IF HE’S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, HE DOESN’T SEEM THAT INTERESTED HE DOESN’T SEEM THAT INTERESTED OR CONCERNED. OR CONCERNED. YESTERDAY HE’S SAYING, WHY ARE YESTERDAY HE’S SAYING, WHY ARE THEY BLAMING ME FOR THE CRISIS THEY BLAMING ME FOR THE CRISIS IN HONG KONG? IN HONG KONG? HE’S FORGETTING JUST A FEW WEEKS HE’S FORGETTING JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO IN LATE JULY HE SPOKE ABOUT AGO IN LATE JULY HE SPOKE ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE AND SAID WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE AND SAID CHINA’S GONE EASY ON THEM. CHINA’S GONE EASY ON THEM. CHINA COULD DO A LOT MORE. CHINA COULD DO A LOT MORE. THEY COULD BE A LOT STRONGER. THEY COULD BE A LOT STRONGER. WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AS A WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AS A TACIT GREEN LIGHT TO XI TO GO IN TACIT GREEN LIGHT TO XI TO GO IN FORCEFULLY TO THESE FORCEFULLY TO THESE PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS AND PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS AND THAT’S A WORLD VIEW OF TRUMP’S THAT’S A WORLD VIEW OF TRUMP’S WE’VE SEEN THAT’S CONSISTENT WE’VE SEEN THAT’S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HE SAID FOR YEARS WITH WHAT HE SAID FOR YEARS ABOUT AUTOCRATS AND STRENGTH, ABOUT AUTOCRATS AND STRENGTH, HIS IDEA OF STRENGTH. HIS IDEA OF STRENGTH. IT’S HARD POWER. IT’S HARD POWER. DOESN’T BELIEVE IN SOFT POWER, DOESN’T BELIEVE IN SOFT POWER, HE BELIEVES IN HARD POWER. HE BELIEVES IN HARD POWER.>>RON KLAIN, SOMEBODY RAN>>RON KLAIN, SOMEBODY RAN AGAINST DONALD TRUMP IN THE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP IN THE PRIMARIES AND SAID THE MOMENT HE PRIMARIES AND SAID THE MOMENT HE WAS MOST VULNERABLE WHEN HE WAS WAS MOST VULNERABLE WHEN HE WAS OUTED TO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE OUTED TO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR TRY ADWAS. NUCLEAR TRY ADWAS. TO THE DEGREE HE HAS NO SHAME ON TO THE DEGREE HE HAS NO SHAME ON HIS STUNNING KNOWLEDGE ON HIS STUNNING KNOWLEDGE ON FOREIGN POLICY, WHAT IS IT — BE FOREIGN POLICY, WHAT IS IT — BE TAKE YOUR SOURCE’S WORDS FOR TAKE YOUR SOURCE’S WORDS FOR THAT. THAT. THIS IS SOMEONE DEFEATED BY THIS IS SOMEONE DEFEATED BY DONALD TRUMP AND EXAMINING THE DONALD TRUMP AND EXAMINING THE MOLTS TRUMP IS MOST VULNERABLE, MOLTS TRUMP IS MOST VULNERABLE, I ACCEPT THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS I ACCEPT THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS ONE OF THEM. ONE OF THEM. IF YOU TAKE THAT AND TAKE ALL OF IF YOU TAKE THAT AND TAKE ALL OF THE REPORTING ABOUT BASICALLY THE REPORTING ABOUT BASICALLY EVERY INSULT’S ALREADY BEEN EVERY INSULT’S ALREADY BEEN LOBBED AT DONALD TRUMP, AND HE’S LOBBED AT DONALD TRUMP, AND HE’S STILL STANDING. STILL STANDING. YOU KNOW HAVE PRO-DEMOCRACY YOU KNOW HAVE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES AS EVERYONE HAS SAID, ANY FORCES AS EVERYONE HAS SAID, ANY OTHER AMERICAN WOULD BE STANDING OTHER AMERICAN WOULD BE STANDING UP FOR BECAUSE LIVES ARE ON THE UP FOR BECAUSE LIVES ARE ON THE LINE. LINE. NOT JUST IN FOREIGN POLICY THAT NOT JUST IN FOREIGN POLICY THAT AFFECT OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT AFFECT OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT LIVES OF THE PRO DEMOCRACY LIVES OF THE PRO DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS. PROTESTERS. WHAT WOULD YOU ADVISE ANY WHAT WOULD YOU ADVISE ANY CRITIC, NOT JUST A DEMOCRAT, BUT CRITIC, NOT JUST A DEMOCRAT, BUT ANY CRITIC OF DONALD TRUMP’S ANY CRITIC OF DONALD TRUMP’S CONDUCT OVER THE LAST FOUR DAYS CONDUCT OVER THE LAST FOUR DAYS TO DO AND SAY IN. TO DO AND SAY IN.>>LOOK, NICOLLE, IT LOCKS LIKE>>LOOK, NICOLLE, IT LOCKS LIKE THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NO THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NO LONGER JUST THE KBUN CONTROLGUN LONGER JUST THE KBUN CONTROLGUN POLICY OF THE TRUMP POLICY OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. ADMINISTRATION. HE’S STANDING ON THE TARMAC HE’S STANDING ON THE TARMAC SAYING I HOPE IT WORKS OUT OKAY, SAYING I HOPE IT WORKS OUT OKAY, PEACEFUL AND WHATEVER. PEACEFUL AND WHATEVER. FOR HIS CRITICS, REPUBLICAN FOR HIS CRITICS, REPUBLICAN CRITICS AND DEMOCRATIC CRITICS, CRITICS AND DEMOCRATIC CRITICS, AN AMERICA ABSENT FROM THE WORLD AN AMERICA ABSENT FROM THE WORLD STAGE AND ABSENT FOR STANDING STAGE AND ABSENT FOR STANDING FROM DEMOCRACY GOES TO RICK’S FROM DEMOCRACY GOES TO RICK’S POINT OF IDEALISM AND REALISM. POINT OF IDEALISM AND REALISM. THERE’S AN IDEALISTIC ELEMENT, THERE’S AN IDEALISTIC ELEMENT, AMERICANS STANDING FOR DEMOCRACY AMERICANS STANDING FOR DEMOCRACY BUT REALISTIC ELEMENT. BUT REALISTIC ELEMENT. ONE COUNTRY’S GOING TO WRITE THE ONE COUNTRY’S GOING TO WRITE THE RULES FOR THE 21st CENTURY, RULES FOR THE 21st CENTURY, EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR CHINA. CHINA. IF AMERICA DOESN’T LEAN FORWARD, IF AMERICA DOESN’T LEAN FORWARD, WE ARE BASICALLY CEDING THE WE ARE BASICALLY CEDING THE ENTIRE PACIFIC TO CHINA. ENTIRE PACIFIC TO CHINA. THAT’S NOT ONLY BAD FOR THAT’S NOT ONLY BAD FOR DEMOCRACY, IT’S BAD FOR OUR DEMOCRACY, IT’S BAD FOR OUR ALLIES THERE AND COUNTRIES LIKE ALLIES THERE AND COUNTRIES LIKE SOUTH KOREAN AND JAPAN, IT’S BAD SOUTH KOREAN AND JAPAN, IT’S BAD FOR AMERICAN INTERESTS AND TRADE FOR AMERICAN INTERESTS AND TRADE AND JOBS. AND JOBS. I THINK WHAT TRUMP’S CRITICS I THINK WHAT TRUMP’S CRITICS HAVE TO HIT ON IS THE PASS HAVE TO HIT ON IS THE PASS SIEVETY, IGNORANCE, INDIFFERENCE SIEVETY, IGNORANCE, INDIFFERENCE BY TRUMP THAT IS PUTTING OUR BY TRUMP THAT IS PUTTING OUR IDEALS AT RISK, ECONOMY AT RISK IDEALS AT RISK, ECONOMY AT RISK AND NATIONAL SECURITY AT RISK. AND NATIONAL SECURITY AT RISK. AND I THINK THAT’S THE CRITIQUE AND I THINK THAT’S THE CRITIQUE THAT NEEDS TO COME AT TRUMP. THAT NEEDS TO COME AT TRUMP.>>ELISE, LET ME HAVE YOU TEE UP>>ELISE, LET ME HAVE YOU TEE UP ON ALL OF THIS AND GIVE YOU ONE ON ALL OF THIS AND GIVE YOU ONE MORE REPORTING FROM “THE NEW MORE REPORTING FROM “THE NEW YORK TIMES.” YORK TIMES.” WANING OF AMERICAN POWER TRUMP WANING OF AMERICAN POWER TRUMP STRUGGLES OF AN ASIA CRISIS. STRUGGLES OF AN ASIA CRISIS. BY FAILING TO ACT AND ASSUME BY FAILING TO ACT AND ASSUME LEADERSHIP IN THE REGION, TRUMP LEADERSHIP IN THE REGION, TRUMP IS ALLOWING LONG, COMPLICATED IS ALLOWING LONG, COMPLICATED HISTORY TO FALL BACK AS HISTORY TO FALL BACK AS TRADITIONAL RIVALS. TRADITIONAL RIVALS. THE MORE THEY FEEL UNITED STATES THE MORE THEY FEEL UNITED STATES IS AN UNRELIABLE PARTNER, THE IS AN UNRELIABLE PARTNER, THE MORE THEY WILL DEFEND MORE THEY WILL DEFEND THEMSELVES. THEMSELVES. I’M HEARING GROWING CALLS IN I’M HEARING GROWING CALLS IN SOUTH KOREA FOR THEIR OWN SOUTH KOREA FOR THEIR OWN NUCLEAR WEAPONS. NUCLEAR WEAPONS. THAT IS AN EXPERT AT THE WILSON THAT IS AN EXPERT AT THE WILSON CENTER. CENTER. DO YOU AGREE? DO YOU AGREE?>>I DO.>>I DO. AND I THINK THAT GOES TO RON’S AND I THINK THAT GOES TO RON’S POINT. POINT. IT’S GOOD TO TALK ABOUT AMERICAN IT’S GOOD TO TALK ABOUT AMERICAN VALUES AND AMERICAN IDEALS BUT VALUES AND AMERICAN IDEALS BUT THIS IS BECOMING AN ISSUE OF THIS IS BECOMING AN ISSUE OF NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE U.S. WHEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ARE WHEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ARE FIGHTING OVER KASHMIR, NOW PACK FIGHTING OVER KASHMIR, NOW PACK STAJ STAJ STAN STAN PAKISTAN IS THREATENING ITS PAKISTAN IS THREATENING ITS SUPPORT FOR THE AFGHAN DEAL. SUPPORT FOR THE AFGHAN DEAL. NOW JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA ARE NOW JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA ARE REKINDLING THEIR OLD TRADE REKINDLING THEIR OLD TRADE RIVALRIES. RIVALRIES. THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT ENDING AN THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT ENDING AN YENS PARTNER SHN THAT THE U.S. YENS PARTNER SHN THAT THE U.S. NEEDS FOR SURVEILLANCE ON NORTH NEEDS FOR SURVEILLANCE ON NORTH KOREA. KOREA. YOU LOOK AROUND AND NORTH KOREA YOU LOOK AROUND AND NORTH KOREA TESTED FIVE SHORT-RANGE MISSILES TESTED FIVE SHORT-RANGE MISSILES AND PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE TALKING AND PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW HIM AND KIM JONG-UN ABOUT HOW HIM AND KIM JONG-UN LOVE EACH OTHER. LOVE EACH OTHER. IT’S NOT ONLY LACK OF INTEREST IT’S NOT ONLY LACK OF INTEREST AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT THE AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT THE MORE THE PRESIDENT RETREATS, MORE THE PRESIDENT RETREATS, OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA AND CHINA, THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT CHINA, THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT ARE GOING TO FILL THAT VACUUM. ARE GOING TO FILL THAT VACUUM. THEY’RE NOT GOING TO DO IT IN A THEY’RE NOT GOING TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT THE U.S. WANTS. WAY THAT THE U.S. WANTS. PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES HAVE SOME PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES HAVE SOME ADVISERS, YOU KNOW, MATT ADVISERS, YOU KNOW, MATT POTTINGER ON ASIA OR EVEN JOHN POTTINGER ON ASIA OR EVEN JOHN BOLTON, WHO BEHIND THE SCENES BOLTON, WHO BEHIND THE SCENES ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME MANEUVERS. MANEUVERS. BUT WHEN YOU FAIL TO SEE SOME BUT WHEN YOU FAIL TO SEE SOME KIND OF HIGH-LEVEL INTEREST AND KIND OF HIGH-LEVEL INTEREST AND ENGAGEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT, A ENGAGEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT, A WARNING, FOR INSTANCE TO CHINA, WARNING, FOR INSTANCE TO CHINA, HE’S SAYING THAT HE HOPES NO ONE HE’S SAYING THAT HE HOPES NO ONE GETS KILLED, BUT HE’S NOT MAKING GETS KILLED, BUT HE’S NOT MAKING A STARK WARNING TO CHINA, YOU A STARK WARNING TO CHINA, YOU ABOUT BETTER STAND DOWN. ABOUT BETTER STAND DOWN. INSTEAD HE’S SAYING I HOPE THIS INSTEAD HE’S SAYING I HOPE THIS WORKS OUT FOR CHINA. WORKS OUT FOR CHINA. HE DOES SEEM A LITTLE MORE HE DOES SEEM A LITTLE MORE INTERESTED IN THE TRADE DEAL INTERESTED IN THE TRADE DEAL WITH CHINA THAN CRACKING DOWN ON WITH CHINA THAN CRACKING DOWN ON HUMAN RIGHTS. HUMAN RIGHTS. I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PRESIDENT FEELS VULNERABLE ABOUT PRESIDENT FEELS VULNERABLE ABOUT HIS LACK OF FOREIGN POLICY HIS LACK OF FOREIGN POLICY GRAVITAS AND BE DIPLOMATIC ABOUT GRAVITAS AND BE DIPLOMATIC ABOUT IT, IF THERE’S A SERIOUS IT, IF THERE’S A SERIOUS TIANANMEN-TYPE CRACKDOWN IN HONG TIANANMEN-TYPE CRACKDOWN IN HONG KONG, I THINK THAT COULD BE ONE KONG, I THINK THAT COULD BE ONE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S STINGING OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S STINGING FOREIGN POLICY LEGACIES. FOREIGN POLICY LEGACIES. SO I THINK THAT’S ONE OF THE SO I THINK THAT’S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT HIS ADVISERS AROUND REASONS THAT HIS ADVISERS AROUND HIM ARE VERY CONCERNED. HIM ARE VERY CONCERNED.>>AND, LISTEN, I DON’T WANT TO>>AND, LISTEN, I DON’T WANT TO HOLD THE POSITION, RICK, THAT HOLD THE POSITION, RICK, THAT HAVING A LEARNING CURVE IS A HAVING A LEARNING CURVE IS A POLITICAL VULNERABILITY. POLITICAL VULNERABILITY. WE WOULD NEVER NOMINATE OR ELECT WE WOULD NEVER NOMINATE OR ELECT GOVERNORS. GOVERNORS. WE WOULD NOT ELECT HALF OF THE WE WOULD NOT ELECT HALF OF THE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS AND WE WOULD PEOPLE IN CONGRESS AND WE WOULD NOT HAVE ELECTED DONALD TRUMP. NOT HAVE ELECTED DONALD TRUMP. BUT I GUESS THE TOXICITY IS BUT I GUESS THE TOXICITY IS AROUND THE COMBINATION, THE AROUND THE COMBINATION, THE IMPULSE AND INSTINCT AS A HUMAN IMPULSE AND INSTINCT AS A HUMAN BEING ARE TOLD AUTOCRACYth BEING ARE TOLD AUTOCRACYth THERE’S NO INTELLECTUAL THERE’S NO INTELLECTUAL CURIOSITY AND NO STAFF. CURIOSITY AND NO STAFF. I REMEMBER SAYING — I THINK I REMEMBER SAYING — I THINK SOME OF YOU WERE HERE THE DAY SOME OF YOU WERE HERE THE DAY MATTIS RESIGNED OVER HIS MATTIS RESIGNED OVER HIS DISAGREEMENTS WITH DONALD TRUMP DISAGREEMENTS WITH DONALD TRUMP ON SYRIA POLICY, IT WAS A ON SYRIA POLICY, IT WAS A DANGEROUS DAY NOT JUST FOR THIS DANGEROUS DAY NOT JUST FOR THIS COUNTRY BUT FOR THE WORLD. COUNTRY BUT FOR THE WORLD. HR McMASTER AND DINA POWELL USED HR McMASTER AND DINA POWELL USED TO BE IN THE SIT ROOM EVERY DAY. TO BE IN THE SIT ROOM EVERY DAY. WHO IS EVEN THERE? WHO IS EVEN THERE?>>THE LEARNING CURVE FOR HIM IS>>THE LEARNING CURVE FOR HIM IS JUST THE LEARNING CURVE ABOUT JUST THE LEARNING CURVE ABOUT AMERICAN VALUES. AMERICAN VALUES. HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO WOODROW HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO WOODROW WILSON IS. WILSON IS. HE DOESN’T KNOW WE HAVE HE DOESN’T KNOW WE HAVE HISTORICALLY STOOD UP FOR HUMAN HISTORICALLY STOOD UP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. RIGHTS. I REMEMBER ONCE HAVING A MEETING I REMEMBER ONCE HAVING A MEETING WITH AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN FOREIGN WITH AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN FOREIGN MINISTER — MINISTER –>>DO YOU THINK HE KNOWS HOW>>DO YOU THINK HE KNOWS HOW MANY DEMOCRACIES THERE ARE IN MANY DEMOCRACIES THERE ARE IN THE WORLD? THE WORLD?>>NO, I DON’T THINK HE EVEN>>NO, I DON’T THINK HE EVEN KNOWS DEMOCRACIES ARE IN KNOWS DEMOCRACIES ARE IN RETREAT. RETREAT. YOU LOOK AT THE LAST TEN YEARS, YOU LOOK AT THE LAST TEN YEARS, FEWER COUNTRIES QUALIFY AS A FEWER COUNTRIES QUALIFY AS A DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY. AND THERE’S THIS RISE OF AND THERE’S THIS RISE OF AUTOCRACY, WHICH HE IS AIDING AUTOCRACY, WHICH HE IS AIDING AND ABETTING. AND ABETTING. THAT TO ME IS THE WORST GLOBAL THAT TO ME IS THE WORST GLOBAL AFFAIR AT ALL. AFFAIR AT ALL. I HAD AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRIME I HAD AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRIME MINISTER S TO ME, YOU COME AND MINISTER S TO ME, YOU COME AND TALK TO ME ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS TALK TO ME ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE CHINESE COME AND SAY I AND THE CHINESE COME AND SAY I WILL BUILD YOU A SUPER HIGHWAY. WILL BUILD YOU A SUPER HIGHWAY. WHO AM I GOING TO LISTEN TO? WHO AM I GOING TO LISTEN TO? OF COURSE YOU’RE GOING TO LISTEN OF COURSE YOU’RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THE CHINESE. TO THE CHINESE. BUT THOSE PEOPLE IN HONG KONG, BUT THOSE PEOPLE IN HONG KONG, THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO AN THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT SAYING WE AMERICAN PRESIDENT SAYING WE SUPPORT YOUR ASPIRATIONS FOR SUPPORT YOUR ASPIRATIONS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH. PRESS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH. THAT IS THE THING THAT AMERICAN THAT IS THE THING THAT AMERICAN PRESIDENTS HAVE ALWAYS STOOD FOR PRESIDENTS HAVE ALWAYS STOOD FOR AND DONALD TRUMP DOES NOT GET AND DONALD TRUMP DOES NOT GET THAT AND HAS NEVER LEARNED IT. THAT AND HAS NEVER LEARNED IT.>>LISTEN, THAT’S THE OTHER>>LISTEN, THAT’S THE OTHER THING TOO, YOU ASKED WHERE IS THING TOO, YOU ASKED WHERE IS THE STAFF? THE STAFF? WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE IF WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE IF THEY WERE THERE? THEY WERE THERE? I HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF THIS I HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF THIS ADMINISTRATION FOR IS ADMINISTRATION FOR IS HOLLOWNESS, THE FACT THEY’RE NOT HOLLOWNESS, THE FACT THEY’RE NOT CAPABLE, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AT CAPABLE, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AT ALL LEVELS GOING DOWN AND CAN ALL LEVELS GOING DOWN AND CAN GET STUFF DONE. GET STUFF DONE. BUT THE FACT IS THE PRESIDENT — BUT THE FACT IS THE PRESIDENT — MIKE POMPEO IS NOT A STUPID MIKE POMPEO IS NOT A STUPID PERFECT. PERFECT. I KNOW MIKE POMPEO. I KNOW MIKE POMPEO. HE’S NOT A STUPID PERSON AT ALL. HE’S NOT A STUPID PERSON AT ALL. HE UNDERSTANDS THE HISTORY. HE UNDERSTANDS THE HISTORY. AND SO — AS YOU SAID, HE WON’T AND SO — AS YOU SAID, HE WON’T GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. BECAUSE IF HE SAYS SOMETHING, IT BECAUSE IF HE SAYS SOMETHING, IT COULD BE COUNTERED BY TWEET FIVE COULD BE COUNTERED BY TWEET FIVE MINUTES LATER. MINUTES LATER. IT IS THIS DYSTOPIAN AND OTHER IT IS THIS DYSTOPIAN AND OTHER UNIVERSE WE’VE FALLEN INTO. UNIVERSE WE’VE FALLEN INTO. ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WOULD BE EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WOULD BE WAITING TO HEAR WHAT’S THE WAITING TO HEAR WHAT’S THE UNITED STATES IS SAYING ABOUT UNITED STATES IS SAYING ABOUT HONG KONG. HONG KONG. NOT NOW. NOT NOW. THERE I DON’T LIKE TO GIVE THERE I DON’T LIKE TO GIVE CREDIT TO REPUBLICANS WHO HELPED CREDIT TO REPUBLICANS WHO HELPED BUILD FRANK INSTEIN, UH-OH, BUILD FRANK INSTEIN, UH-OH, FRANK INSTEIN DOESN’T LISTEN TO FRANK INSTEIN DOESN’T LISTEN TO ME OF THE BUT IN THAT VAIN, LET ME OF THE BUT IN THAT VAIN, LET ME SAY ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI SAYING ME SAY ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI SAYING TRUMP MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED TRUMP MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED FOR 2020. FOR 2020. JOE WALSH, ANOTHER TEA PARTY JOE WALSH, ANOTHER TEA PARTY MEMBER, CALLING FOR A PRIMARY MEMBER, CALLING FOR A PRIMARY CHALLENGE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. CHALLENGE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. IT’S A LONELY JOURNEY THOUGH, IT’S A LONELY JOURNEY THOUGH, THE PEOPLE THAT KNEW HIM FROM THE PEOPLE THAT KNEW HIM FROM BIRTHERISM AND PEOPLE THAT SAW BIRTHERISM AND PEOPLE THAT SAW HIM ATTACK NURSES AND DOCTORS IN HIM ATTACK NURSES AND DOCTORS IN AFRICA IN 2015 TO FIGHT EBOLA. AFRICA IN 2015 TO FIGHT EBOLA. I GUESS I WILL TAKE A LAKE GUESS I GUESS I WILL TAKE A LAKE GUESS AT THE PARTY — LATE GUESS AT AT THE PARTY — LATE GUESS AT THE PARTY OVER NONE. THE PARTY OVER NONE. BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK OF — BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK OF — THERE NEVER WAS A FOUL-MOUTHED THERE NEVER WAS A FOUL-MOUTHED ENTHUSIAST THAN ANTHONY ENTHUSIAST THAN ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI. SCARAMUCCI.>>I DON’T WANT TO SPEND TOO>>I DON’T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME WORRYING ABOUT ANTHONY MUCH TIME WORRYING ABOUT ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI BUT THE POINT ABOUT SCARAMUCCI BUT THE POINT ABOUT MIKE POMPEO AND POLITICS OF THE MIKE POMPEO AND POLITICS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, IF MIKE POMPEO REPUBLICAN PARTY, IF MIKE POMPEO IS THE SEBLTS,Z, SECRETARY OF ST IS THE SEBLTS,Z, SECRETARY OF ST OF THE FEW PEOPLE WHO HAS A OF THE FEW PEOPLE WHO HAS A LITTLE TO SAY AND NOT SERVING IN LITTLE TO SAY AND NOT SERVING IN AN ACTING CAPACITY AND YOU’RE AN ACTING CAPACITY AND YOU’RE HERE AND I CAN’T GET RID OF YOU HERE AND I CAN’T GET RID OF YOU AND DON’T DO ANYTHING I DON’T AND DON’T DO ANYTHING I DON’T WANT YOU TO DO OR DON’T LIKE, WANT YOU TO DO OR DON’T LIKE, MIKE POMPEO MAY HAVE AMBITIONS MIKE POMPEO MAY HAVE AMBITIONS TO DO SOMETHING OUTSIDE THIS JOB TO DO SOMETHING OUTSIDE THIS JOB IN THE POLITICAL SPACE. IN THE POLITICAL SPACE. AND IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN AND IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN BEING A POLITICIAN, THE BEING A POLITICIAN, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AT THIS MOMENT, REPUBLICAN PARTY AT THIS MOMENT, YOU RECOGNIZE THIS IS DONALD YOU RECOGNIZE THIS IS DONALD TRUMP’S PARTY. TRUMP’S PARTY. AND YOU TALK ALL THE TIME ABOUT AND YOU TALK ALL THE TIME ABOUT WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PUT SERVICE ABOVE AM IGSBITIO TO PUT SERVICE ABOVE AM IGSBITIO NATIONAL SECURITY ABOVE NATIONAL SECURITY ABOVE POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN TOO MANY BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THOSE IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN THOSE IMPORTANT POSITIONS ACTUALLY STEP UP AND POSITIONS ACTUALLY STEP UP AND SAY THE THINGS THAT ARE SAY THE THINGS THAT ARE BASICALLY SELF-EVIDENT AT THIS BASICALLY SELF-EVIDENT AT THIS POINT. POINT. YOU SEE PEOPLE LIKE ANTHONY YOU SEE PEOPLE LIKE ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI ON THE SIDELINES WHO SCARAMUCCI ON THE SIDELINES WHO MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN OP ED IN MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN OP ED IN THE PAPER, GET AN INTERVIEW ON THE PAPER, GET AN INTERVIEW ON TV AND COME FORWARD AFTER THE TV AND COME FORWARD AFTER THE FACT AND RECOGNIZE WHAT’S BEEN FACT AND RECOGNIZE WHAT’S BEEN RECOGNIZABLE FOR A LONG, LONG RECOGNIZABLE FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. TIME. BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING IN THIS PARTY WHO WANT TO STAY IN THIS PARTY WHO WANT TO STAY IN THIS PARTY, THEY ARE FALLING IN THIS PARTY, THEY ARE FALLING IN LINE BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT IN LINE BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT BECAUSE THAT’S THE POLITICAL BECAUSE THAT’S THE POLITICAL REALITY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A REALITY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A PLACE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF PLACE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF 2019. 2019.>>ELISE, I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE>>ELISE, I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD ON THIS. LAST WORD ON THIS. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO UNDERSCORE AND ASK YOUR UNDERSCORE AND ASK YOUR THOUGHTS, JOHN McCAIN USED TO BE THOUGHTS, JOHN McCAIN USED TO BE ANOTHER NUMBER THAT WORLD ANOTHER NUMBER THAT WORLD LEADERS COULD CALL, ESPECIALLY LEADERS COULD CALL, ESPECIALLY RUSSIA’S NEIGHBORS WHO FELT RUSSIA’S NEIGHBORS WHO FELT THREATENED. THREATENED. WHEN I WORKED ON HIS CAMPAIGN, WHEN I WORKED ON HIS CAMPAIGN, HE WAS OFTEN ON THE PHONE WITH HE WAS OFTEN ON THE PHONE WITH FOREIGN LEADERS ABOUT U.S. FOREIGN LEADERS ABOUT U.S. FOREIGN POLICY. FOREIGN POLICY. FRANKLY, HILLARY CLINTON AS FRANKLY, HILLARY CLINTON AS SECRETARY OF STATE AND U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE AND U.S. SENATOR WAS THE SAME KIND OF SENATOR WAS THE SAME KIND OF AMERICAN LEADER. AMERICAN LEADER. JOHN KERRY IN THE SENATE. JOHN KERRY IN THE SENATE. OBVIOUSLY LATER AS SECRETARY OF OBVIOUSLY LATER AS SECRETARY OF STATE. STATE. WHO WOULD THAT EVEN BE? WHO WOULD THAT EVEN BE? LIKE IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE LIKE IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE AND YOU WANT TO CALL SOMEBODY IN AND YOU WANT TO CALL SOMEBODY IN AMERICA AND SAY, KIDS ARE ABOUT AMERICA AND SAY, KIDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE HERE IN HONG KONG AT THE TO DIE HERE IN HONG KONG AT THE AIRPORT. AIRPORT. IT’S GETTING UGLY. IT’S GETTING UGLY. WHO DO YOU CALL? WHO DO YOU CALL? WHO DO YOU EVEN DIAL? WHO DO YOU EVEN DIAL?>>I THINK AND HOPED IT WOULD BE>>I THINK AND HOPED IT WOULD BE LINDSEY GRAHAM. LINDSEY GRAHAM. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE ISSUES OF NATIONAL SECURITY, ISSUES OF NATIONAL SECURITY, LINDSEY GRAHAM IS SPEAKING OUT. LINDSEY GRAHAM IS SPEAKING OUT.>>BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND –>>BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND — I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM. I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM.>>I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY>>I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM EITHER. GRAHAM EITHER. EVEN THOUGH HIS RHETORIC TALKS EVEN THOUGH HIS RHETORIC TALKS IN FAVOR OF THE DEMONSTRATORS, IN FAVOR OF THE DEMONSTRATORS, IT’S FALLING ON NANCY PELOSI. IT’S FALLING ON NANCY PELOSI. SHE SAID SHE’S WILLING TO PUT SHE SAID SHE’S WILLING TO PUT FORWARD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD FORWARD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD SANCTION CHINESE OFFICIALS SANCTION CHINESE OFFICIALS CRACKING DOWN ON HONG KONG. CRACKING DOWN ON HONG KONG. THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS THAT GOING TO BE? THAT GOING TO BE? I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT A CASE I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT A CASE SUCH AS RUSSIA, THERE WERE SUCH AS RUSSIA, THERE WERE OFFICIALS AROUND PRESIDENT TRUMP OFFICIALS AROUND PRESIDENT TRUMP THAT GAVE HIM SOME SANCTIONS ON THAT GAVE HIM SOME SANCTIONS ON UKRAINE, OTHER ISSUES. UKRAINE, OTHER ISSUES. PRESIDENT TRUMP DIDN’T DISPUTE PRESIDENT TRUMP DIDN’T DISPUTE IT. IT. HE LET IT GO AHEAD. HE LET IT GO AHEAD. I THINK IF OFFICIALS WERE BRAVE I THINK IF OFFICIALS WERE BRAVE ENOUGH TO BRING SOMETHING TO ENOUGH TO BRING SOMETHING TO PRESIDENT TRUMP, HE WOULDN’T SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP, HE WOULDN’T SAY NO. NO. BUT AGAIN WITH THE ABSENCE OF BUT AGAIN WITH THE ABSENCE OF SOME KIND OF PRESIDENTIAL SOME KIND OF PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATION, WARNING AGAINST DECLARATION, WARNING AGAINST CHINA IN SUPPORT OF HONG KONG, I CHINA IN SUPPORT OF HONG KONG, I THINK IT’S GOING TO FALL ON THINK IT’S GOING TO FALL ON CONGRESS AND THE QUESTION IS CONGRESS AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS IT GOING HAVE? WHAT IMPACT IS IT GOING HAVE?>>YOU WANT TO TRY TO ANSWER>>YOU WANT TO TRY TO ANSWER THAT, WHAT IMPACT, SFLIK. THAT, WHAT IMPACT, SFLIK.>>IT’S GOING TO HAVE A NEGATIVE

Kim Jong-Un’s New Strategy: Explained


In 2017 North Korea went on a missile launch bonanza first into the Sea of Japan in February, then its first ever intercontinental ballistic missile on July 4th, Happy Birthday America, and 18 other missile tests plus a cyberattack on 150 countries disrupting everything from banks to hospitals No five nine But pretty effective according to North Korean media Americans on internet websites Now have nuclear phobia kim jong un’s threats of war weren’t new But this time they were echoed by the US on twitter by the way Which seems like a bad way to reach someone in North Korea But hey tensions were at an arguably all-time high and then something changed out of nowhere after the deadline Kim jong-un announced He would send two athletes to the 2018 Olympics and not just that but with South Korea under a unified flag his sister and an entourage of suspiciously enthusiastic fans also traveled to the South. Missile testing suddenly stopped and Kim even met with a US Secretary of State He also left the country for the first time as supreme leader to visit Xi Jinping in China And then the biggest news yet both North and South held an inter-korean summit For Kim hugged the South Korean president even stepped on South Korean soil. I mean that sounds like a story from the onion It’s a complete 180 from non-stop missile launches two friendly smiles and hugs in just five months for many This is completely bizarre for others It’s the obvious result of successful foreign policy but what looks like desperation or Backpedaling or even foolishness is really just the continuation of a long-standing very rational very Calculated survival strategy with a twist so what exactly is going on and how will it end? Kim jong-eun has one thing on his wish list Stay in power for him power means wealth and luxury and safety for his family So if that’s the goal you might wonder why not just you know show out and enjoy those things he appears to do the opposite Risking everything by poking the biggest guns he could find That’s why so many see him as genuinely crazy and the media of course has no interest in alleviating that word Worry is their business model But it’s not true Kim inherited a very poor hungry primitive country if he does nothing the country will wither and fail no one to make Swiss cheese or basketballs and becoming a Self-sustaining or just not terrible country would mean economic reform reform brings better living conditions for everyone Which you might expect would protect Kim from revolution? But it’s just the opposite a population that can just barely feed itself only has time to do exactly that Revolutions are feats of strength not weakness What’s really dangerous is a taste of the good life a peek at what they could have? Reformed could eventually make the north as successful as its neighbor, but it would mean goodbye for Kent so he needs resources But can’t afford economic reform the solution is the same kind of socialism the country has always dreamed of and never Delivered shared or resources aka four and eight, and how do you get handouts as a totalitarian country with death camps? But intimidating a superpower like the United States is hard if they had six hundred billion dollars to rival the US military they Wouldn’t need to scare them anyway so instead they skip the entire tech tree straight to nuclear weapons a single nuke is the ultimate shield against war and Uproar which also makes it the perfect Negotiating tool the thought of denuclearizing North Korea is so attractive the world will do anything for the slightest chance to get it including forgetting 15 years of failed foreign policy just two years after Kim jong-un took power a Former exchange student in Pyongyang and now expert and rail and cop wrote a book called the real North Korea Co 40 wrote sounds familiar when North Korea are unhappy they follow the same routine they first manufacture a crisis and drive tensions as high as Possible when newspaper headlines tell the world that the Korean Peninsula is on the brink of war the North Korean government suggests Negotiations the offer is accepted with a sigh of relief Giving North Korean diplomats the leverage to squeeze maximum concessions It’s the North Korean version of the hero’s journey the same story told over and over and over again But because we want to believe we buy it every time at any given moment Kim is either in total assault mode creating fear and therefore our desperation for negotiation or total charm mode Convincing the world is a new man He just needs some financial support man this cycle of aggression charm and repeat is happening now But it’s not new at all there have been six other rounds of negotiations North Korea agreed to abandon their nuclear program in 2005 they got what they wanted and then broke their promise But this time is a bit different their nuclear program has been building up for almost 40 years to one goal the ability to reach The US mainland until then there was no realistic chance of their giving up the program It’s their one and only deterrent the only key to Kim’s life lesson learned from Iraq in Libya on November 28th They tested the whole song 15 proving. They could reach anywhere in America and two months later They joined the Olympics and turned on the charm that timing is no coincidence they accomplished their goal No need for more missile testing now it’s time to cash in get all they can from halting the tests while keeping even if it means hiding the ability to target the U.s.
They couldn’t have scheduled it better xi Jinping was probably pressuring them to relax and tensions were extremely high with the u.s. the administration really wants to show its strategy worked giving Kim enormous negotiating leverage It’s possible the talks will fail or succeed with flying colors But here’s my rough prediction Kim will excite the world with concessions But most will be completely symbolic cheek smiles and no concrete promises He’ll agree to stop nuclear development, which they no longer need in exchange for some American military concessions that also benefit China who would prefer America back out of Asia little to nothing will change inside, North Korea more of the same terrible oppression and real Reunification won’t be possible anytime soon, but American and South Korean politicians will declare a huge success But so will North Korea who finally got a seat at the table has its security guaranteed plus Maybe some economic benefits Exactly as planned when he next finds himself low on cash or in need of something without the attention to get it well He’ll know exactly what works and by the time North Korea makes its next move You could be well on your way to making yours everything you saw in this video I made in a graphic design application called affinity designer It’s far cheaper than Adobe Illustrator, but still a bit intimidating for beginners So a great way to learn it is with a class like this one on Skillshare It’ll walk you through making digital graphics and easy to follow Bite-sized videos everything from colors to custom shapes brushes and exporting if you want to make videos like this one This is a great way to get started and with a premium membership you pay one low price for all the classes you want so You can find the perfect one for you jump around or take multiple at a time There are classes on photography finance app development and something I’m gonna check out calligraphy something. That’s really cool Is that you can browse other people’s projects for inspiration? I mean look at all the cool lettering people have made who took this calligraphy class and for poly matter viewers the first 500 people to sign up with a link in the description get two free months of unlimited classes Thanks again to skill share and to everyone who gives it a try (Engsub by many people)

Why China Is so Good at Building Railways


This video was made possible by Squarespace. Build your beautiful website for 10% off at
squarespace.com/Wendover. Imagine a train that took you from Washington,
DC to Dallas, Texas in nine hours… or Paris, France to Athens, Greece in nine hours…
or Adelaide, South Australia to Perth, Western Australia in nine hours. These train trips actually take 44 hours,
44 hours, and 41 hours respectively so the idea of making any of these trips by train
in nine hours seems almost absurd. In China, though, that’s reality. In September, 2018 the country opened up a
brand new high speed rail route with d irect trains from Hong Kong to Beijing. This is about the same distance as DC to Dallas,
Paris to Athens, or Adelaide to Perth and yet these trains make the trip in only 8 hours
and 56 minutes. What makes this even more impressive is that
ten years ago, in 2008, at the time of the Beijing Olympics, China’s high-speed rail
network consisted of this. We’ll have to zoom in because the extent
of the network was one 19 mile-long Maglev train from Shanghai Airport to the outskirts
of Shanghai and a traditional high-speed rail line from Beijing to the coastal city of Tianjin. Today, ten years later, that network has expanded
into this. China has eight times as much high speed track
as France, ten times as much as Japan, twenty times as much as the UK, and five-hundred
times as much as the US. In fact, China has as much high-speed rail
track as the rest of the world combined. It is staggering the amount of progress they
have made in such a short amount of time. Traditionally high speed rail exists in small
countries with rich populations by the likes of Germany, France, and Japan. China is neither of these things. The country is enormous, about the same size
as the US, and is also not rich. While no longer poor, China is definitively
a middle income country. It’s about as rich as Mexico, Thailand,
or Brazil. In fact, despite being the country with the
most high speed rail in the world, China is also the poorest country in the world to have
any high speed rail. Despite the country’s vast size, China’s
huge population makes it very dense especially in the east half. This means that China does have large cities
close enough together where it makes sense to take the train rather than the plane. Trips like Guangzhou to Changsha, a distance
of 350 miles, take an hour by plane or 2 hours and 20 minutes by train. When factoring in the time it takes to check
in, go through security, and board it absolutely makes sense to go by train when traveling
between these two cities even without considering that the high-speed train is cheaper than
flying. High speed rail even makes sense in China
on longer routes where it wouldn’t in other countries. Beijing and Shanghai, for example, are about
650 miles apart. Normally that would be too far for high speed
rail to make sense. Paris and Barcelona, for example, are 500
miles apart—closer than Beijing and Shanghai—but only two high speed trains a day run between
the two cities compared to about 20 flights. Between Beijing and Shanghai, on the other
hand, about 50 flights run per day run compared to 41 trains. Considering the trains carry far more people
each, up to 1,200, trains are therefore the dominant means of transport between these
two cities. There are a few differences between these
two routes. For one, while Beijing-Shanghai by train takes
4 hours and 28 minutes, Paris-Barcelona, despite being a shorter distance, takes a longer 6
hours and 25 minutes. The other factor, though, is about the competition. Europe has an efficient air transport network
dominated by budget airlines that are often far cheaper than trains. You can find tickets for flights between Paris
and Barcelona for as little as $12 while the cheapest Beijing-Shanghai flights go for $74. Air travel within China is also far from efficient. China Southern, China Eastern, and Air China,
the three largest Chinese airlines, arrive on time an average of 67%, 66%, and 63% of
the time respectively. A big reason for this is that there’s just
not enough room in the skies. A majority of China’s airspace is military
controlled meaning that there are just these narrow flight corridors that account for 30%
of airspace where civilian planes can fly. With tons of planes and not much room to fly
planes are frequently delayed by air traffic control to wait for the airspace to clear
up which leads to the abysmal on-time ratings of the country’s airlines. While the Beijing-Shanghai flight takes only
two hours the potential of delays, along with all the other factors that make air travel
slower, help make the train the popular means of transport on this longer route. Other train routes in China, though, make
less sense. For example, in 2014, the new high speed train
line opened between Lanzhou and Urumqi. These two cities are relatively small by China
standards. They both have a population of 3.5 million
and between them are only small towns. They’re also not close—about 1,000 miles
separate them. This project could therefore be compared to
building a high speed train from Denver to Seattle—they’re modestly sized cities
a long way’s apart with nothing big in between. Some people would use it but it wouldn’t
make any financial sense. In China, Lanzhou and Urumqi are not small
cities but there’s really nothing big in between and, at that distance, there’s no
sense not flying. The Lanzhou-Urumqi high speed train takes
11 hours compared to the 2.5 hour flight and the construction cost of that line was $20
billion meaning that, if every seat on every train was filled tickets would still have
to cost $400 each way just to make back the construction cost in 30 years. In reality tickets cost about $80 and trains
are far from full meaning that this rail line is just insanely far from profitable. The ticket revenues from these trains reportedly
don’t even cover the cost of electricity for the line let alone construction and other
operating costs. So why would the Chinese government sink so
much money into something that has no prospects of really ever making money? Well, politics. Urumqi is the capital of the Xinjiang province. While 92% of China’s population is Han Chinese,
the Xinjiang province is primarily Uyghur—one of the minority ethnic groups of China—and
there has been an ongoing fairly strong separatist movement by the Uyghurs from China that has
often turned violent. The central government in Beijing, however,
wants the Xinjiang province to be just as integrated as the rest of the country and
has tried a variety of methods to force this including moving Han Chinese into the region
and the imprisonment of Uyghurs in so-called “reeducation camps.” The high-speed train is just the most recent
tactic to bring Xinjiang closer to Beijing and this is no secret. The central government is fully upfront in
saying that the line was built to promote, as they call it, “ethnic unity.” This isn’t even the first time they’ve
used this tactic of railroad politics. Tibet, a region even better known than Xinjiang
for its independence movement, was the last region in China not to have a railway due
to its small population and intense terrain. The central government still wanted to build
one, though, to bring it closer to the rest of the country and so they did. Trains now run directly from Beijing to Lhasa,
Tibet in 47 hours on the highest elevation rail line in the world. These trains reach an elevation of 16,640
feet—so high that passengers have to use a direct oxygen supply. Even the train to Hong Kong serves the central
government’s goal of further integrating Hong Kong, which is an autonomous special
administrative region, into mainland China. While high-speed trains to Hong Kong certainly
do make a lot more sense than trains to the Xinjiang province, many Hong Kongers have
not greeted the new service kindly as they view it as an encroachment on the autonomy
guaranteed to them by Hong Kong Basic Law. The most controversial part has not been the
fact that there’s a train but rather that the station in Hong Kong includes an area
that is effectively now part of Mainland China since people pass through border controls
before boarding the train in Hong Kong. Just like any country, what having a high-speed,
efficient rail network in China is doing is bringing the country together and making it
stronger even if it’s bringing together people that want to stay apart. No matter their motives, it’s clear that
China is building their high speed rail network more efficiently than any other country. To compare, this is the plan for California’s
high speed rail line from San Francisco to the Los Angeles area. It’s currently in very early phases of construction
and is expected to open by 2029. Of course that means that the time it will
take for the California’s high speed rail network to go from this to this is the same
as the time it took China’s high speed rail network to go from this to this but, the main
thing to look at is cost. This Californian network is expected to cost
$77 billion and is 520 miles long meaning that it will cost $148 million per mile to
build. China, on the other hand, is building their
network at a cost of only $30 million per mile. Of course labor costs are lower in China and
their network crosses more rural areas where land acquisition costs are lower but, what’s
more meaningful is that they’ve turned building high speed rail into almost an assembly line
process where they can mass produce even the most expensive elements like viaducts and
tunnels. In true Chinese fashion, with scale they’re
making high-speed cheaper. The big difference between China and a lot
of the western world, particularly countries like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand,
and the UK, is that high speed rail is at the top of the government’s priorities. Unsurprisingly given their government structure,
in many ways, China has placed social benefit, at least by the definition of the central
government, ahead of profitability when developing their high speed rail network. High-speed rail lines just aren’t as profitable
as other means of transport like planes but they are undoubtably better for countries
so you have to consider the social benefit when looking at their overall profitability. For the San Francisco to LA high speed rail
route, for example, one study found that the social benefit derived from lower carbon emissions,
higher worker productivity, and reduced casualties from fewer people on the road would be equivalent
to about $440 million per year. As it turns out, this is almost the exact
amount that the state will have to subsidize the line for it to break even. The China Railway Corporation, a state owned
enterprise, is actually slightly profitable, although it does have huge amounts of debts
and is helped by government subsidies. The benefit to the Chinese people, though,
is huge. The high-speed rail allows those who can’t
afford to live in the most expensive cities like Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou to easily
commute from cheaper suburbs by high-speed rail. Thanks to the high-speed rail, there are now
75 million people who can commute to Shanghai in under an hour. It is growing what are already some of the
largest cities and, when it comes to cities, size is strength. These lines connecting the east’s largest
cities are some of the most profitable rail lines in the world and they’re making living
and working in China easier but the question is, when we look back decades from now, whether
the high-speed trains to smaller cities will have made sense. Out of a desire to keep the lines going straight
between the big cities, the stops for smaller cities are often out in the countryside dozens
of miles away from the city core. The high speed station for Hengyang, for example,
a smaller city of only a million, is about a 45 minute drive east of the city center. The hope is that new development will spring
up around the stations but this network structure, even if it saves time on the train, wastes
time before and after which degrades the benefit of high-speed rail. In all, China is really the first country
to have experimented with long-distance, high speed rail through less-dense areas in its
west. In the east, though, these trains are enlarging
the country’s economic power. It’s just one of the many factors speeding
up China’s catch-up with world’s richest countries. Even though China is building these trains
for less and innovating on the construction of high-speed rail, the real reason why China
is so good at building railways is because they have the one thing that almost every
other country lacks—the political will for high-speed trains. Whenever I’m looking to to launch something
new one of the first things I think about is how to present it online. I think about domain names, emails, websites,
and where I always go to do all that is Squarespace. As you probably know by now, Squarespace is
the all-in-one solution to building a web presence for whatever you do. Being in the internet age it’s incredibly
important to present yourself well online and Squarespace’s beautiful designer templates,
customizable website builder, and 24/7 award-winning customer support help you do that all for
a reasonable monthly cost. It’s a much better solution that learning
how to code a website or paying someone thousands to do it. It is also, of course, made easier by the
fact that you can get 10% off by going to squarespace.com/Wendover and you’ll be supporting
the show by using that link.

Why 50 Million Chinese Homes are Empty


This video is sponsored by Skillshare. The first 500 people to use the link in the
description get their first two months free. Deep, in the mountains of Austria, lies the
small, but scenic town of Hallstatt. But this isn’t that, It’s an exact replica,
built 9,000 kilometers away, near Hong Kong. Austria. China. It’s home to European architecture, Chinese
cuisine, and all the traffic of… North Korea. Because, during the day, it may be the wedding
photo capital of the region, But after the sun sets, its cottages become
remarkably quiet. China’s lookalike towns, of places like
Paris, Berlin, London, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming, aren’t alone. In many places, across China, there are far
more houses than there are people. Long rows of apartments, even entire cities,
sit completely, or mostly empty. In total, approximately 50 million units,
Or 22% of China’s entire urban housing. But this doesn’t mean they aren’t being
bought. Because, they are. Like crazy. Ten years ago, most people were, as you’d
expect, buying homes for the first time. Today, it looks like this. Second homes are the majority, and people
are buying almost as many third homes as first! These aren’t cheap, either. In Los Angeles, the price per square foot
is $633. In Shenzhen, 805. And, close your eyes, because you don’t
even wanna know the price in Hong Kong. Now consider the difference in wages. The average annual income in Shenzhen is around
7,500 US Dollars, compared to 60 thousand in LA. Something clearly doesn’t add up. People in China are buying homes like Americans
buy… cars, But they’re leaving them empty, And it’s not clear where the money is coming
from, or why they’re being built. The usual explanation is that China’s government
is so desperate for economic growth that it builds bridges to nowhere and houses to…
look at. But that’s only one part of a much bigger
story. China’s troubles begin with its political
system. The Central Government is the highest level
of its only party. Here, laws are written and the fate of the
nation, decided. Beijing is THE ultimate authority. It appoints everyone from secretaries to governors,
and isn’t afraid to move them around should any one official gain too much influence. BUT – it would also be a mistake to see China
as one, singular power. Because below the central government is a
network of local divisions: 22 regional provinces, 4 municipalities, 4 autonomous regions, and
2 Special Administrative. Under those are over 300 prefectures. Followed by the less important counties, townships,
and villages. Now, just as Californians have different concerns
than do Texans or Floridians, China is a big country, and the interests
of a coastal exporter like Shenzhen are very different than those of, say, a more independent
region like Inner Mongolia. The same is true for different levels of government. While Beijing writes the rules, cities apply
and enforce them. Often, very differently. And there’s one, awkward little detail:
Cities receive just 40% of tax revenue, but are responsible for 80% of their expenses. So, naturally, they need another source of
income. And this is where things get interesting. In China, rural land is collectively owned. Everyone, and also no-one, owns it, which
means it can’t be the location of a new luxury apartment. But luckily for cities, they have the power
to rezone land from rural to urban, which can be developed. In other words, they own a money printing
machine. Watch this: First, a city buys cheap, rural
land, Which it then redefines as urban, And finally, sells to developers at its now, much
higher, price. Like. Magic. Over, and over, and over, again. Cities get much-needed cash, and developers
build housing like it’s nobody’s business. Now, unlike states in America, local governments
here are generally forbidden from taking loans. But, again, there’s a loophole. Cities can create a Local Government Financial
Vehicle, which is a fancy way of saying, a state-owned company. And by “giving” it that new urban land,
the “company” can do what the city legally can’t: borrow money. Which, they can use to build roads, schools,
and, on occasion, replica Austrian towns. This is so effective that, in some years,
land sales account for 40% of local government revenue. Plus, all this construction increases GDP,
which just so happens to be the way officials get promoted. It’s a perfect system. At least, until it’s not. If, or, when, housing prices fall, so does
city revenue. And, all those loans probably won’t magically
disappear. Beijing wants to avoid a housing crisis, but
cities just want to survive, and governors, get promoted, which puts the two at odds. Eventually, cities start running out of land
to sell, and have no choice but to build more. Like this one, which spent 2 billion dollars
blowing up the tops of mountains. Those developers who purchase that land, by
the way, are required to use it, which leads to many, often quickly-constructed, low-quality,
houses. And that brings us to the second question:
why are people buying them? And doing it like their life depended on it? Well, for one, because it kinda does. Thanks to the famous One Child Policy, China
now has the entire population of Canada more men than women. And that means fierce competition for marriage. Men are expected to own at least one property
before even being considered. It’s one of the most important elements
of social status. For many, real estate isn’t just an opportunity,
it’s a downright social necessity. Because of this, friends and family pool money
together to help buy homes for their children. And that’s how, nearly everyone, in a country
with the per capita GDP of the Dominican Republic, can afford some of the most expensive homes
on the planet. The other big factor is that Chinese citizens
Save. Like. Crazy. When it comes to saving money, there’s China,
and then there’s basically everyone else. Where, Europeans put 4 percent of their disposable
income in the piggy bank, Chinese drop nearly 40! The problem is, where can they put it?. China’s domestic stock market is just too
risky, And its banks are often seen as unpredictable. Which makes real estate a Chinese investor’s
best friend. It alone accounts for 70% of all household
wealth. It also doesn’t hurt that property tax is
a beautiful 0%. When taxes are only paid upfront, why wouldn’t
you buy as soon as possible, and just sit on it? Put all this together, and you have a recipe
for extreme house buying. An amazing 90% of homes are owned by their
residents. Europe and the U.S., stand at 69 and 64%,
respectively. And while we’re on the subject of crazy
high numbers, Ninety-four percent of Chinese millennials who don’t already own, plan
on buying in the next five years. What else do 94% of people agree on? Not even China can quench this thirst for
real estate. Despite laws against it, billions of dollars
flow out of the country every year into foreign property. It’s so common in places like Vancouver,
that, earlier this year, it introduced a 20% tax for foreigners. The irony is that while cities like Beijing
and Hong Kong have so little room, people are forced to sleep underground, these 50
million homes can’t find renters. So, hey, if you live in California, I think
I may have found an escape plan. Anyway, not only are these homes bought without
interiors, literally just concrete walls, but they’re also usually located outside
city centers, where there aren’t as many jobs. Now, the assumption in all of this, is that,
eventually, people will come, And speculation will become reality. The Eastern side of Shanghai, for example,
was once laughed at by Milton Friedman for being totally empty. Today, as a financial capital of the world,
with a GDP of 400 billion, we can pretty safely say it’s proven the haters wrong. China is in the process of migrating 300 million
people from country to city, And, of course, they’ll need a place to live. Inevitably, many of these cities will spring
to life. That doesn’t mean everything is peachy. A few things are decidedly not peachy. First, remember that the vast majority of
empty homes is expensive, commodity housing. These are not the kinds of places you buy
coming from a farm in the country. And second, all these homes have an expiration
date. In China, a building can be owned, but the
land beneath it can only ever be leased – from the government, for 70 years. After that, it’s anyone’s guess whether
ownership will be renewed. And if so, for how much. But, the truth is, 70 years is pretty optimistic… Think about it this way: If construction is
good for GDP, why build once, when you can build and re-build every few years? It’s kinda like the iPhone, if you’d like
to upgrade every year, Apple will happily sell you a new phone. It’s certainly not judging. Except, in the case of China’s housing,
developers are incentivized to make short-term bets, they know their homes will only last
a few decades anyway, which means using lower quality materials. Meanwhile, cities continue taking loans and
housing prices continue rising unsustainably. Of course, Beijing knows all this. It’s aware of the bubble, the risks involved,
and it knows more or less how to fix it – some combination of slowing down lending, reining-in
local governments, and introducing a property tax, like Shanghai. The problem is, real estate is so intertwined
with its GDP, that any of these solutions would seriously risk slowing down its economy. In the coming decades, the world will watch
as China does its best to carefully balance its enormous challenges with its relentless
desire to grow its economy and realize The Chinese Dream. As Beijing prepares for economic change by
diversifying its revenue, You and I should do the same. Today’s sponsor, Skillshare, helps you learn
new things so you can do just that. If you’re still watching this, it’s clear
that a) You like learning things and b) You learn visually, which means Skillshare’s
video lessons are perfect for you. There are classes on starting your own business,
taught by successful entrepreneurs, Topics like how to start programming your
own apps or games from scratch, and creative classes, like drawing, or my
course on how to make your own YouTube videos, where I go over my process, from writing scripts
to animating them. Here’s the thing: there’s absolutely no
risk, so if any of this sound interesting, just give it a try, Because the first 500 people to use the link
in the description get 2 months completely free. Thanks to Skillshare for sponsoring this video
and to you for listening.