tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg June 7, 2017 10:00pm-11:01pm EDT
♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with politics. former fbi director james comey will testify before the senate intelligence committee thursday. it is one of the most anticipated hearings in recent history. it also marks comey's first public appearance since being fired by president trump last month -- a central question is whether he believes that trump tried to obstruct an investigation in russia's ties in the u.s. campaign. we look from a global perspective a week after the
president's return from traveling abroad. joining me is zanny minton beddoes, editor in chief of "the economist." and roger cohen for "the new york times." joining us from washington, al hunt. a columnist for "bloomberg view." and robert costa of "washington week." i am pleased to have all of them here on the program. it's a changing world, they tell me. charles blow wrote this, "my whole life i have taken for granted america's leadership in the world. america's might was a cornerstone of diplomacy. we are a beacon and balance to the world. america has been imperfect but always seems to me bent towards the belief that america and the world could be made more perfect. that time has come to a close. america is exiting the world stage. donald trump is drawing the curtains." does that sound like something you hear often in europe? zanny: yeah, it does, actually. perhaps not put quite that eloquently. but it does sound like something
you heard a lot in europe. there is a sense in europe that the u.s. is no longer exerting the leadership of the western system. under donald trump, the america first agenda is one way he views the world, a zero-sum world where america's debt -- interests are different from the rest of the world -- it is no longer a community of nations as h.r. mcmasters penned in "the wall street journal." the climate accord and the decision to pull out of paris was the latest and biggest testament to this big change. charlie: the question we raised, also -- zanny: absolutely, and clearly, president trump did not come out and declare forthrightly he stood by article v, but i think paris was a very powerful signal to the world. when he stood there, he said i was for pittsburgh and not paris. the rest of the world is going, this is the u.s. we thought we could rely on. charlie: they all thought they were citizens of the world. zanny: citizens of the world has
become a tricky phrase, even in the u.k. theresa may says if you are not a citizen of the world, you're a citizen of nowhere. i think it is that people thought the world order was one where america leads. charlie: when i mean is it is a world where there are issues that affect everybody in the world. so there is a common sense of impact from climate change. it doesn't spare anybody. zanny: absolutely, and the really big difference is the view that it appears to be central to the administration that president trump seems to believe that it doesn't help america. in fact, america's had a bad deal by leading the rest of the world. and this kind of zero-sum nature where no longer is there a sense of a community of nations, where there are things that can help everybody, but there are things that benefit others must be bad for america. that zero-sum transactional nature is something very different. roger: well, charlie, it is the 70th anniversary this week of
the marshall plan. the marshall plan would be incomprehensible to our president for the reason zanny just stated. i mean, here was a plan that involved the united states giving a lot of money to europe but everybody benefited in the end. and europe was rebuilt and the united states was a huge beneficiary. and president trump does not seem to believe in that kind of policy. and i think for the first time since world war ii, we seem to have a valueless u.s. foreign policy. i am a naturalized american, maybe for that reason i am a little starry eyed, but the idea of a u.s. foreign policy that does not contain somewhere within it the notion of spreading liberty, the rule of law, a rules-based world order, all that is simply -- america is an idea. if it denies that idea, it is no longer itself. this president does not seem to have met a dictator he does not like. it has been left to angela merkel in germany and emmanuel
macron in france to hold up the banner, for now at least, of the values-based world order that america embodied since 1945. charlie: some say that the country that will come in and fill the vacuum is neither britain or france. the country that will fill the vacuum is china. roger: we have the curious situation today where china seems to embody more than the united states -- an open global trading system. and clearly, when the united states abdicates, when america first causes this kind of a retreat, who is going to fill that vacuum? it is going to be the biggest rising power. and that power is china. i do think that this chaotic, valueless foreign policy is dangerous. right now in the gulf, we're
seeing the president apparently tweets, pointing to qatar as a major source of funding for sunni terrorism. at the same time, and it does not seem to begrudge him that -- to occur to him that this is home to the largest u.s. military base in the area. so, what is mr. mattis over at the defense department, what is he having to deal with, right? it is not easy working in this team. charlie: it is a staging ground for our presence in the area. zanny: i think the chinese would very much like the rest of the world to think they are upholders of the system of globalization, but i am not at all sure they are. i think in the short-term, the consequence of u.s. abdication of this leadership is that there is not any leadership, which is itself worrying. i think we have to separate a little bit the president's tweeting and all of that which sort of is its own separate thing with the broad outlook of
this administration. there are a lot of people in this administration who still have the basic view of american leadership. you know, i'm sure on the national security team, many do. but the president himself, and i think roger is absolutely right, the president firstly has a clearly transactional view of the world. he is a real estate developer. you do deals. sequentially, and in those deals, one person wins and one person loses. if you pay too much for the hotel i am selling you, you have done well and i have done badly. it is a very zero-sum view of the world. but i think he translated it onto the global stage. he, quite explicitly, they would expect after 1945, the u.s. decided to take a global or leadership role where others got a better deal in their logic now , the time has come to change that. you add on to that what is fairly clearly an economic outlook that the president has had for many decades where he believes that trade deficits are bad trade deals. and america first means deals that benefit america.
in his view, that trading system needs to change. the two together are the america first agenda. they are not, in his view, a lifting up of the drawbridge. if we had this conversation, he might dispute that. he recently said, "i need to look out for americans, and i need to do better for americans, and americans have had a bad deal. charlie: he would also say this. "this is what the people who elected me wanted me to do." the mayor of pittsburgh, but also the people who gave me victories, certainly in those states that i expected perhaps to be closely contested or to lose. zanny: that is absolutely right and diane sure steve bannon is reminding him of that every day. but i am sure it is something the president believes. he's not a natural internationalist who is being dragged this way because of his base. he actually holds those beliefs. charlie: what are the consequences of america not leading the world? roger: i think the consequences are, for now, a vacuum. everybody is waking up every
morning not knowing what to expect from the united states. and as zanny said, the president's commitment to fundamental institutions of global stability over decades, including nato and the european union, are very doubtful at this moment. so, you know, what happens if president putin steps into estonia, a nato member? we really don't know. what happens if there is a flareup in the south china sea? we don't really know. we do know that this is a president, as one member of his administration put it, that is interested in hard power, not soft power. and it seems that this is an administration that is prepared to countenance a small to medium-sized war somewhere in the next couple of years that it could say it triumphed in. i don't know what that conflict will be. i can think of all kinds of
scenarios, but i think everybody is worried and bewildered at times. they think that the adults in the room, if you like, have control of the president. but i it's said that power changes people. i think we see with donald trump that power does not change people. donald trump is donald trump. he is not a russian doll. there is not another little donald trump to burst out and embrace another policy. if you look at the open letter he took out in the new york times in 1987, 3 decades ago, it says exactly what he says now. "we the united states are being screwed. we have to be tough." this is his world view. zanny: i think at a minimum, the international system, the rules atrophy, because if you do not have the leader of the free world tending that system, they atrophy. what does that mean if you are our southeast asian country know and you have traditionally been allied with the united states, and the first thing president trump did was to withdraw from tpp, you have a large rising
power right there next to you, china. your calculus has shifted in terms of who do you rely on , now? the uncertainty of not knowing what the u.s. reaction is. if you are u.s. ally, can you really trust the u.s.? can you trust what the u.s. is going to do? i think increasingly countries are worried about that. charlie: there is also this interesting thing. a lot of nations around the world, whether it is asia or europe, came to these institutions because the united states asked them to come and brought them in and encourage them to the there. we leave and they're still there. zanny: absolutely. it is happening at the time when already, the nature of the global governance is shifting. because of the rise of china. we had the rising power, we are always going to have a question of how the u.s. accommodate a rising china, the world's
second-largest economy? how is that shift going to happen? now you've got that shift happening with the u.s. abdicating responsibility and saying we are going for america first agenda. at best, you have a more uncertain world. you have one where, we take for granted these institutions. these acronyms, the imf, the wto, most people do not pay any attention to them but they fall -- form together something that has brought us stability and prosperity for seven decades. and i think we all notice. charlie: and russia and china wanted to be part of those organizations. roger: and i think the state department and foreign service offices are in a state of shock. not only it is the plan to slash the budget of the state department by 30%. who knows the reality, but it sends a clear message. it is interesting in the last couple of days you seen the acting chief of mission in beijing quit rather than hand the demarche to the chinese government that stated that the united states had quit the paris today, you have,
to this conversation. i want to bring you in because you have covered for a long time the president. al has covered washington for a long time. there is some sense we came in talking here about europe, but the president also faces a huge challenge coming up on thursday. bob, lay out for me how the trump administration sees this and how they will respond. robert: the president himself wants to be his own messenger. he was to be the person, his lawyer, his spokesman, his media watchdog. but this is against the advice of his own aides, the white house counsel and others i'm cold, have told the president to resist, to not engage. they have packed his schedule on thursday with different events. but the president remains adamant that he wants to directly confront comey should he feel the need to on thursday. charlie: al? this will be a big day in washington. al: it is going to be a big day. i think that -- first of all,
let's understand the limit of what jim comey is going to talk about. he is not going to talk about the investigation. he is going to talk about what trump said to him. a lot of it has been about jim comey, a man who some have questioned his judgment but no one has ever questioned his integrity. which is impeccable. when he raises that right hand and swears under oath of perjury that this conversation took place, i do not think it much matters what donald trump tweets. because i think it is clear who will be believed except by that 30% base. charlie: the reaction in europe to all of this? not to the -- that the president is in trouble at home. because of his response to the russian probe and what he did in terms of flynn and comey. zanny: i think that is probably a combination of utter fascination. it is like watching an ongoing soap opera. confusion.
because no one can follow what the heck is going on. some sense of schadenfreude mixed with expectation. might this mean he will go at some point? i think, the europeans are gripped by this as everyone is in this country. i find you can have a conversation with people in the u.k. in as much detail as you have pretty much here with people who are glued. charlie: they know the facts zanny: my goodness. they know the facts absolutely. you combine that with the morning twitter storm, and you just cannot believe this is happening. it's surreal. charlie: robert, the president, as you have been chronicling since the beginning of this campaign -- how does he think he is going to get through this? does he think that this will blow away? or does he view this as a serious challenge to his presidency that most people do? robert: well, this all is very
real and its very typical for president trump. if you look at his book "the art of the comeback" he talks about how fighting as part of the ee -- east coast -- ethos that defined his career. he believes in the public imagination if someone is seen as fighting more than a opponent they can be seen as in the right even if they are in the run. he would relish going to the new york post and page six. he loved fighting with ed koch. this is who trump is. so in spite of all of these swirling problems and the advice of his aides to cool it, he believes in his gut that fighting is the way to connect with his base. he does not really care about the consequences in terms of the global response or how his own party feels perhaps a bit uncomfortable with the way he has -- is proceeding. zanny: he may not be wrong about that in the short term. clearly, there are a lot of people in the base for whom this is the mainstream media
attacking him, for whom this is a whole load of trumped up stuff. the question is, at the same time, it's deterring them from being able to push through any of his agenda. the striking thing is that nothing really has gotten done. this was supposed to be infrastructure week. what has happened to that? robert: it is constant turbulence. he can't stand a minute of calm. it is as if calm is fatal to him. charlie: bob, go ahead. robert: i had a fascinating conversations with susan collins of maine. one of the moderate republicans. she said, look at the big issues facing the senate right now. health care, number one, trying to get something passed, overhaul that nation's health care law. she said the president seems to be more concerned with fighting with the london mayor, talking about his infrastructure projects. he isn't driving in agenda on capitol hill. and remember the bargain many republicans privately tell me and i'm sure you -- they have made with this president. he is not ideological.
he is not really one of them. they saw him as politically useful to pass what they wanted on health care and taxes. now that those proposals have stalled, that usefulness is coming under scrutiny and question. charlie: al, is it likely that any of these things will pass before the next election in 2018? al: i think they may get a tax cut but i would be very surprised if they get health care or infrastructure. trump does not care much about history, but it teaches us things. i do remember some 44 years ago. and richard nixon was quite a different creature in many ways than trump. but going to bob's point of trump's view of fighting back. that is the exact attitude nixon had. read about right before watergate. he was more measured than trump was, but that was the strategy in 1973, keep the base. which he kept for a long time, and fight back and fight hard. trump has, if he didn't do anything -- if he's innocent if you will, then that will work.
if he has not, he has got robert mueller investigating, he is in trouble. charlie: every time you ask anybody from any of the committees, they will say there is some circumstantial evidence but we see smoke but no fire yet. al: charlie, we didn't see this smoking gun on nixon until nine days after they voted impeachment. robert: let's remember, however, that the smoking gun in terms of collusion with russia may not actually end up being the issue. for the white house, when i was there today, they were talking about obstruction of justice as the question that looms over this. do trump's exchanges with comey, in the past, the meeting at the white house in february, the phone calls, can these be seen by comey, perhaps in his testimony and by trump's critics as an obstruction of justice? that worries the white house more than all of the smoke on russia collusion. charlie: at some point, do you expect, all of you here at the table, looking at how, events you have covered, that is some point people begin leaving the
administration because they a, think it is a sinking ship, or because there is something about the values they believe in that they think are being sullied? zanny: i would not be at all surprised if that happened. i suspect it is a matter of time. for me, the interesting metaphor, when we went to see the president a few weeks ago, we described it as such in our editorial, it felt like a court. it felt like courtiers around a king rather than an administration around the president. and i think -- frankly, it is no surprise to me that the president gets on terribly well with autocrats. not that he is authoritarian in the 1930's european sense, but it is a king and his court. he goes to saudi arabia and he rather likes the way things are done there. it's not as -- i make it sound more sort of sinister than i mean it to, because when he ran the trump organization, it was a entrepreneurial one man show.
he did not have a boss, he do -- did not have constraints, he did not have checks and balances except the law, which he took issue with quite often. for me, that is a have a way of -- helpful way of thinking about how things are there. process is not something that is a big part of the president's -- roger: when i saw you in london and you are just gotten back from that meeting in the white house, you said one of the most striking things was how frightened, how terrified a lot of his aides seemed, afraid to speak. zanny: his aides were offering -- affirming what he said. that was very much the sense. charlie: does the leaking continued rampantly? robert: there are a lot of lifelong bureaucrats who are not part of the political employment process who are deeply concerned. that comes up repeatedly through the course of my reporting. your question is an intriguing one, charlie. who leaves first? who will leave? most people inside the washington political establishment are paying close attention to jim mattis and
secretary of state rex tillerson. they see those two figures as people who are serving more out of duty then loyalty to trump, duty to country and they may be unsettled, in particular by trump's handling of the nato "politico" has reported, his advisers including members of the cabinet wanted trump to have an affirmation of article v of nato. he did not end up doing that in his speech. charlie: i'm told he took it out himself. not told -- reporters told me -- he took it out himself. it was in the speech and he took it out. robert: that is correct based on everything i heard. al: i would add mcmaster to that list of worried people. people are going to leave but the other probably has people coming in. who wants to join right now the summer -- who wants to join
right now? there were stories about all these high-priced lawyers he was going to get. williamson conley firm and others. i think they will have real trouble attracting people. to this administration. they have got a lot of vacancies. robert: real quick on our's point. the lawyer decision, the outside counsel decision is so revealing about president trump. he at all of these white shoe -- he had all of these white shoe lawyers in d.c., brandon sullivan, who were thinking about coming in, even ted olson, to join the team. but because the president went with a long new york attorney, very combative personality, some of these washington lawyers tell me they had reservations about joining up that kind of operation. the president was going to go with him. that really told them everything. he really did not want white shoe washington legal advice. he wanted a loyalist at his side. charlie: and a street fighter. robert: street fighter. zanny: for me, the question is, how much should i worry about that? there seem to be two outcomes if
what you are describing happens. one is that there's nobody around. so we have stasis. there is no policy, nothing happens. the other is you have a president with perhaps a very small coterie of partisans around him and then something crazy happens. because if all of the people you describe -- >> crazy as in an international crisis? robert: a big one. zanny: all of the foreign policy that you describe, secretary mattis and so forth, were they not there, i suspect you and the rest of the world would be much more worried about right direction u.s. foreign-policy, even more worried about what direction you was foreign policy takes. the grown-ups are not in the room. charlie: can anybody change? let's assume the president has all the flaws that are attributed to him. is there likely anything that can change him? roger: no. no. he is 70 years old. donald trump will not change. zanny: i'm not sure he can change. i suspect someone can take away his phone, take away his twitter feed.
>> we keep reading these articles about how he is going to be restrained, nothing is going to go on his twitter account without it going to lawyers. it never actually happens because his bottom line is that he wants to communicate directly with his base. the fake "new york times," and everyone else. the failing "new york times" full of fake news. if he were not able to communicate directly. he is behaving like the leader of a movement, much more than like the president of the united states. charlie: -- some people, even there have been questions raised about jarod and ivanka because of the battle over paris. who remains the most powerful person in his ear? robert: it is not really ever about the person who is whispering in trump's ear, it is about trump himself. i have seen him up close talking
about his business career. this is a person who throughout much of his life in real estate but also personally, has been isolated and defiant, running a wasly organization, when he running a bare-bones campaign with only a couple of staffers along with him, it was his instincts reacting to cable news minute by minute. tweeting, deciding by his gut what he needed to do to cultivate this massive public persona he has generated over decades. it has always been him more than a spin master, more than a counselor. this is what is dismaying to the aides in the white house. jared kushner, ivanka trump, gary cohen, all these names we hear every day, have a limitation in what they can do. charlie: al, democrats can just sit and watch? al: yeah, that's what they should do. some of them are crazy enough to start talking about impeachment which is so premature right now. but i think most of them are
going to sit and watch and see what happens. and i think to go again, bob is the best. he knows trump. jared kushner, whatever influence he has has to have been diminished because he is in the crosshairs. and he's got, i think that probably will affect the president as much as anything. i think from the democrats point of view they have to see what happens. the intelligence committees are going to have to defer to robert mueller. that will be hard but they will have to do that. robert: do you want to hear something about jared kushner real quick? charlie: yeah. robert: the president brought reporters into the white house for a press gaggle. he said, jared kushner has become more famous than me. that sent some shivers around the white house. that is a classic trump way of putting someone down. in trump's orbit there is only trump at the top. when steve bannon was on the cover of "time," now jared kushner on the cover of "time," trump pays attention. al: that is what he said about
charlie: the normandy invasion on june 6, 1944, change the course of the war and was instantly inscribed into the pages of history. a new film presents a unique portrait of the prime minister in the days before the d-day landings. brian cox stars as the british bulldog in "churchill." cox play structure or with roaring conviction, all fire and bluster and the lion of britain. here's the trailer for the film. >> we defy hitler. it is time -- to win this great war. for five long years, we have lost our men to the tribulations of war. >> winston? >> general mcgovern. >> mr. churchill. >> if hitler were to drop a bomb on this little patch, he'd destroy the entire high command of our armed forces. the invasion of france taking the german army had on. >> i've seen this before.
>> a quarter of a million men were cut down at gallipoli. >> the plans for d-day have been in place for over a month. >> carry out your plans. >> we are taking care of it. you need to let us do the job. >> i beg your pardon. i am the prime minister of this country. i cannot be stopped. you cannot change everything. over the heads of our allies. >> i need your help. >> try acting like a hero and many people will believe you are one. >> he might be on one of those ships. i have no right. >> you have every right. >> he could be a liability as a leader. >> would you have us do nothing on the nazis -- on our shores? >> no! i would have us do more!
this magnificent -- air, land and sea. we must launch now. >> he has to address the nation tomorrow. >> tell them we're winning the war or we just killed 1000 people. whatever happens -- we must give him hope. >> when it's all over, what will i be? >> you will always be the man who led us . >> our troops will fight on and we shall never surrender. ♪ charlie: welcome. brian: nice to see you, charlie. charlie: there were many winston churchills. brian: there were many. you know, people forget about churchill. we have churchill the hero, the master of the second war, the great rhetorical speaker, the great broadcaster, the guy that got us through the war. all babies look like winston
churchill and winston churchill look like all babies. there was this childlike quality he had. the little boy that was abandoned to his grandfather who the earl of marlborough. his mother jenny was not always there. his father randolph had syphilis and was quite out of it most of the time. he was this kind of lonely child who kind of the sealed his destiny by being a child, by being on the outside, by actually taking something and saying, no, i'm going to go this way. and he did that throughout his entire career. so, by the time he had reached the time of the second world war, he was very much in the wilderness. he was a man --
charlie: he spent the 1930's in the wilderness. brian: he did, indeed. this is the great thing about him. he incurs, for example, he was a great supporter of bertie, king george vi. and they did not like george vi at all because they wanted edward to continue. he was very, very strong about bertie. and very strong about hitler. nobody wanted to go to war after 19 -- charlie: there were literally two churchills -- performer, writer, leader, military strategist. but essentially people knew him through the voice. you, he had to use that voice to project confidence, vision. brian: reliability. charlie: we shall win. brian: i think his voice i mean, he was a brilliant actor. first and foremost, he was a brilliant actor. he used his voice. those long vowels. it's almost shakespearean.
it's like gielgud or larry olivier. he had that sort of, richard burton. burton could always do winston because they had that cadence about him, in his speech. he was, and he was mesmeric when he was in his element, he was absolutely mesmeric. >> you have said this war is not like the last war. but this operation very much is. men will die tomorrow. do not let a single one of them die in vain.
godspeed. charlie: have you wanted to play him for a while? brian: yeah. i have. i've always -- ironically, he was the mp of my hometown. dundee in scotland. he changed parties. he was a liberal mp. the reason he lost faith with the -- a lot of the population were irish. he brokered the six counties -- michael collins, the result was collins' assassination and the forming of the six counties. so, he was not popular. when i was a kid, my uncle, he used to say, "i remember winston churchill. he was a chancellor." charlie: meaning? brian: he was always for the
main chance. a chancer. charlie: very ambitious. brian: this is true. there's film footage of churchill. he comes into the main square of dundee. he's brought in on an armchair with poles, that looks like a sedan chair. he was always ill, churchill. he's brought in and put in the center of the square. my uncle shouts out to the guys that carried him. "how much did he pay you?" the guy said, "a quid." my uncle shouts back, "we will give you two if you drop him." [laughter] charlie: he was more than ambitious people disliked the idea that he switched parties. he seems to be an opportunist of every state. at the same time he had the wisdom to alarm the country in the 1930's of the coming rise -- brian: he stuck by that much to the chagrin of his party.
him and chamberlain did not get along. one of the things i think about churchill in this time of brexit, happening back home, that he in 1940, before, when he was, he was first lord of the admiralty. he resumed the position he had in the first world war. he was in the chamberlain cabinet. at the time of the, what was happening in vichy france, he made the suggestion that the people of france should have english citizenship and friends should censure -- citizenship should be given to the people england. and he was the first man who formed the phrase the united states of europe. and that vision, of course now, he would be going, his biographer mr. johnson, he would not be too pleased with. charlie: lots of people have played churchill.
even john lythgoe. brian: he sent me an e-mail saying, "welcome to the fraternity." there is albert finney, robert hardy and burton who did him on the sound, radio. there's john lythgoe. and gary oldman, too. charlie: gary oldman did as well. in terms of trying to capture him beyond whatever physical thing you had to do, what was it about him? the voice is clear. brian: the voice, the childlike quality. you do that because of just the physical image and also his, you know,i tell you, this is absolutely true. i was really thinking about churchill and thinking because i knew there was something in the child. and i happened to be watching. i live here. my kids, my american children,
they love family guy. you see this? huge fans of seth mcfarland. i'm sitting watching "family guy". and there on the screen is the baby winston churchill, stewie. he is this cantankerous, off-the-wall youth, can only communicate with his dog. his parents are not understand him. this was winston's problem. he was so ahead of everybody that they did not catch up with him, which is what gave him an incredible temperament. the other thing that fed into that was his drinking. charlie: how much did he drink? brian: he would start of the morning with champagne for breakfast. at lunchtime he would have brandy with claret and sauvignon blanc. in the evening, he would have whiskey and brandy and wine. but i think that was also part
of his self-medication. i think that was to do with depression, the burden on his shoulders. charlie: how much depression did he have in terms of clinical depression? brian: it is very hard to say because we did not talk about it in those days. i think if, you know, somebody was to do a diagnosis on him, they would find them severely clinically depressed. he slept four hours a night. charlie: he'd stay up late at night. he did not get out of bed till 11:00 or 12:00. brian: he would work, he was doing all of his writing. he was astonishing. he does become that thing that you see -- we all have our moments. and his moment was the war. the war was the making of him. charlie: as he famously said when he entered 10 downing, everything i have ever done has
prepared me for this moment. brian: that's right. and that is exactly what he did. his career. the big supporter of him and the defender of him was clementine. she was the woman who really, really made sure his legacy was all right. there is a famous painting by sutherland of him. and it's a wonderful painting. a thin canvas. a red background. 2/3 is covered in red. the bottom third is churchill sitting. this elder statesman and he's even got a button undone on his fly. there's a video of when he revealed that painting. clementine is watching him. she has seen the painting. she doesn't like it. she's watching winston. winston is joking. he turns to unveil the painting. he looks at it and in a beat, under his breath, i see a victim of modern art. and she, that painting she took
it and she had it burnt. because that was something -- so, that's why this whole premise of how he was plagued by d-day and he did not want d-day to happen because he hated the idea of amphibious landings. because he knew. all these old guys talking about who they ran landing crafts and some of their boys never made the beach. after the dardanelles, the thing he did, he went to the front. now, that's a penitent active ever there was one. that never left him. charlie: the interesting thing about him, for me, is that the idea, that he was this guy.
who in a sense was so wise about what his image was, and so, he, came in there. you have got to show leadership. clem said to him, you have got to show leadership. they've got to believe you are a leader. it's hard to imagine the future of the world was at stake. brian: and i think that was the great -- i think that was an enormous burden. he did not go to that task easily. he didn't just throw it on. charlie: there is no training. brian: except life. that is the only training. charlie: all those skills had come into play. brian: all the setbacks, all of the disappointment he had because he was, he became a yesterday's man very quickly. one funny story and i found this out the other night was in 1931, he came here. i don't know if you know this, he was knocked down on 66th street by a car.
winston made the fatal mistake of looking the wrong way. because the cars company the left not the right. he was hit. and he was very gracious about the guy who hit him and not very rich. he invited this gentleman to several speeches later on. but when he was in hospital, his doctor said, this was prohibition, his doctor said, note on his diagnosis sheet, mr. churchill must be allowed the appropriate amount of alcohol. [laughter] charlie: he also was a brilliant writer. he said about history, history will be kind to me because i will write that history. brian: that's right. and, of course i think first and foremost i think he was a
journalist first and foremost. charlie: he started writing early. brian: that's right. charlie: world war journalist. brian: he did. this is where his relationship with -- they became great friends. i think his writing is the real clue to winston is in his writing. charlie: this is churchill discovering operation overlord, which as we know or can read about, was the plan for the invasion of europe. here it is, churchill talking to john slattery. >> a hell of a speech today, winston. >> much needed to be said. >> i wish you had told some of it to me early. >> you said you welcomed criticism. >> i do. i welcome any thoughts on how to increase overlord's chances of success, decrease casualties, shorten supply lines. but start talking about turning it into a totally different operation, in front of the men who have spent months planning it in front of the king of
england, well -- that could be seen as unhelpful. >> unhelpful? you must remember, ike, we fought the germans and france before even if you break through, with a massive casualties, civilian and military, what will our boys face in france? another western front? the somme? trench warfare. >> winston, we have an air force, armored division, the infantry, the front is over. >> operation overlord is that the only way of winning this war. i should know. i have seen a great many wars. >> sure. some of them in the last century. >> i beg your pardon. >> the war you're talking about was 30 years ago. i don't think you appreciate how much things have moved on. charlie: it is interesting as you see the picture of fdr behind churchill.
and churchill spent a considerable part of the early time in the 1940's trying to get fdr engaged. brian: it is funny you say that because that was my first link with winston. i did a thing called nuremberg, goering. the thing that we wanted to do next was the fdr-churchill relationship, because this is a fascinating. charlie: jon meacham wrote about it, the friendship during the war. the famous story about churchill being caught naked walking in the hall and he turned to franklin roosevelt and said, "the prime minister of britain has nothing to hide from the president of the united states." [laughter] whose idea was this? because we have had so many. and yet, there is always something to learn, either from
what an actor brings to it, what a script brings or a focus on a particular -- brian: it focuses on the -- before d-day. and it focuses on the fact that it was silent pictures. these two independent producers -- carter -- and they were very, they just had this idea they wanted to do this thing. there had been this rumor. it is in the eisenhower diaries of churchill's demuring about the d-day landings. that became the sort of point. what really was fascinating about it was towards the end of our shoot, when we have come to the end of the shoot, the military advisor who had been our military adviser softly spoke up and said, "oh, yeah, we knew about churchill's alternative plan."
that is the first time that somebody had actually said it. i asked, why didn't you tell us? charlie: and history has this to offer. the allies were getting lots of pressure from joseph stalin because he had been invaded by hitler. they wanted a two front war as soon as possible which cannot begin until they invaded france. brian: interestingly enough, hitler's plan, this guy, they put it into computer analysis. and i said, so what was the result? he said, with a few caveats, the result was that the war might've ended six months earlier. now, churchill's idea was the idea that you come into the underbelly of france which is bourdeaux. basically paratroopers.
people forget that rome had just fallen. italy was open, it was ours. he wanted to come in through the alps. the other thing was to come down through the baltic, through norway, avoiding that battle of france, which was notorious not just because of the trenches, but the land itself, people used to get bogged down. you had the battle of the bulge. holland. so, there were a lot of things that happened that stopped the war propelling in the way it could have done. charlie: my father was in the battle of the bulge and often talked about how cold it was. that was the thing he remembered most. he had frozen feet because it was so cold. the german counterattack. we want to close with this. this is clip number five where churchill is addressing the nation on d-day. it is the man with his own remarkable ability to explain the stakes and, also, the possibility of victory.
here it is. >> this great war against nazi domination is fought by ordinary people, the soldiers, sailors and airmen in the field and also those at home. we defy hitler with our endurance and our strength of character. and our refusal to give in to tyranny and oppression and the darkest evils in history. charlie: brian cox, thank you. this opens on friday. "churchill" is the title. thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪
alisa: i am alisa parenti from washington and you are watching "bloomberg technology." former fbi director james comey will tell a senate committee president trump asked him to make it known he was not under investigation in his russia probe. comey will also say the president asked for his loyalty and that mr. trump said of the investigation into michael flynn "i hope you can let this go to testifying today, director of national intelligence dan coats declined to say whether trump pressured him on that russia investigation. "the washington post" said the president asked him to intervene with then director james comey and michael flynn in the pressure pro.