Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  June 13, 2017 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT

4:00 pm
. >> rose: welcome to the program, we begin this evening with a former prime minister of qatar hamad bin jassim bin jaber al thani. he talks about the efforts of some gulf countries to isolate qatar. >> a sovereignty of qatar is the most important thing for us. and the integrity. and that we will defend until the last minute. the problem that all these allegations or all these talks about qatar, they have no solid base. >> rose: we continue with david leonhardt. the pulitzer prize winning columnist of the new york tiemsz. >> i would argue the most important things we don't know, it is possible that we don't know there are largely innocent explanations for a lot of it. but i do think there are two damaging things we do know. one, he was not honest when he testified before. he can argue well i didn't understand the question but i think any fair reading makes
4:01 pm
clear he was not fully honest. and two is what you just hinted at, which is he said he was going to recuse himself from the russia investigation and then he played an active role in the firing of comey. and i don't see anyway that you can claim that recusing is consistent with firing comey. >> rose: and we conclude with a preview of my kferg with director oliver stone and a look at his latest project on showtime it begins tonight and it's call the the putin interviews t is a series of conversations he had with russian president vladimir putin. >> listening to his side of the story. i don't know everything. i don't claim to. i wanted to hear it. i know, i've heard the u.s. version because we see it in our papers all the time, in our media. but have i not heard him, i didn't know much about the munich speech, i didn't know what he was doing at meunish until i studied it. i didn't know the crimea speech that he gave too. these are points that we don't hear in the west. i have never seen an interpretation of his in the
4:02 pm
western media. of the ukraine. >> rose: qatar, washington and russia when we continue. funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: bank of america, life better connected. >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we begin in the middle east and with the gulf states. last week five middle eastern states egypt, saudi arabia, united arab emirates and yemen severed ties with qatar. the goal was to isolate them for
4:03 pm
their alleged support of terrorism. the standoff put the u.s. in a difficult position since both sides of the dispute are american allies and because the united states has ten thousand troops based in qatar. the state department offered to negotiate a resolution but so far it has not been accepted. joining me for a discussion about this is hamad bin jassim bin jaber al thani, the former prime minister of qatar and a very close friend of the present amir and his father. i'm pleased to have him back at this table. welcome. >> thank you very much. >> so president of the united states visited saudi arabia, announces that he fully supports saudi arabia and the others effort against iran to isolate iran. then several days later, we have an announcement that these arab states want to isolate qatar. are they connected? what is going on? >> well, it's simply we feel
4:04 pm
quawt by-- caught by surprise because our imirwent to the conference and i think he have a good meeting with the presidentment and always there are issues with our two countries or other countries and it's been solved through the right channels. and for us isolating iran, it ends by isolating qatar. and there are now saying that we have a very special relation and sympathy with iran and with the terrorism and financing the terrorism. first of all with iran, if you take it from commercial days which it is very important things. qatar may be 1 percent in a thousand compared to the other gulf states or their trade with iran. even in syria, we are in a different position with the iranian and syrian war. and with bashar again it's his people. so the connection, yes, we continue to try to have a normal and good relation with iran
4:05 pm
because we are a neighbor and we share the-- together and that is normal and legitimate and it is not only to have normal relation but do we have a special relation with iran, again, it is our ally and brother, that is completely false. if we are talking about terrorism, qatar is a partner with the united states, after 9/11, your troop came in one day to qatar. and they use all our fa sillities, our own facility sillities before we have this big base, and we facilitate that overnight for them when they came from saudi arabia. mib when bin laden said no islamic state should have american troop. we receive all your troop at that time. we took all the plane. and we from that time, we was your partner, fighting in afghanistan and iraq, in yemen, elsewhere, from our base.
4:06 pm
and we were taking full security for your guys which are there and host them all these years. and we been caught by surprise to say that we are supporting terrorism. which terrorism we are supporting? >> rose: that is what they say. they say you are supporting the muslim brotherhood, egypt was a member of this isolate qatar. clearly the muslim brotherhood has a conflict with the present government, the muslim government is in jordan. and some of those arab countries have a strong feeling against the muslim brotherhood. they say qatar supports them. secondly, they say qatar supports hamas. thirdly, they say qatar supports iran and some of its behavior which they don't approve. those are just some of the items that they listed as to why i you are not on board with isolating iran and on board with supporting terrorism. >> who is isolating iran in the gulf, and we don't isolate did
4:07 pm
they close the diplomatic tie with iran that they requested in the gcc and we oppose that? they did not bring it to the gcc to close the embassy, their embassy in iran or close the embassies of iran from the gcc. >> rose: gcc, gulf countries council. >> yeah. >> nobody brings any kind of even thinking, by closing the embassy. if they bring it, let somebody suggest it in the gcc and we'll be part of the gcc. but that's not happening. in fact, they did it with qatar. and when you are talking about islamic brotherhood and egypt, islamic brotherhood, it is a big name, with-- of islamic brotherhood, some of them, they are part of the nation, everywhere. and the parliament, in some countries. and some of them is using
4:08 pm
aggression which we don't agree with them. and some of them is peaceful, so we need to-- we need to identify, you know myself, i'm against these groups by anyway, personally. but to take that reason against qatar, how we support them? the egyptian people elect them in egypt. and sisi and the army throw them out. >> rose: president sisi. >> president sisi and for us, our i mir was one of the first people which he support sisi when he come, at that time. because that egyptian-- but their problem, they have so many problems inside. and they need to blame somebody. do you think qatar has the capability to do the economic situation as what it was or what it is now in egypt?
4:09 pm
despite all the billions being given from our other brothers in the region? i'm not sure the egyptians, they need to work inside egypt more and to do wht they need to do. we, i wish to see egypt one of the strongest countries in the world because it's one of the arab nation, the biggest nation. >> rose: the largest standing army. >> yes, we need, that they have strong army. because that's important for the arab nation. and the arab policy. that's one thing. there is change, there was an islamic government and they've been taken out by the election and another government come. look how we are working with other governments, which they are not islamic brotherhoods. we support them financially, biggest support financially for tunnist from qatar now. so that it means they are not muslim brotherhoods, why we are supporting them. we are supporting the civility of any region ask for help. what is the benefit of a small
4:10 pm
monday arcky like qatar to unstable egypt or any other country by muslim brotherhood or any other groups. i don't think this is-- if you talk with somebody, at least with a reasonable mind, will not believe. >> so what do you think is at heart here? what is the reason for this coming now? because there has been an ongoing conversation about some countries, not approving of the fact that qatar tried to play both sides t had friends on both sides. there's even questions have been raised about how much funding qatar has done to some of the islamic groups in irsyria. >> look, everybody is-- including your country. when the war or the revolution happen in syria, all of us work through two operation rooms. one in jordan and one in turkey.
4:11 pm
the first one was in jordan. and there was countries, some of the gcc countries, among them the saudis, the emirateis, qatar, united states and other allies. and there was working with from. and all of us we were supporting the same group. in turkey we did the same. we discover by the time that there is some groups have other agenda and we always eliminate them one by one and always when we have information from our friends that this group is not-- you supported wrong group sometimes. >> rose: sure. >> but you stop. it doesn't mean that we did not do something wrong there. but it is intentionally we do that, that is not true. because what is the reason? if they finish with syria, they will come to us. we know that. so for us,. >> rose: the terrorist organizations. >> of course, of course, they will come to us. that's normal.
4:12 pm
do you think that we are out of the threat. we are not out of the threat. >> rose: is the principal conflict in the region today saudi versus iran? >> look, i think that a few problems in the region. one of them is okay, iran behave in the region, i think it's not the right-- that's not out of office. and i say this not now, i say this two months ago, in a speech in the university. and i say that before that and other speech i think in london. if i don't forget. and i always say iran is shaking the stability of the region by doing things in yemen, in syria, in lebanon and iraq. and if we need to fight iran, we have to be more intelligent. i don't mean fighting them by weapon. i mean fighting them with the
4:13 pm
brain. the problem we don't have a strategy in the gcc how to fight. we have an initiative sometimes taken and these initiatives sometimes taken because of certain things happen here or there so we take initiative to counter attack that initiative. the problem, we need the stability in our mind so we can find the way how to counter, let us say, attack the iranian in the region and not to let them make the interfere. but by isolating qatar you do this. by isolating qatar, if tomorrow i call for example, the iranian and the turk is coming and i call other regions to the country, you say you will bring them inside if i want to defend myself, is that what they want, to push qatar. a sovereignty of qatar is the most important things for us. and the integrity. and that we will defend until
4:14 pm
the last minute. the problem that all these allegations or all these talks about qatar, they have no solid base. we need a case, nobody tell us a case that x guy finance x guy. we find this list, as i mentioned the last few days, they descended to the right channel last month or month before or six month ago and our people deny it. they did not show us this list. they create this list lately, maybe it is right. maybe there are some people and the list-- we need to look at their cases. but this is the right way. to boycott qatar where is the international law, if they cut you from food, they cut your family, between the countries. and there is a lot of cases. if they cut the air right f they cut the sea, do you think-- . >> rose: these are things they said they were going to do.
4:15 pm
>> no, they did, they have did all that. >> rose: already done. >> already been done that, when this been done together, you and everybody say this is not right and there was a war between israel and the palestinians. maybe some-- . >> rose: tell me more about the impact on qatar that has happened since they announced that there was going to be this effort to isolate combat are. what has been the impact on qatar. >> what i am proud about are the people of qatar. the support fully support because they know he was honest and sincere and tried to build an excellent relation from when he come to power with his neighbor. and by doing this, they did not give him the chance. and they disappoint all the people of qatar and all the gcc people, the majority of the gcc people, they did not agree with that act been taking. if you tell me this is the biggest impact, the hurt of the people that have been hurt, that brother, gcc, tell me, there is a constitution in the gcc.
4:16 pm
did they use the constitution? did the gcc meet and accuse qatar for something? did we see the secretary general of the gcc see something? >> they did none of those. >> nothing like this been done. it means there is no-- no rely on the gcc in the future t is a big country and the gcc which we request, saudi arabia have a difference with somebody, that means they will do what they need to do without the gcc. i respect the king, we respect saudi arabia and we always respect them and we will continue to respect them. but this act, it changed a lot of situations among all the gcc members. >> rose: in what way? >> a way that this could happen for any reason. any leader wake up in the morning and decide that he want to cut not the relation, the border between him and other country, he will do it for a
4:17 pm
reason or no reason. that mean there is no stability in this constitution, in this six countries. that means they are not together. imagine if there is a problem between the european and another-- between germany and lithuania or any small country and the european community. do you think they will shut the border or they will go on and discuss it in the european union and see who has mistakes and they will take the necessary action. none of these happen. and the big problem that the americans which they are ally for both sides, they are not clear in their way how to handle the problem between-- they should be more fair to look at the problem, and to try to see if there is something to be solved. >> rose: two questions and i want to move the aspects of this. do you believe the saudis are behind this? >> they announce, not i believe, they announce themselve and the
4:18 pm
emiratei, they announce. >> rose: there's two. >> yeah, they announced this. up until now, okay, i know something, but the size, the magnitude of this which they did, it is not justified. >> what is the united states doing and have the united states changed its position since the initial announcement of the this effort to isolate. because president trump said in the rose garden conference said you know, the saudi led action against qatar was hard but neglects. he clearly has staked his lot with the saudis in the battle against iran. but then you have the secretary of state who has seemed to want to mediate, seems to want to figure out a solution to this, that is better than the reality on the ground today. >> i think any mediator should look look at the matter from both sides equally until he has
4:19 pm
the right evidence. that's one thing. second thing, the president of the united states which i respect, i think he takes his measures without having the right evidence against qatar. i think united states is a big country, as the superpower country in the world, should be more thoughtful when they take measures like this or support others who take measures. >> rose: so you are criticizing washington for going along with this without finding out more information? >> i criticize them because they are our ally and our friend, and we expect from our friends to be fair, not to help us, but to be fair. >> rose: the air base that is in qatar? >> it is not only that, it is, we did a lot of things with the americans together in fighting terrorism, and do other things for more peaceful region. >> and are those things at risk
4:20 pm
now? >> i am not a person of-- i'm not in the government, particularry to say if it will affected or not. but the people of qatar, the normal people is being helped because they think that united states should look at them. have i no doubt that in the end, united states will do the right things. i have no doubt in this. i will tell you why. because this country have an institution which they will look at the matter and they will find that we have been taken an assumption or theories that it has not tried. >> is there any part of the qatar government and the imir who believes that because this has happened they have to rethink some of their policies, rethink some of their policies that might have given rise to
4:21 pm
the perception that that qualt ar was-- was supporting iran and supporting extremism and supporting terrorism. >> qatar supporting iran is a big joke, first of all, a big joke. a i want them to tell me one event we support iran. one event. there is no evidence. in fact, we have a normal relation but we are not in the top of the list of the relation with iran. we are not on the top list. if we are in the top list, we will not fight with them in syria. that is totally, totally a joke in my opinion. >> rose: meaning if you had a relationship with iran, you would have joaned hezbollah who iran was supporting in syria? >> of course we shall-- but did you not. >> exactly. but the problem, if it is because of iran, we ared will to open session and discuss it.
4:22 pm
which that is not the case. but the case is that there are some countries in the region, want to dictate their policy to other countries which we cannot take it. as a country. we are a sovereign country, and independent country. and we have the right to do our own policy if it goes with the international law and with the normal practice of the normal country. >> how serious a crisis do you view this? >> it is serious, in the mat thary there is a big crack happened in the gcc. and i don't know this crack how it will be, you know, rebuilt. >> but it could affect u.s. relationships with qatar? >> i don't want to jump to that, more than that it is a hurt. >> rose: a hurt. >> a hurt from, you know, we feel that we have been hurt because-- but let us not jump to this conclusion.
4:23 pm
because we take the foreign ministry-- announcement and we are waiting to see what they will come, as a mediator f they want to mediate. don't forget that you can wait, the amir of you can wait is also med yaited and he is respected by all of the gcc countries. and i think between him and united states, i have a hope that we will come to conclusion and most of the criticizing about cat qatar will be seen that it is built in. >> it is said that after our president, president trump tweeted some things that president putin of russia telephoned your amir stressing russian principal by settling crieses through dialogue. is that correct? can you confirm that? >> this is what was said. but let me tell you one thing. if we talk with the russian, for
4:24 pm
example, i think here they will say that also we have a dealing with russia. the problem now, if we want you to be fair, free between both sides, you are-- you are not taking it or are you not listening to one side. and if somebody else wants to talk nicely about us or want to help in this crisis, will you take him, they should not go to the russians. imagine if the russians went to solve the problem. what the americans will say, qatar is allowed the-- okay, fine l not let them interfere in this. tell me, how we can solve the problem and integrity and keep the integrity of qatar. >> you seem to be saying, that this is a grave injustice to the people of qatar. >> definitely. >> a humanitarian crisis having to do with food and other
4:25 pm
issues. qatar happened to be at the highest per capita income of any country in the world, i think, because of the size of its population and the size of its wealth. it seems to me you were saying that the way out of this is through washington. that washington has to interfeen in-- intervene in here and use some influence with the gcc, that it has especially because of president trump's visit to saudi a wraibia; is that correct? >> it's correct but not fully correct. because washington is an important element in this, definitely for all the gcc countries. all the gcc country have a special relation with washington. and your interference, of course, will help, if it is in the right way. but also as i mentioned, you can wait is doing a good job and the amir visited the three countries and tried to listen to what is the problem and how-- . >> rose: you mean he visited
4:26 pm
saudi arabia. >> and an you dab bee and quatd ar. >> really. >> yeah. >> so what remains to be done? >> well. >> what is the way out? >> well, i believe the way out f we activate the gcc, first of all, because the gcc right now is frozen. it's not-- . >> rose: not functioning. >> not functioning. the second thing is united states as ally for all the countries in the gcc, they have to stand in the same distance from the problem from every one, and if there is any problem, i will tell you one thing. the qataris will not be hesitating if there is a mistake, to say there is a mistake and will correct it. >> rose: including anybody. >> definitely. >> rose: anybody who alleges their support of terrorism. >> definitely, because we will not be shy from this, because that is not our intention. and will not be our intention.
4:27 pm
but you have to show me evidence, you know, if you go to any court today, you need to see evidence. they need to see something to talk about it. right now everybody is saying for us, supporting terrorism, financing. okay. show me one case. show me twocase, show me anything. and also, if you have a case today. >> okay, how much financial support are you giving to hamas whose thumb people and others don't that characterize as a terrorist. >> hamas, everybody knows that we, for we everybody know, united nation notion, the israeli know it, because sometimes you bring electricity from israel. the houses which have been damaged in 2005, i think, we built some of the houses and we built hospital, and we built some other things which had been
4:28 pm
damaged, part of it been damaged. >> rose: if gaza. >> yes, and everybody appreciated that because that relieved the hostility in gazza a little bit. and that is also, the gcc countries, they pledge money for gazza in 2005. and the arab countries, there was an international conference to pledge for gaza at that time. so that is known. and that is public. and when you say about hamas, let me tell you, this little information, when there was election and pal stein first election, the americans at that time push us to talk with hamas, to let them participate in the election because they want them to be. >> when they participate in the election. >> and they participate. >> and it was successful. >> and then they have been thrown, fine, that's their own
4:29 pm
problem. if you tell me they are dealing with taliban, the five guys from taliban which we have them from united states, we have the muslim. >> exchange for the prisoner. >> and also they are negotiating with taliban. >> and they are still in doha. >> this is your request, yes. we are-- i'm sure our people would be happy, if you want them back, or you take them somewhere else. i'm not talking on behalf of the government. but. >> they are still in dohar under surveillance so they know what they are doing. >> your people know that more than the qataris where they are and what is done. your people know that. >> so was there any evidence, any evidence of a disruption in the relationship between the united states and quatd ar before this event. >> no, no. >> none, so as far as were you concerned, the relationship between qatar and the united states because of the air base, because of other issues was going just fine. >> st fine.
4:30 pm
and we believe it will stay fine despite this problem because this problem i'm sure i'm still positive, when the people in washington know the causes and know the things, they will be fair to say well, this is not exactly like what we think or like what we have been told. >> when you leave new york, where are you going? >> well, i will be here around, going to see some friends in washington for a few days. and back home. >> thank you for coming. >> pleasure. >> pleasure to have you. >> thank you. >> back in a moment. stay with us. we turn now to politics, attorney general jeff sessions will appear before the senate intelligence committee tomorrow to discuss russian interference in the 2016 election. is he imhepted to answer questions about his contact with russian officials during the campaign, questions remain as to whether president trurch may have obstructed juses tis with remarks by former fbi director
4:31 pm
james comey into the investigation of michael flynn. the president accused comey of cowardly leaks over inn his tweets over the weekend, david leon hartd is a columnist for "the new york times." pleased to have you back here. >> always good to be here. thank you. >> you were just sitting down telling me a story on the wires that's been online today. the president had a cabinet meeting. >> yeah. president had a cabinet meeting. it was televised. at which he began the meeting by announcing to the world that he has been the most successful president that we have ever had with the possible exception of fdr at the beginning of his term. >> rose: with the possible exception. >> he acknowledged that fdr dealt with some tough situations at the beginning of his term. and then went around the room and somewhere between invite and directed every cabinet member to speak and they had to give a little speech expressing how honored they are and privileged they are in order to serve this president. and if he talked to people who served past presidents of either party they will tell you, we just don't do this.
4:32 pm
we haven't done this before. the idea that we turn the cabinet into some sort of performers who are there to just praise the president. >> rose: not only that, most of these cabinet members do not have a fully staffed department. >> no, that's right. this he are missing many people. think about who these cabinet members are. z in many cases they have run companies. they have run huge portions of the united states military. and the idea that we're going to ask them to serve as sort of props, some of "the new york times" reported suggested that part of the goal of this was to improve president trump's mood, is really sort of a remarkable statement of where our politics are right now. >> rose: meanwhile his attorney general goes to a live open session tomorrow. what do we expect from that, before the house senate intelligence committee. >> one of the most intriguing parts of the testimony from former fbi director comey were the little crumbs that he seemed to drop about jeff sessions, the
4:33 pm
attorney general. we don't know whether those crumbs were sort of accidental or deliberate, but in general i think james comey's record suggests he's very careful. so we should assume maybe they were deliberate. and sessions at various points could have ducked questions about sessions and he didn't quite duck them. instead he sort of went out of his way to say things like i can't discuss that in an open setting. he seemed to go out of his way to signal on two or three occasions that sessions was really a potential target of this investigation. target is a normal word-- farmol wash, i'm not saying any charges are being brought or con tell plated but the sessions that someone or the investigators were actively looking at. so i think what we can assume is the democrats will try to go after sessions on some of heese issues. did he pete with the russians. >> and how many times. >> and how many times, exactly, has he mislead us, multiple times. we know he misled us once. and in what capacity. the fact that sessions has agreed to t i still don't think
4:34 pm
we'll see big fireworks. but it will be worth watching. >> the other question they're raising is having recused himself, did he really recuse himself. >> so there are a few things we don't know. we don't actually know whether sessions met with the russians in any kind of highly inappropriate way. we do know two things. >> one time he said it was a courtesy. >> that's right. so there is much, much we don't know. i would argue the most important things about sessions we don't know. it's possible that there are largely innocent explanations for a lot. >> but i do think there are two j daing things we do know, one, which he was not honest when he testified before. he can argue well, i didn't understand the question but i think any fair reading makes clear he was not fully honest. and two is what you just hinted at which is he said he was going to recuse himself from the russia investigation and then he played an active role in the firing of comey. and i don't see anyway that you can claim that recusing is consistent with firing comey when trump has acknowledged. >> what was the active role he
4:35 pm
played. >> it was clear when trump talked about it that he had met with sessions and with rosenstein, the deputy attorney general when making the decision about comey. >> in fact session i guess had the deputy attorney general at that time even though he said he had already decided it do it earlier when he got that memo, i think it was brought to him by the deputy attorney general and the attorney general. eting with all of them.was a sessions was quite open and trump was open with the fact that sessions played an important role in the firing of comey. when you think about comey's role in the russia investigation, i don't see anyway that you can say hey, i recuse myself from russia, also i played a central role in firing the fbi director which the president said was about russia. >> when sessions offered to resign. >> yeah. >> was that real? >> i assume it was real. we don't know. so you are talking about reporting out there that said trump has become dissatisfied with sessions. and. >> because he thinks sessions is in a sense responsible because, for the session counsel.
4:36 pm
>> that's right. so in president trump's view, apparently, basically loyalty comes above all else. and so even though its kaition for sessions recusing himself seems really overwhelming. he met with the russians, was part of the campaign t is impossible to imagine a russian investigation lead by jeff sessions that an independent person or much of the american citizenry would consider to be realistic. but the president seems to blame sessions, they thought he should have drawn a hard line saying i'm loyalty to the hospital, i'm not recusing, and stood in the way of the russian special. he didn't and he became dissatisfied and sessions went in and said i can't do my job if are you getting in my way i will resign and trump stood down. >>-- on two occasions the first being that sessions kind of lingered when the president wanted them to go out of the room when he want toed talk to
4:37 pm
comey, when he wanted to talk to the president. >> that's right. >> rose: about whatever the president wanted to talk about the president did not want anybody in that room according to comey but the two of them. and the attorney general lingered using comey's words. the other time is that comey said he went to the attorney general and said don't put me alone again with the president. >> right, which is clearly a very damning thing. look, jim comey. >> rose: did the attorney general then said why, what happened, how do we make sure this doesn't happen again. i will go to the president, or chief law enforcement officer and say this is not something you should be doing. >> you would think that would be the case if sessions viewed himself as praimly the attorney general and chief law enforcement officer of the united states. but i think sessions has now behaved in a number of ways that make clear that he doesn't always view himself that way. and sometimes views himself as a loyalist to trump before attorney general. so we saw sessions give a press conference from the press room of the white house. and if you talk to former
4:38 pm
justice department officials, again from both parties, they will tell you, past attorneys general would not have done that they wouldn't want to be seen as an aide to the president. they want to maintain some independence. and so while you would think that sessions might have reacted more to comey saying please don't leave me alone, it's worth remembering that jeff sessions in many ways is above all else at this point a donald trump loyalist. >> rose: on the other hand, you could point out, and i think something may have changed since then, but robert kennedy was the president's brother as attorney general. >> yes. >> rose: and was pretty much involved in all the political aspects. >> that's exactly right. >> rose: and the campaign manager first and later as attorney general and involved as a right hand in all significant matters of stait. >> that's absolutely fair. i think the thing to keep in mind is that this modern era in which the justice department tries to maintain some semiindependence, is a post-watergate era and rfk was
4:39 pm
prewatergate. >> rose: so where do you think the russian probe is now. because when i talk to senators on the intelligence committee, they all say we've got to keep our focus here. all these stories are out there, you know who saw who, who did what. but the question is did the russians intent too disrupt our election and how successful were they. and what can we do to make sure that kind of thing dnt happen or has no impact. >> and how much collusion if rose: most importantly. >> so i think that the cause and patience are two important things right now. as much attention as the comey hearing got, deservedly. as much attention as setionzs may get when he goes to testify. as much as we were all obsessed with this for good reason, we want to know for what extent was this really an attack on the united states. these kinds of investigations take time, right. robert mule certificate known as a very cautious, careful person. they're not going to try to speed to the end of this
4:40 pm
quickly. this is still going to play out over many months and the most important thing here is that they get to the right answer, not that they give us an answer within two months. >> rose: suppose are you sitting in the oval office and you know there is a russian probe going on and that there is a special counsel named robert mueller who everybody says is a man of the highest integrity, and also was a very effective director of the fbi. but is putting together a team of the best criminal lawyers in the country. if you are sitting there, you have to say where is this going. >> yeah, what's going to happen. >> i mean it's not good, right? i mean-- . >> rose: but the best talented criminal officials in the country who deal with criminal issues has former solicitier general deputy, or whatever it might be. >> there was an interesting exchange on twitter where someone wrote mueller is putting together the kind of team you put together if you want to bring charges. and the former united states attorney from new york responded no, he's putting together the kind of team you put together if you want to get
4:41 pm
to the truth, regardless of whether you bring charges or not. and that's a version of what you are saying. >> he also said over the weekend that i think in response to being careful about his answer, you know, he said there is reason to believe that a krgses of social injustice ought to start the case and quickly pointed out that he cannot say, no one can say there has been obstruction of justice nor can you say there has not been obstruction of justice. but there is reason to start the case. >> yeah. i mean look there is a lot of very damaging stuff, including if you just take the president's own public words, about why he feared the director of the fbi. in addition to comey's testimony which i find highly credible given the documentation, given his reputation, given many other things. >> is it troubling at all to anyone other than the president, the means in which he leaked the information with the stated goal of getting in his words to see us, i think he said it, i'm not sure to get a special counsel
4:42 pm
appointed. >> he did say. i would imagine that some americans find it troubling, this idea that comey kept these private recollections, he then gave them to a friend when he was out of government and said you can releases these to the press and put them in the public arena. so i do think some people would find it some what troubling. obviously as a member of the press i'm not personally troubled. >> no. >> the thing i would say though, is, more important to me is not the exact process for how this happened, but why did comey do this? he did this because he was concerned this was going to get swept under the rug. and he thought it was important that the facts get out. he did not think the trump administration should be left to investigated itself and he wanted to make sure that wasn't the outcome. and so even if you find the leaking a little bit unseemly, i would say the important thing here is that we do have a truly independent investigation. that will give us answers we can trust. >> rose: there are two questions about trump that i'm interested for you. one is you write to david without cares por about winning than any coherent philosophy.
4:43 pm
>> yeah. >> rose: meaning the dynamic of his goal is simply to win rather than to promote an idea. >> yeah. i mean i think we've seen hints of what his fill os see is in different ways, he is clearly probusiness, clearly anti-regulation. he seems to believe in some government programs like a military he claims to believe in universal health insurance. >> in the budget he does. >> that's exactly right. if you look at the budget, he meant what he said about the military and he didn't really mean what he said about making sure americans have health insurance. and so you look at this conflicting stew of things and it's really hard to figure out what he wants it is clear he wants to be well thought of. we saw that today with that strange cabinet meeting. and so i think what we see is that on health care he's willing to violate nearly every campaign promise he made about keeping people covered, in order to claim that he repealed obama care and he got a win. >> rose: the interesting thing too about where all of this is in addition to the russian probe
4:44 pm
are two questions, it seems to me. one, is what is trump's relationship with congressional republicans. >> uh-huh. >> speaker ryne, specifically. then majority leadser mitch mcconnell and what is his relationship with his constituency that elected him. are they as they seem to be so far, strongly supported by him, and have not yet begun to erode? >> i think there are some kinds of erosions. i don't want to erstate them. but nate silver of 538 pointed out that not only have the percentage of americans who say they approve of trump declined, right, they really have come down since inauguration by somewhere in the number of sing e8 digits. but the percent who strongly approve of him has come down more significantly. and so when you see trump's approval rating, what you don't know is that they actually have people that strongly approve, some what a prorvetion some what disapprove or strongly disapprove. and the sheriff people who say strongly approve has really gone
4:45 pm
down quite markedly. so i don't think we should assume that trump is i meun to graift, the gravity of politics. i do think some of these scandals are hurting him. but they obviously have not hurt him so much yet that congressional republicans to your first question have yet felt the need to abandon. >> so far they are vocally supporting him for their own reasons, i assume. >> they are. although i think if you think of the comey testimony, it is interesting. you would have seen a very different hearing had trump been a lot more popular, right? they kind of nicked at comey a little bit. but there wasn't any member who was giving a full throated defense of the truthfulness of the president of the unitied states. and that's some what unusual for members of your own party not to come more strongly to your own defense. >> you sulged that we do not lose interest in what is happening in health care? >> i find this really disspiritting, i will be honest. i think there are really honest disagreements that people on
4:46 pm
different parts of the political spectrum can have about health care. i this there are conservative plans for health care that show promise. i think there are more liberal plans than the ones we have that show promise. can i see all kinds of arguments on health care watch we have here in the senate and in the house is a leadership that is writing bills in secret, they are not holding any hearings which is unlike anything we have ever had on a major bill. the plans they put out have been derided by derided by the conservatives, liberals, the doctor up gross you are nurses group, groups of cancer, and i could go on and on. they seem to be jamming through a by that will take away health care from middle class, poor, sick and elderly people to pay for tax cuts for the rich and they doing it all as quickly and quietly as they can. >> well, certainly that would have the potential to erode support among the base would, it snot? >> it would. and i think if you look at the polling on this bill it is really remarkably unpopular.
4:47 pm
and the idea that they may pass it anyway is sort of remarkable. the thing that i worry about is that there is so much attention on comey and on russia and, again, comey and russia are well important. i don't want to suggest otherwise, but i'm worried that people are being distracted, and not seeing about there really is a substantial chance that the senate could take health care away, health insurance away, and by extension health care away from millions of americans. over the next four weeks. they want to act before the july 4th recess. and they may have the votes. they may not but they may. >> rose: will they solve the the dissengs because 350e78 said it was dead on arrival when it arrived like the budget. >> they said that and what i found worry stop in recent weeks is the md rates have shown signs saying we can fix that little part, and it is sort of as if well, maybe our bill won't take health insurance away from 23 million people, only from 20 million people and moderates have sent signals they may still vote for the bill anyway.
4:48 pm
we don't know what will happen but there is an uncomfortably large chance that the senate will pass the bill that could do enormous damage and i think the president would sign a version of that bill. >> rose: what amazed me was all the talk about infrastructure. >> yep. >> infrastructure day has already come and gone, meaning the day that they were pushing for their infrastructure program. >> wasn't last week infrastructure week. >> exactly my point. >> because of comey, and all the attention there. so tomorrow they're going to talk dp about deregulation, i guess, that is i think part of the agenda for tomorrow. the secretary of the treasury is coming here to this program to talk about deregulation. >> yeah. >> dodd-frank and all of that. >> i mean what i don't know is,. >> rose: am i wrong about that. >> no, are you absolutely right. there is a ton going on. it often seems very disorganized. there is sort of a start in one direction and a move to another direction. there say part of me that thinks
4:49 pm
that all that disorganization means they will struggle get anything done. and there is a part of me that thinking that a majority can almost always rule on the house and mitch mccon sell an extremely skilled legislator in the senate. and you put those two together, and you put, you add a president who wants to just be able to claim victories, and even with all this chaos, i think there is a significant chance of some legislation that really could do damage to a lot of people. >> thank you for coming. >> great to have you here. >> thank you for having me. >> david leon hard from the new york times. >> this week on showtime the putin interviews begin, four hours of conversation with the russian president conducted by oliver stone the filmmaker. here is his explanation as to what he was trying to do. >> i see it as i'm directing this film and it has a beginning, middle and end t
4:50 pm
starts in 20 0rbgs 0rbgs, and ends in 2017. >> but it gives him an opportunity to tell his side of the story. >> i am listening to his side of the story. i don't know everything, i don't claim to. i wanted to hear it i know, i have heard the u.s. version because we see it in our papers all the time n our media but i have not heard him. i didn't know much about the munich speech. i didn't know what he was doing until i studied it. i didn't know the crimea speech that he gives too. >> thee are points we don't hear in the westment have i never seen an intemption of his in the western med afterthe ukraine. you know, what does a correct-- director do. you have had me around your table with actors. i am rooting for him during the course of the movie, i want him to be good. i want him to do his best. that is not to say i will leave the movie, maybe just during the course of the movie when mr. putin, i felt like i
4:51 pm
was-- interest-- i was keeping him interested. i was making him think and about everything across-the-board about what is going on in the world today. i think he said some-- thing bses united states and russia. he was always hopeful about bringing us back together again well. could be partners against terrorism, parter 234 space. >> rose: you provide to have the understanding to how he sees the world, that position should be challenged. and your argument as to why you may or may not have challenged it, because we know that side. we know the opposition to putin. we know the people who believe that he and who have argued that they have plenty of evidence that he tried to meddle and russia tried to meddle in the u.s. election. they have seen the hacking and know where the hacking came from. >> what i read is a little different. it was a sloppy hack. there was footprints left behind it was surlittlic lettering and every expert that i read said if the russians were going to do it, they wouldn't do it this way. >> rose: you were saying oliver stone does not believe it
4:52 pm
was the russians who tried to hack the u.s. elections. >> i don't believe so, no, no. i find it also strange that a week or so later, julian assange who i respect comes up with a breach, a leak, what they call vawment 7 which was the trade craft the cia is using, they built up an entire division called vault 7 using trade craft. they seem to be competing with the nsa, which is about what, it is about getting into, other people, countries machines and leaving fingerprints that are malware that are wrong such as sirillic lettering am you can fake anybody being in the country. it could be you go to china and you say china did it or say north korea did it the cia has spent the most amount of money on cyberwarfare. we started cyberwarr fare, i don't think you have seen vladimir putin speak and say the things he has here. i haven't heard this. and it tells you what he, the
4:53 pm
world as he has seen it since 2 thousand, that's pretty important. >> rose: whether it is the truth or not t is his view of the world and that's important to know. >> yes, yes. >> rose: and a lot of people, everywhere else spend a lot of time trying to understand what he thinks and what he believes. they do. >> i think they will be looking at this. and see some layers that they missed. >> rose: an here is an excerpt from the interviews appearing on showtime. >>
4:54 pm
is stop referring them to as partners, our partners. you said that so much.
4:55 pm
>> rose: for more about there program and earlier episodes visit us online at pbs.org and charlie rose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
4:56 pm
>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> you're wat
4:57 pm
4:58 pm
4:59 pm
5:00 pm
>> announcer: this is "nightly business repor with tyler math new highs. stocks soar and tech shakes off a recent slide as investors wonder if this market is getting too expensive. a heated hearing. the attorney general comes out swinging in testimony about russia and wall street watches. great fed expectations. the central bank is widely expected to raise interest rates again tomorrow. so why aren't savers benefiting? those stories and more tonight on "nightly business report" for tuesday, june 13th. good evening, everybody, and welcome. i'm sue herera. tyler mathisen is off tonight. is. it is the 19th record close for the dow this year and the 23rd for the s

14 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on