Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  Bloomberg  April 3, 2016 7:00am-8:01am EDT

7:00 am
>> from our studio in new york, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin with our continuing coverage of election 2016. donald trump met with the rnc and reince prebus today. it follows the comments that women should be punished for getting an abortion and his retraction. forcampaigsn are gearing up .ext wednesday's
7:01 am
a poll released this week showed ted cruz leading by 10%. bernie sanders has a narrow lead of 4% over hillary clinton. joining me now, chris matthews, host of hardball, and matt dowd. here in new york, matt flegenheimer and kellyanne conway. cruzeads a pro-ted superpac. i begin with chris matthews pretty take me back to how you solve this. he moment you asked these questions. do you think you thought about this at all before? chris: it was a question from the audience. a young woman asked about abortion rights. i asked him the question on my mind. what do we do in terms of enforcement. woman beim, should the abortion?ho has an
7:02 am
he took a while to answer and he said yes there ought to be some punishment for the woman. what about the guy involved? he said no, not him. later they retracted it. i thought he made a very big mistake. i've never heard say punish the woman. it is always the doctor. never the woman. charlie: what did you think when you saw that? dowd: i think i thought the same thing chris matthews thought. i was shocked that he answered that way. he was totally unprepared for the question. that is a foundation of this campaign he has had. he has done well but in spite of himself. not because of himself. this is another rock in the backpack that makes them harder to get up the mountaintop. one thing i find interesting, and his position while way out of the mainstream, there is a logical consistency.
7:03 am
if you say abortion should be beminalized and it should question isatural what chris asked. there is a logical consistency. how crazy it is, it is logically consistent. charlie: let's talk about that. you are pro life. what did you think beyond the politics and what it might mean for the campaign in wisconsin, as a pro-lifer? kellyanne: it was shocking for the pro-life community has worked hard for decades to make sure people understand we don't look upon the woman as a perpetrator. she is a victim. believe there are two victims. the woman involved and her
7:04 am
unborn child. it would take -- chris had to ask that question four times. the woman is the victim. you are not going to criminalize her. secondly, voters have a reasonable expectation candidates have thought about policy as deeply as they have. many voters in the trenches care about these issues and have thought them through and want a candidate who reflects that own point of view on these issues. the reason his numbers are sliding overall, particularly among women, suburban women, it is because they see him is not willing to put in the work on these issues and they fear he can't do what the republicans want, he cannot win in november. if he can't beat hillary clinton, then he can't win. flegenheimer: we've seen so many
7:05 am
explosive statements. i think he knew he made a mistake. this runs afoul of conservative doctrine. someone told him quickly this was something he had to clean up. charlie: back to the point you made, why would he not at this stage have the kind of advice that would give him the policy substance necessary to handle these questions whether it is about nuclear arms, relationships with other nations or important personal issues in the country? chris: that's an ongoing question. nuclear weapons against isis in the middle east has been brought up before yesterday. you won't take it off the table. what about europe? he said i'm not taking it off the table there either. you would have thought someone would have intervened and said we don't talk about the use of nuclear weapons. even kennedy was indirect.
7:06 am
you don't say nuclear weapons as if it was a weapon where there are rules of engagement. you keep it quiet. why did you just say no comment? he said i'm not going to take it off the table even in europe. why isn't he being thrown behind the scenes like hillary clinton, you can always tell when she wins a debate when she is loaded and prepared. she has all the answers ready and you can tell they are formulated. he is trying to do it all on the spot. he is fairly gifted as the man on the stage. he relies on that ability to answer questions on the spot. quick on the uptake is one thing, but there are certain
7:07 am
things you have to master before you can get on that stage. charlie: do we assume if he loses in wisconsin he cannot compile enough delegates necessary before cleveland? dowd: i think that is a safe assumption. it is hard for him to get to 1237. if he loses wisconsin he will not get to 1237. this is the problem. if donald trump doesn't make the 1237 it's his own fault. if he finishes sure it is his own fault. he hasn't grown as a candidate with a base of support that is strong and has not put together a professional campaign operation. he makes decisions by the seat of his pants. when you do that you get exposed in the course of this. the reason why he doesn't have a professional organization having debate prep, he doesn't want that. if you wanted that he would have that. here is a guy that does everything by gut and intuition. it has brought him pretty far.
7:08 am
to get throughhe last stages he has to be the most professional candidate who is prepared. he has neither right now. charlie: what does ted cruz bring? kellyanne: he has two pathways to the nomination. he has an 85 percent of the remaining delegates. wisconsin health because it resets the race and shows it is a two-person race. kasich is still in the background but it is no longer establishment versus nonestablishment. it is trump versus non-trump. the non-trump share of the electorate is larger than the trump share. it is where the growth opportunities lie.
7:09 am
if cruz can go in with a significant number of delegates he is the odds on favorite to win the nominee. he is doing some things now that we can't talk. he now has more delegates in louisiana. every state has different rules. if you have professionals working on the delegate rules, working on convention strategy, you have an infrastructure that is there to bolster human uncertainties present themselves. today there is an article in the paper showing in south carolina all 50 of donald trump's delegates may be unbound because he has violated the pledge to support the eventual nominee. charlie: is that what the meeting was about? kellyanne: it could have been. he wants to coalesce and unify the party. that is becoming difficult to do given the fact he has had the
7:10 am
worst 72 hours of his campaign. charlie: do you think john kasich will stay in? kellyanne: he is probably going to stay in. he is here in new york. he is not in wisconsin. if john kasich doesn't want to be called a spoiler he should justify why he is in this race and so far is as you trying to give it to ted cruz or donald trump? charlie: i will ask all of you, has this become donald trump versus the future of the republican party? guest: that seems to be the divide. do you want to harness the antitrust energy or do you co-opt his supporters, the anti-washington fervency that has been central to his message. he has bought that line trying to make the case that the policies trump would pursue are not consistent with conservative policies ted cruz has been
7:11 am
supportive of. charlie: and immigrants in wisconsin. what does it look like? guest: it looks like sanders. it means a longer campaign. he is getting very aggressive. he is not soft balling this at all. he is running an aggressive campaign against her. he is trying to win the nomination. it's a strange situation. he will turn 75 this september. this is last chance to be president. he is going for it. hillary clinton is trying to avoid a fight with him. one side wants to fight, and clinton is trying not to fight
7:12 am
because she wants his voters and enthusiasm. that puts him at an advantage. charlie: donald trump putting together a campaign looking at the way they are trending in a series of things in the most recent, abortion. can donald trump looking at how he played with hispanics, young people, african-americans put together a winning coalition? guest: a lot of people are struggling to see that path. polling has suggested between the comments this week, the attacks on ted cruz his wife, his problems would come to the floor. charlie: tell me what you think this about? kellyanne: if we can't beat hillary clinton, she has a problem among men. democratic party and hillary clinton's problem with attracting men. many of them dismiss, dislike
7:13 am
and distrust her. she has significant disadvantages going into the fall because mr. sanders has given her such a run unless donald trump is the nominee. hillary clinton can get 35% of the white male vote in a two-person rate -- race. ted cruz keeps her under 50% in every single poll. that is closer to hillary. he keeps her within the usual republican margin. it won't matter if you nominate someone for republicans who is that much worse among women. it is a long way to november we are going to have weak front runners with weak favorability ratings.
7:14 am
charlie: what will the history books say against this? guest: donald trump and ted cruz are the leading nominees starting off a huge disadvantages. ted cruz started down on a field goal. the only candidate available that consistently beats hillary clinton is in third place, the only one that starts out ahead of hillary clinton in the course of the race. it's an amazing situation how vulnerable she is in the course of this race your publican party is either going to nominate donald trump or ted cruz, who is decently behind in this race. i think this is an accelerator. i think this is an accelerator to the breakdown of the established parties. the republicans are well on their way. we are well on her way to that. it is going to be hard to put that back together.
7:15 am
the only thing keeping the democrats from going through the same process of breaking down his hillary clinton has her foot in the door and keeps it together in the course of this. when we look back in the years ahead we will see this year is the end result is the breakdown of the two major policies as national entities. chris: most likely conclusion of this, kasich is doing well in pennsylvania, he could win pennsylvania, but he is the alternative now. the republican party splits because trump is the nominee or because he is not. that is a great opening for a third candidate. the big strike on the democratic side is the party is not coming apart. it doesn't matter who hillary picks for vice president. she has formed this marriage of convenience with the president. president obama is going to campaign as hard as he ever has for his legacy. he will show up in october and
7:16 am
you will see them campaigning together. the african-american vote will show up because of him. those two together can hold the democratic party together while the republican party will be split. guest: i think he is right about bringing the full force of his campaign apparatus. he was already signaling at the time the time to wrap up was approaching, making clear that hillary was the nomination. this will be seen as a remarkable and potentially something that sends us to the separation of the parties. charlie: are we looking of the possibility they will break up somehow? this is, donald trump if he is nominated it will destroy the republican party? kellyanne: it is doubtful. these are growing pains.
7:17 am
the democratic party has grown so far to the left it is an uncomfortable place for hillary clinton. the republican party has growing pains to figure out the populist, conservative axes that it must deal with. historically, people will look back and say this was the election where electability was no longer the gold standard. who can win. who can win. for conservatives that is a huge relief. this is the year the electricity supplanted electability. both parties underestimated the insurgent outsider candidate in bernie sanders and donald trump. charlie: final word? guest: my fear or my thought on
7:18 am
this, even if hillary clinton wins in the course of this, she is going to get elected when a majority of the company distrusts her and dislikes are. with a split senate, a split house of representatives in the course of this. the american public will be forced to choose between two people they both don't like and don't trust and they are going to choose hillary clinton in the course of this. unless you dramatically changes the way she is likely to govern, i believe the country is going to look at this, they are so frustrated, in the aftermath of this if there is no way either political party states in any way as a dominant national presence like it has been.
7:19 am
kellyanne: inertia is the most powerful physical force in politics. we have had some friction this year. things at rest tend to stay at rest. voters always do the same thing. they reelect incumbents. if you are going for your second term as a president, you normally get it with few exceptions. i think it is very healthy for the body politic but at the same time i don't know the electorate cares enough to form a third party and things they have enough voice to do that. charlie: thank you matt, thank you chris. we'll be right back. thank you. stay with us. ♪
7:20 am
7:21 am
7:22 am
♪ charlie: helen mirren is here. she is an emmy, tony, and academy award winning actress. dame of she became a empire. sh how about that? a critic once wrote "no other actress can let you know as fast and economically that she is playing a distinguished and important woman." she stars in "eye the sky," as a an military officer leading the capture of one the most wanted terrorists in the world. here is a look at the trailer. >> we have intelligence of a meeting between danford on our most wanted list. we believe they are connected to the suicide bombing in kenya.
7:23 am
we have information they will be in this house. this is an operation to capture, not kill. >> range is 22,000 feet. >> your job is to be there i am the sky. >> i have to know if danford is inside and who is with her. ♪ >> this changes things. >> what's happening? >> she has a suicide best and
7:24 am
explosives. >> we have an ability to strike a target with considerable accuracy. >> dozens of lives are at stake. >> weapons on. >> given the circumstances i think we should walk. >> your putting the issue at risk because of one collateral damage issue. >> minister? >> i need legal clearance to strike. >> i am the one responsible for releasing the weapon. >> there is more than what you see in this image. >> we win the propaganda war. if we kill one child, they do. >> no one was to take responsibility for pulling the trigger. >> we lost the visual. >> we need a decision right now.
7:25 am
charlie: i'm pleased to have helen mirren back. helen: great to be back. charlie: you and alan rickman. you were off to a good start. helen: we never met in the movie. i finished before alan arrived. we talked on the phone in the film but we never actually -- i knew him very well. i did a play with alan, anthony and cleopatra. we all know each other. it is an incredible loss. i do think he would be very proud of this movie. charlie: why? helen: i think it is the kind of
7:26 am
movie, with the kind of issues he was interested in, he was committed politically. he was very thoughtful. he would love a movie that doesn't take sides, that leaves the decision up to the viewer and says we're all in this together. this is our responsibility. i think he would have appreciated that. the alan on the screen is the alan i knew in real life. as opposed to the actor who played those amazing get extraordinary characters. here this is alan on the screen. it is a great way to say goodbye. charlie: the movie is about the morality of the war and modern
7:27 am
warfare. helen: and all warfare. innocents are always killed. charlie: you can do all sorts of moral questions. helen: the bombings of hiroshima, of cologne, of london and coventry. leningrad. endless history, the whole history of warfare on the human planet has been one of innocent people dying. charlie: i have been told by national security officials, where was a certain people and they have said to me yes, and why didn't you kill him. they said because the family was there. then they said depending on what the level of power of the person, they would be prepared under certain circumstances to order a hit.
7:28 am
because it was so important. helen: that is the situation in this film. we are not saying every single drone strike would take the shape but in a drone strike that we are showing in the movie would absolutely take the shape. charlie: because he can order all kinds of assassinations and terrorist acts. helen: more in the case of our movie. it is the suicide bombers who are going to bomb a shopping mall. either they kill them here or if they get out, they are in the public might they cannot target them. they are going to set off a bomb and kill far more people. that is the issue, basically. charlie: do you know what decision you would make? helen: i really don't. i think few of us do. i hope it is a discussion people will have when they leave the movie.
7:29 am
it is like a courtroom drama except the audience is the jury. we set the arguments of for the jury and they will leave the cinema and discuss it. i think it is an unanswerable question. it is a question we ask our military to make for us all the time. charlie: and the president has to make these decisions. some have said to me interviewing lots of biographers and presidents, nothing prepares you for the decisions you make in the white house. or the kremlin in other places. helen: yes, absolutely. it is why they all look so gray. charlie: who is colonel powell? helen: the role was written for a man. gavin astutely realized if there was a man in that role it could easily be not dismissed the thought of as a man's movie, men doing macho things in war. making into a woman, which is legitimate, there are women commanders nowadays of that level, it opens the discussion
7:30 am
to all of us. we are all in this together. we can't just say it is men getting on with war. it opens the moral issues up. charlie: how is she different from the characters you have played and other officers? helen: it's an interesting character to play, someone who had gone into the military at a time probably in the 1970's when it was much more difficult for women to enter. and to survive and thrive in it and become a colonel in the system. that was interesting to research. but the movie is not about that. that is not what the movie is about. the movie is about this operation and the tension, the drama.
7:31 am
that is because that is the way it is. charlie: a lot of people say they want to make sure i understand this is a dramatic movie but also a movie that is exciting and interesting. helen: i'm sure they do. that just happens to be true. but no, honestly. you do movies because you have a great role, a fantastic role, great costumes. woman in gold was a wonderful story of an interesting character to play. with "eye the sky," i didn't
7:32 am
care about the characters. i cared about the story and the way in which the story was told, which was original. it is rare these days to see a movie you think, i haven't seen a movie like that before. charlie: the things should be discussed by all of this regardless of gender. >> i think that is true. i think that is what he has done. he has heightened the conversation. i lucked out. but i think that was the intention. charlie: here is your character trying to obtain legal clearance for the drone strike. >> the plan was to get through the roof of that house. i need legal clearance. >> it is no longer a capture situation? >> no.
7:33 am
can you clear me? this is a time sensitive target. >> the rules of engagement only allow for a low collateral damage. >> the explosives bring it to a potentially high icd. >> i can see a potential legal objection. >> jesus, we have two suicide bombers and high-value individuals in that house. >> rules of engagement is to capture, not kill. mum, i think it would be wise to refer up. >> are you telling me that or debating? >> to refer up? >> i am telling you. [laughter] charlie: higher up. helen: i think it is about democracy as well. the film. i had no idea this chain of command took place. charlie: does she change?
7:34 am
helen: no. charlie: she wants to strike. helen: she wants to strike and in a months time maybe there will be another operation and she may make similar decisions. no. i don't think she changes. she has an idea in her mind of what it means to be in the military, what your target is, what your intention is. she is following it through. charlie: you really like this movie. helen: i do. i wanted to do this movie. there was a potential conflict with another film and i said if there is a conflict that is the film i want to do. it is a smaller movie, smaller budget but more of a risk if you like. it was the movie i thought had exciting potential. charlie: do you choose based on what it is, how do you choose? helen: i don't know.
7:35 am
there is always slightly different reasons. one of the things i look at his is my character on the last page of the script? if it is, it's a good thing. charlie: you don't want to be killed off early. helen: that's not so bad but if you are killed off in a dramatic way, that is also good. with great drama. if that is not the issue, it is who is the director, the script. this was always a great script. it didn't need any drafts. charlie: i never understood how they come up with a singular narrative in seven people are running the script.
7:36 am
helen: this was a perfect thing. i've had a few like that. mostly scripts go through many, they develop and change. charlie: is there anything you want to do you have not? helen: work wise. yes. i don't know what they are, what it is. it is the thing that takes a by surprise. charlie: you can't say i want to do the shakespearean character. helen: i have a hunkering to do some chekhov. being half russian. i love the cherry orchard. it's a wonderful play. it's interesting. people are going through redefining chekhov, which is
7:37 am
interesting. charlie: how? helen: they are trying to take it out of the 19th-century russian thing. all about,at it is 19th century russia. but they are eternal plays. they are classic plays. they will survive eating looked at in a new way. charlie: you will take a role how small or large it is? if they pay you appropriately? helen: even if they don't pay me appropriately. charlie: you want to work all the time? helen: i'm still lucky. i'm still working. but, it is incredible. you know? you looking ate me like that? helen: sorry, charlie.
7:38 am
[laughter] helen: i will work as long as people want me to work. charlie: what is it you love about acting? helen: honestly, it is watching other people act. i do. in theater or in films, being inspired and excited by the process. we are storytellers. it's an ancient, ancient human craft. charlie: do you feel yourself growing in your talent? helen: i hope so. charlie: because you have different experiences. your brain has changed in terms of experiences so therefore it is different? >> one is completely a different person than you were 30 years ago. but yes. i doubt no. it is fun. it's incredible fun doing what i do. charlie: when did you see a role and say i want this. call up the director and say, how about me?
7:39 am
helen: i don't know. i suspect my agent has done that with me not knowing. i don't usually find out about things. if i do, i would be a bit embarrassed. charlie: what do you do when you are not acting? helen: i garden. i garden i'm acting actually. i make a little hard and around my caravan. big flowers. charlie: are you good at this? helen: i am. i'm quite good. i love it. it is something i love to do. charlie: you do or you don't have a green thumb? helen: i don't always battling my mistakes. charlie: i asked you if there are any great roles. in terms of your personal life, are the things you wanted to do? places you wanted to go? helen: i have been to china, i'm so glad. i'd love to go back. vietnam, cambodia, those places.
7:40 am
i would love it. i've never been to india. and alaska. how beautiful alaska must be. so many places i want to go to. even just here in america. america is a beautiful country. charlie: another scene. asking alan rickman to switch the mission from capture to kill. [video clip] >> we need to put hellfire in that room right now. >> it is a capture, not a kill. >> we no longer have a capture option. any action on the ground will confrontation,d which we will lose. >> they are watching.
7:41 am
even with the vests, we need their approval. >> that should justify using the hellfire. >> she is a british citizen. they want her a lot. they cannot have her alive. >> we have to know we are legally in the clear. [end video clip] helen: so moving to see alan. so great to see him. i'm so incredibly sad. we lost him much too early. so, sorry. charlie: it was an interesting career he had. helen: yes, a great career. he had such a diversity. helen: yes, he did. him. absolutely loved talk about sex appeal.
7:42 am
he had a sex appeal. he was one of those people women just on the screen just absolutely adored. then he played against that, playing all those weird goth type character in harry potter, snape. he kept it very quiet from everybody, very close friends didn't know. i went to his memorial. a lot of people spoke. emma thompson spoke. lindsay duncan spoke. i should remember everybody. there was such a lot of people there. charlie: what is next for you? helen: i finish this film and sure. am not quite there may be a project i am thinking about now but i can't talk about it. before everyone signs the deal you can't talk about it. charlie: is the queen over? helen: yes. i have taken the crown off and
7:43 am
put it in the back of my cupboard. occasionally in fond memories and then i will put it back in the box again? charlie: what do we know about her sense of your performances? helen: i doubt no. is that the royal we? charlie: no. [laughter] helen: i know a little. i have been generously invited to various functions at the palace. [laughter] [indiscernible] helen: but with many other people. not just me and the queen. charlie: it is lovely to see you. helen: thank you for having me. charlie: eye in the sky opens nationwide tomorrow. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪
7:44 am
7:45 am
7:46 am
♪ charlie: we conclude this evening on the driving range with the world's number two golfer, jordan spieth. one of the things i love about watching you, after you drive, the first iron into the green. it is a waggle, it is like this. what is that?
7:47 am
jordan: just to keep moving other than standing stiff and getting into a swing. i like to kind of keep moving. charlie: the same grip you have always had? jordan: yes. we try herein there to space my hands out. the club is little weaker. meaning further write. but same grip. charlie: the more it is over here the weaker it is. jordan: when it gets close together. it is something we will mess around with at the beginning of the year. charlie: you have one swing going back.
7:48 am
ordan: ideally. right now i am trying to load. what that means, with this right side, i want to keep it very stable and keep this going back. as i take this back my waist should shift into this leg but this whole leg should hold study and let my body go over the top of it. charlie: people say at the top of your back swing you are quiet. jordan: ideally. it gives me time to set their, be quiet in transition and gives me a nice move in to the ball. charlie: everybody who loves the game, there is always a conversation about getting your hips around. are you conscious of that? jordan: no.
7:49 am
when i was nine may be. i don't think anything about going through the ball, all my stuff is in the back swing, the trigger. a consistent downswing whether i want to work it left to right or right to left. charlie: hit one. [laughter] charlie: what iron was that? jordan: that was a seven. charlie: that looks like my driver. jordan: that went a little over to the side. that is better. charlie: oh my gosh. look at that. that. that is exactly where you wanted it.
7:50 am
jordan: i normally hit this around 180 yards. my irons are spaced 10 yards apart in carry distance. you space everything out teedo have an uncomfortable number. charlie: if i shifted to a four jordan: it will come out lower. on this range this will fly. it will hit into the net. oops. charlie: it is a joy to bow hold. jordan: what happens if it goes over that? charlie: right into the river. jordan: as you come down, there are ways you can hit it higher, lower. you try and get the club to deliver with higher effective laws. you try to use the loft on the club.
7:51 am
charlie: how? jordan: getting the club there before your hands. charlie: most of your time it should be leading. jordan: slightly leading. to head higher you want the club to get it earlier. if you looked on camera it is a millisecond earlier but the effective loss changes and it gets the ball in the air. the hands are still in front of the club. they are closer to 90 degrees. now i am cheating. it should go a lot higher.
7:52 am
charlie: you were 7 when you stop thinking about don't move your hips? jordan: stuff like that though, a lot of times, if you feel like everything is good in your swing and you want something to think about, think about something basic, whether it is your shoulder alignment or your head. it is enough to be your one trigger. that is ideal. as far as impact position, you never want to think about it. he wanted to be subconscious. charlie: if you were hitting a
7:53 am
ball blind, close your eyes. jordan: close my eyes? watch out. charlie: i should have -- jordan: i should have enough muscle memory. charlie: look at that. blind. jordan: the strike was in as good but -- charlie: which raises my question. how much of your sense is in your mind? 90% of your sense of concentration? you are doing what great golfers are doing, you are really manipulating the ball. that is the genius of your game. having it do whatever you wanted to do, and all those kinds of things. are you actually, i got this from reading something tiger had said, your idea of knowing exactly where your clubhead is. are you thinking about that moment of impact?
7:54 am
jordan: when you have the one trigger going back to set it, you get a transition to produce what you want. controlling that. when you pretend there is no water on the left side and hit it to the water on the right, up towards the center and you can manipulate the club to spend the golf ball in that direction. you do the same. you don't change much in your back swing. as you start down, to work it left to right, to spin it, you cut across it. you hit to the left for it to go right. i'm trying to think of the easiest way to explain it. as you start your downswing down you know exactly where the angle of the club face is as it rotates to get it to cut across it with an open face. so, hopefully something like this. or not.
7:55 am
charlie: my final question. you want to hit the ball over the fence. jordan: yes. hit more club. charlie: what do you mean? jordan: i can't tell where it is landing. i will hit a three wood. it will sail over the fence. this should have a chance. we are good. charlie: hello boat. [laughter] there is a fool trying to hit us with a golf ball.
7:56 am
jordan: i think it made it. charlie: one stupid question. of all the things you have contained in your golf game, what is the most important thing that makes you number one? that gives you the season you had last year? jordan: confidence in my putting. in my alignment, and the ability to make the big pot when it matters. you only do that by seeing it when it matters.
7:57 am
after you see a couple go to have that visualization and you believe you can do it. a lot of times when it comes down to millimeters, that is all it takes. believe that puts the confident stroke on it. charlie: feel and speed. jordan: it was fun. charlie: i enjoyed it. ♪
7:58 am
7:59 am
8:00 am
>> welcome to bloomberg businessweek. i am carol massar. drags and i am david europe. jura.and i am david ♪ david: i am here with the editor of bloomberg's this week. an inconvenient truth about trade, something that has been talked about already. hotor: it is the


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on