Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  August 1, 2017 12:00pm-1:01pm PDT

12:00 pm
>> welcome to the program. tonight we begin with breaking news of anthony scaramucci's departure and talk to jonathan swan of axion. >> he was a real liability with the interview he gave last week to the new yorker that brought embarrassment upon the white house and the decision was made he had to go and by all accounts he agreed with that and was fine to leave and let general kelly have a clean slate to start over. >> charlie: we conclude with a conversation with senator jeff flake the republican from arizona. >> some will see this as just a critique of the president. it's not. this is a critique of where the movement has gone in the past decade. i think we've been losing our way for a while.
12:01 pm
>> the depart of anthony scaramucci and the conversation with jeff flake when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by the following: >> 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. >> charlie: we begin with news out of the white house anthony scaramucci has been removed as communications director after 11 days in the role.
12:02 pm
me attracted widespread criticism for his behavior. his exit comes on the same day general john kelly was sworn in as president trump's new chief of staff. john kelly is seen as someone who may bring order to the west wing and he has an opportunity to give general kelly a clean slate and the ability to build his own team. phil rucker is a white house bureau chief and political analyst for msnbc and jonathan swan a national political reporter for axios. i'm pleased to have them both on the program. phillip, what happened? with it simple or did he insist on an empty slate? >> that's right. he came in as chief of staff and empowered the way reince priebus was never empowered. the whole staff would report to
12:03 pm
him including anthony scaramucci and he decided he doesn't want scaramucci here and he was a liability with the interview he gave last week to the "new yorker" and the decision was made he had to go and he agreed and was fine to leave and let general kelly have a clean slate sto start over. >> charlie: do we know now more about the marching instructions general kelly has from president trump is it i want a clean slate and get started because i'm unhappy the way things have turned out the first six months. >> president trump knows he's had chaos and disorder in his white house and because of that in part there's no legislative achievements and he wanted general kelly to come in and whip the place into shape,4 and
12:04 pm
part of that involves getting the staff in line. kelly is now empowered to overrule all these factions within the white house. everyone will report through him. it's important to know kelly's not of these factions. he's respected and well liked by the nationalist and family folks like jared and ivanka and will remain in the white house. they like kelly and at least for now they seem to be willing to behave. >> charlie: have we, jonathan, heard from scaramucci? >> i'd rather not comment on my own conversations. he hasn't spoken publicly. he hasn't said anything yet with a statement with the white house president secretary. one thing i would say in terms of what went down there's some reports coming out now the trump family women were horrified and disgusted by his language which
12:05 pm
is the most absurd retrospective analysis to try and put a nice coat of paint in all this. in real time we were not getting the horror, the horror about the comments leaked out and president trump's first reaction was he thought it was funny and the next day he was joking about it and saying can you believe this guy. he's crazy, what am i going to do with him. this is very much a general kelly decision. this is general kelly from the outset sending a signal he was in charge and everyone goes through him. that's the authority he was giving by the president and firing scaramucci send a big signal to the staff. >> charlie: there was an
12:06 pm
interview with peter baker where he said you're either if you're chief of staff all the good ones have been stabbed rather than cheap and it has to do with their relationship to the staff that makes the difference in the white house. >> and look, scaramucci was brought in for a very specific purpose. jared and ivanka and this is not wishful retrospectful reporting around he was brought in to destroy reince priebus. i don't imagine it was as controversial and a lot of people on the press team couldn't stand him and didn't want to work under him and the a lot of other people after the interview came out one senior official said if this kind of behavior is condoned it makes me question whether this is the kind of place i want to work.
12:07 pm
getting rid of him was a very important cultural signal to the west wing. >> charlie: reince priebus had joined the white house staff for a while had he not? >> no, that's true. >> charlie: the other question that looms over general kelly arriving is can he say no to donald trump? is the at longlastne peron that can say no to donald trump and perhaps influence his behavior. is there some indication he can? >> that's the big question right now whether trump is willing to be disciplined and tamed.t
12:08 pm
very best to try and i am upon the president how important it is to be disciplined, to be thoughtful, to be strategic in his actions but at the end of the day i'm not sure he'll be able to change that much of what the president actually does. >> charlie: jonathan, do we know more about the television conversation and why he did it? >> anthony does this. anyone who's covered him will tell you he's colorful.
12:09 pm
a lot of reporters have dealt with him as a political donor to the republican party and a colorful figure on wall street. he usually did say off the record i'm told by others sometimes he forgets to say that and reporter have cut him slack but generally i understand he thought the conversation was off the record and never said that. i think he might have set it later in the conversation for a certain portion but it was genuinely just very sloppy performance. >> jonathan, i would add to this capacity he wasn't the donor anymore he was a communications director. you start speaking for the president. you should know to say off the record if you're going to be off the record. >> i am not excusing it -- yeah. it does show you how
12:10 pm
inexperience -- one of the arguments they were making for why he should not come to the white house is he's unqualified and inexperienced and if there's proof is saying all this stuff without saying off the record. >> charlie: does he stay in new york or washington? >> my understanding is he wants to stay in the administration but i don't have confirmation that's going to happen and they left that open in the press conference. >> charlie: and the president has said nothing? >> not too my knowledge unless something's happened in the last ten minutes. >> charlie: thank you both. it's a fascinating first day for john kelly. >> big first day. thank you, charlie. >> charlie: thank you, jonathan. we'll be right back. stay with us.
12:11 pm
>> senator flake is here serving as a junior united states senator from arizona since 2013. the senior senator is john mccain. he said the conservative movement has lost its way and urges fellow republicans to put aside partisan politics and do what's best of the country. we take this interview at 11:00 a.m. this morning prior to the news that anthony scaramucci is ousted. here's the conversation with senator flake. thank you. we only did a morning show and it's been a busy time. >> it has. >> how does a united states senator have time in a time like this to write a book? >> late nights. >> charlie: early mornings or late nights. >> i promised my wife i wouldn't do it at home when i needed to spend time obviously with her and the kids so a lot of late nights, yeah. >> charlie: how did you write
12:12 pm
it? >> well, i started actually last year. last july or so. i started thinking that a book like this needed to be written and started to write parts of it and parts of it were written a decade ago when i was in the house of representatives. every time i would travel home on the weekend on the plane before we had wi-fi on planes i would write. i have ten brothers and sisters and they were interested in what happened in washington that week and my wife sheryl said you'd better write it and post it on the family website if you don't they'll be calling you all weekend to see what happened and it will allow you to spend more time at home and i did and kept a journal in the house 12 years and a lot of that has ended up in the book. to write this particular book i thought at that time we're going if the wrong direction.
12:13 pm
some will see this as a critique of the president. it's not. it's a critique of where the movement's gone the last decade and think we've been losing our way for a while. >> charlie: the issue of behavior has looked to the president. >> it's worsened but the staying up and yelling you lie during the presidency during the obama state of the union and there's examples of after gabby gifford was shot and a year later she came back to congress to resign the next day but i was with her at the state of the union. i was her friend. i sat next to her. she was still unable to stand very easily and when president obama at that time, when the applause lines would come i helped her up and left he
12:14 pm
standing amid a lot of democrats and i started getting texts and e-mails from friends and other die-hard republicans saying why are you standing when the president is talking. why are you standing? i thought that's out of hand frankly you can't even do that. >> charlie: and the feeling that both sides of the aisle leaders were held hostage by caucuses. >> i think that's worsened over time. the us versus them and shirts versus skins over time. 24-hour media coverage and social media has exacerbated that but it's really our responsibility to break out. >> steve scalise shot at the softball game, you were one of the first people to reach him if not the first. >> yeah, i was the first. after the shooting stopped i ran
12:15 pm
out to him and it was a terrible thing. >> charlie: he was bleeding and you had to apply a tourniquet. >> i applied pressure and others were wounded. >> charlie: and you called his wife so she heard first from a friend rather than on television. >> i got him to the stretcher and off the field i went to call my wife to make sure she didn't see it and one of the staff members grabbed steve's phone and gave it to me and said would you call jennifer. i didn't want her to see it on the news and learn of it that way. but i just remember just ten minutes earlier when the shooting started there was one shot that rang out and i knew it
12:16 pm
was a shot and someone yelled shooter." i remember turning to the dugout ten yards away being the only safe place to go that was a proper dugout to get down and seeing the gravel pitching up as bullets were hitting it but it was the only place to run and but i had this thought, why? here? really? us? it was in congruent. >> charlie: what do we think about the motive now of the shooter? >> he had asked a few members who left early is this a republican practicing or democrats and they said republican and he had up his pocket a list of republicans and posted things that looked like he had it in more for republicans than democrats but i don't think he knew anybody in particular or was aiming for
12:17 pm
anybody in particular. but i mention in the book this came after the book was really finished but i added a couple paragraphs saying how awful it is to have somebody look out to see a bunch of middleaged middle-aged members of congress and saying they're the enemy. the way we look to other americans as the enemy and it's troublesome. it really should motivate us i think to be a little kinder and a little more gentle and in one of the chapters into the book i talk about growing up in snowflake. ten brothers and sisters. >> charlie: snowflake, arizona. >> one of 11 on a cattle ranch. >> charlie: your family has been in arizona for a while.
12:18 pm
>> brigham young send my great grandmother william jordan lake to colonize and found a valley to settle an apostle came along and was overseeing the colonization and asked him if he started a settlement and he said yes and he said call it snowflake and that's where i grew up. i had wonderful examples of my father who was mayor of snowflake. he passed away just a month ago in snowflake. my uncle jake flake from snowflake was speaker of the house he passed away ten years ago after being thrown from his horse. one of the last gentle cowboy legislators in his early 70s.
12:19 pm
my uncle was in the house. >> charlie: was it inevitable you went into politics? >> no, i have lots of cousins and sisters and brothers that haven't. >> charlie: and your family have served in high positions in arizona. >> what always struck me was like jake and jack brown a democrat from st. john a great udall boy and thighs republicans and democrats got along well. in fact i mentioned in the book, i talk about how the flakes were mostly democrat. in the late 1800s the mor church was concerned there would be too many republicans or too many democrats and when a new administration would come in it might favor the other party and the church obviously had been concerned about things like that
12:20 pm
after the extermination order from missouri and that was fresh in their minds. the church said you on the left pews are democrats and you on the right are republicans in snowflake the ones east of main street were democrat and west were republicans. the flakes were east of main street so we were democrats really until this generation. >> charlie: while he was alive, marlo marlon brando use to communicate with me because the program was on late and would always describe things as snowflake. where we leave it how is congressman scalise doing today? because after the shooting and went to the hospital there was a sense it was worse than we thought and maybe a turn for the worse and he seems better now from what i read. >> he is. he's out of the hospital and now in rehab.
12:21 pm
i spoke to his wife and saw his wife last week and he's doing better. the infection they had to go back and operate for seems to be taken care of and he's got a long road ahead obviously. it's a tough injury but boy he is tough. he has the whole country pulling for him and a great family. >> charlie: >> charlie: after something like this there is always whether it's new town there's two things that happen. one, the country unites in spirit for people who have been the victims of gun violence and at the same time people come forward and say let's figure out a way to do something about this. and then time passes and it fades. >> i do think after gabby
12:22 pm
gifford's shooting it lasted for a while it used to be republicans and democrats on the other side and you'd bring a date and frankly that was a good thing and not doing that anymore but it isn't as republican and democrat as it used to be. there is some lasting overall. we've got to get away from ascribing the worse motives to our political opponents. >> charlie: is redistricting part of the problem? >> yes, i talk a lot about that in the book. these days with the way you can use computer software and mapping you can choose your constituents rather than them choosing you. it has had an impact.
12:23 pm
a big impact. it's driven. >> charlie: the idea is if you redistrict so it's primarily heavily republican then there is not an effort to reach out to democrats. >> that's correct. >> and you have districts completely safe. you only worry about the primary. you just worry about the base and that's it. no, no matter how you redistrict if it's just geography or what you'll have some of those districts but right now you have far too many of those districts. some states like arizona have experimented with independent redistricting commissions. one type or another. that tends to work sometimes. but it's stuff. it's tough when the ability is there for politicians to choose their voters. they'll try do so. so it has driven our politics
12:24 pm
apart and my biggest concern is -- >> charlie: everything we've talked about is pre-trump and pre-2016 election. obama and boehner could never reach a bargain. >> what bothers me most the biggest thing we need to do is reach the grand bargain on spending. we have the simpson-bowles for a cut in spending for revenue and we have to do a semblance of that. we know the basic contours of what that will look like but given the way the parties have driven apart it's almost impossible to see when one party republican now with control over both chambers in the white house or if the democrats were in control of all three there's no way that party will take the political risk because the other
12:25 pm
party simply won't help. they say let them bear the risk and brunt. midterm elections are never more than two years away and it just really makes it difficult to see how we tackle the big things. i mentioned in the chapter when general mattis was asked what concerns you most. people expected him to talk about the nuclear threat in iran or north korea and he said basically dysfunction in washington. the lack of basic civility. >> charlie: bob gates says that all the time. the problem we have is three square miles. >> if we can't come together on debt and deficit and basic things -- >> charlie: taxes and spending.
12:26 pm
commitment to things like science and research. >> and immigration. how we deal with that. long-term issues long-term issues, health care. >> charlie: politicians say you'll get defeated if you depend on that. >> yeah, that may be the case but we politician have to recognize there's some things more important than re-election. and it was difficult to write this book. >> charlie: i heard you're behind? >> you can discount the polls but having said that it's a tough time to write a book like this. >> charlie: you department --
12:27 pm
your family didn't know. >> and it's not the easiest path to re-election. campaigns are risk averse and you don't want to introduce any variables. it makes some people upset but i felt it was important enough to do. and just to deal with the consequences because we're in a bad way now and have to come together as a country and around principles of economic freedom or free trade and just in terms of demeanor and comportment and basic kindness, the last chapter is talking about the way forward and i talk about what i grew up with with the saying in our home, put on the refrigerator as long as i can remember, assume the best and look for the good. that's what my mother and father
12:28 pm
always wanted to teach us. >> charlie: assume the best, look for the good. >> assume the best and look no r future good and we can use more of that in politics. >> charlie: how is john mccain doing? >> he starts today a regime of chemotherapy and radiation. i can tell you it's a tough diagnosis but an even tougher man. he's shown the country again and again and again that toughness. i think he takes that with him into treatment. we're all just praying and hoping for the best. >> charlie: what did you think when he cast his vote? >> we cast opposite votes. i wanted to keep the reform alive. i thought we've got to. in arizona 200,000 people in arizona will wake up this morning without health fair. they'll have paid the fine but can't afford care. people buying on the exchange are in a bad way and we need to fix it desperately.
12:29 pm
senator mccain's reason for voting against it is consistent with everything he's talked about for a long time. get back to regular order. >> charlie: he also made a sterling appeal for bipartisanship. >> and order means that. you go to the committees. the committees are more bipartisan. they are more expert in the area. in this case is lamar alexander or patty murray. i am convinced we have maybe not the leadership on the democratic side but you have people on both sides the aisle that are ready and ready to work across the aisle on this. >> charlie: it has to be by now, it seems, a repair of obama care. even the former president has acknowledged there were certain problems with obama care and certain principles that
12:30 pm
everybody seemed to believe pre-existing conditions and leaving kids on until they're 26 are things nobody wants to get rid of. >> and some are willing to in the interest of what they thought were higher economic principles. >> well, we've got to find ways to deal with this better. there are a lot of reforms needed both on the exchange side to make it affordable for average americans and on the medicaid side to make sure that's sustainable over time. right now we're growing those programs and spending more money than we can sustain long term. >> charlie: do they say they'll have another vote or health care or let it go for now? >> we got out of town pretty quickly after the last vote so we haven't really sat down. we will this week to see the way forward but my guess is and what
12:31 pm
he's said publicly is we move on. that means i think -- >> charlie: move on to infrastructure? move on to -- >> we don't wait to do those issues until we do health care but all the while -- tax reform is desperately needed and need to be globally competitive and need to move to tax reform but it doesn't mean we leave health care behind. i think we recognized the limits of what one party can do on its own. >> charlie: what's the worst said about obama care? >> that it doesn't work and imploding and i think it very much is. >> charlie: it doesn't work it's imploding. if you let stay on its own he says it will die of its own weight. >> it is but a lot of people will be hurt in the meantime. >> charlie: how many people will be uninsured if it goes away? >> it depends on which part goes away. there's the exchange side and the expanded medicaid side.
12:32 pm
-- >> charlie: what's the worse for republicans? expanded medicaid or the exchange side or mandate side? >> i think it was basically forcing americans to buy a product that they maybe didn't want and cannot afford. >> charlie: and penalizing if they -- >> that's right. we have 200,000 in arizona who paid the fine because they can't find affordable insurance and many had insurance before obama care came along. >> charlie: if you like your present health care you didn't have to move. >> a lot of people i know lost their coverage and haven't been able to find affordable coverage or have a policy where they're paying exorbitant premiums but have such high deductibles the first insurance dollar doesn't kick in for a long time so it's meaningless insurance. those are very real genuine
12:33 pm
concerns we have to address. we're just going to need to do it by sitting across the aisle, working with our colleagues across the aisle. >> what kind of grade would you give donald trump the first six months in office. >> i don't want to give a grade. >> charlie: you're promoting a book, "conscious of a conservative." you're running for election and asking people to support you. isn't it a responsible question to ask you what you think of what the president's doing. >> on things like like he nominated a great supreme court justice, neal gorsuch i was pleased to help shepherd him through the senate. on regulatory policy he's worked through congress to do 14 congressional review acts to nullify the regulation were hampering the economy and the second quarter numbers are due
12:34 pm
to the president and the congress. >> charlie: if there was economic growth i attribute it not to macroeconomics but changing regulatory -- >> i think that's part of it. the regulatory structure. that's what i hear from businesses small and large. we were out of control in terms of regulation. the prospect of tax reform. i think the president's instincts on tax reform are quite good. >> charlie: a corporate rate. >> lower the rate broaden the base orthodoxy. but then on the flip side i think the president's action on trade has been extremely detrimental. i think exiting the tpp will have long-term consequences we'll regret. >> charlie: the tpp. >> the trans-pacific partnership. it will have ramifications on
12:35 pm
our economy because it would have opened new markets for us but also has geopolitical implications. countries need to be part of it and china is moving on every front. i had a previously scheduled trip i took to mexico city. in talking to the mexican government about trade and nafta, for example. at the time we were meeting is when president trump said we're going exit tpp. the mexican senate was talking about going forward with tpp and it made it moot. at the same time the chinese president and russian president were in chile and peru saying already, if america won't deal with you we will. we're losing markets. once you get out of those supply
12:36 pm
chains it takes a while to get back in and there's detriments long in the future. >> charlie: on climate we also pulled out of the climate accord. do you support the president for doing that? >> i think the goals set -- >> charlie: the goals being met -- >> because of innovations and because of the exposure to natural gas oppose to goal. it looked like we'd meet some of those goals anyway. >> charlie: do you believe global warming is caused in part by what we do and climate change and causing the destruction of the planet? >> i do think the earth is warming and i accept the science that said mankind is responsible. >> charlie: why would you support the president's withdrawal? >> what i support is responsibly moving towards a better climate and goals that are achievable.
12:37 pm
i do think the paris accord those may have been achievable because of the growth or abundance of natural gas and exploration. >> charlie: and alternative fuels are cheaper. >> one beef i have with the same ones that give republicans a hard time for the skepticism and i'm not among the skeptics, i believe the science. but if you believe the science then believe it and understand we will need base-load power like nuclear because it's the only carbon-free base load power we have and too many on the left are reluctant to say all right it will be part of our energy mix. >> charlie: are you saying we cannot meet our energy needs if we reduce the level of fossil fuels without going to nuclear? >> i think it's very difficult. very difficult to do so. >> charlie: though there's a dramatic reduction in the cost of alternative fuels?
12:38 pm
>> those are good, they're great but they're intermitt ent. -- intermittent and you'll still need base load power and in the future we'll likely have utility scale storage and batteries for solar and wind but that will take a while. in that interim we're going to have to have base load power and that will likely include -- in the interim i'm talking decades, we need more nuclear power. some people on the left won't accept that and i think they need to to accept the climate challenges we'll face. >> charlie: i asked you earlier in an interview, do you seek president trump's support in your re-election. >> you always hope the president will support you. >> charlie: do you seek his
12:39 pm
support? >> i didn't support him in the elections i'd be surprised publicly for me. >> charlie: so you don't seek his support? >> let's keep in mind with different presidents with president george w. bush he became president the same time i went to the house. i was elected the same time mike pence was and both ran conservative think tanks in the '90s and ran together. 2001. we got elected. we came in and the first thing put on our table was no child left behind. we thought that's not very conservative. as a conservative i didn't like the federal reach into local education. then there was a prescription drug benefit and thought that's not conservative at all. it added $7 trillion in unfunded liability.
12:40 pm
but president bush though i agreed with him on most of the things. i opposed him on his cuba policy. i've been an advocate of lifting the travel ban and allowing americans to travel and trade with cuba. >> charlie: president trump wants to change that and president obama was against him on that. >> that's one area i agreed with president obama on. you don't have to agree with the president on everything. with president bush i disagreed with him on some things and agreed on some things and he recently did a fundraiser for me in arizona. i think that's people from arizona expect of me not being a rubber stamp for everything the president wants. i appreciate and work with this president, president trump on supreme court nominees and other nominees to the federal bunch and regulatory and tax issues but i'll oppose him if he tries
12:41 pm
to get away from nafta. >> charlie: the things with president bush the thing i think he's proud of is what happened is the idea of providing support. and people tell you in africa he did more than any president has done. >> that is completely true. and let me give you an anecdote. i did my mormon mission in south africa in the early '80s and 1999 we lived namibia and we traveled back a year and a half ago and were meeting with one of the worse dictators mugabe and he's still there and we met with him and it was a long two-hour meeting. we'd requested out of protocol but thought he'd reject it and
12:42 pm
he granted it. we were talking about it and he was ranting about every u.s. president and british prime minister forever and he got to president bush and was railing on president george w. bush and finally i couldn't take it anymore and i said hey, president bush was responsible for petfar. that helped you guys. it saved their bacon. and he stopped and he said, i'll give you that. [laughter] even mugabe but they do recognize president bush. that's opened more doors and let to more alliance we have needed on the security front in africa to fight al-shabaab because of that initiative. it was incredible. i was pleased to travel. i traveled back to africa with president obama later when he went to kenya and ethiopia.
12:43 pm
i hope we continue the progress we've made in africa. >> charlie: on an issue like north korea, what's the president do? >> it's cliche, there's no good options in north korea. keep everything on the table. that's all true. but there are just no good options. hope we can go to china and get some kind of action. >> charlie: the president has said he tried to do that and hoped they would be more forthcoming. >> their leverage may be more limited than we want to admit. >> charlie: or maybe they may be willing to do less than we want them to do. >> that is correct as well. that may be correct. i don't know. one thing i do know, you mentioned foreign policy is an area of rare bipartisanship but
12:44 pm
still is and i talk about it in my look. my work with tim cain to get an aumf nominee. >> 23 members of the senate were there to still vote on it. more than 300 members in the house has never voted on an aumf. we like this more than we should in the house and senate because then we can blame the president, republican or democrat for what they're doing or not doing with regard to isis or responding to other non-state actors when we should take our constitutional prerogative to declare war or authorized use of force and we've given that away.
12:45 pm
>> charlie: when should the president not have to go to congress. >> when there's danger. no president wants to accept that but they abide by the structure generally. when we have a long-term e engagement largely now with non-state actors we have to have a template where congress weighs in and that's what we tried to put together and i think we'll get there. you have bob corker and ben carden as chair and ranking members and they're reasserting the congress's role in these areas and hoping we can get that. the senate has six-year terms. we approved treaties, we have more responsibility for foreign
12:46 pm
policy and we see beyond the next till. >> charlie: if the president decides it's necessary to launch an attack north korea, he should come to the congress? >> yes, certainly if that doesn't endanger us in the meantime. if it's something that needs to be done quickly where we're in imminent danger, then, yes, the president has all the authorization under article 2 powers to go ahead but ultimately he'll have to come to congress and he should. but we are better off when our allies and our adversaries know we speak with one voice and right now our allies and adversaries see the administration doing something and congress not weighing in and that's not a good situation and our troops need to know that
12:47 pm
more than anybody. >> charlie: there are new polls that show decline respect for america. >> yeah. i think that's unfortunate. i think we ought to and a talk about being a conservative in the book it not only has to do with adherence of principles of conservatism but comportment and demeanor and in the area of foreign policy. a conservative is nothing if he's not sober and measured. and deliberate and predictable in use of diplomacy and force. i think that has been missing in the past couple of months. i think we need a foreign policy that embraced our allies and recognizes our enemies. i think that has been missing of late. i am concerned about the path forward. >> charlie: and there's europe
12:48 pm
and nato. >> that's right. they have to question or we have to give another speech and recommit ourselves to nato. i mean, there's a problem. it's a distress signal if our allies are having to seek that from us and wonder where we are. >> charlie: that's what the chancellor of germany said. we can't look to them, u.s., for leadership. we have to look out for ourselves. we can't depend on them. >> i am concerned our whole world order or whatever after world war ii was to build up our allies and offer a security umbrella and help them realize as they grow and develop and prosper we prosper as well and trade is not a zero sum game where somebody wins and somebody loses. that's all kind of been put aside.
12:49 pm
i think this banner we've taken up is unfamiliar to us and unfamiliar to our allies. and maybe our adversaries around the world. >> charlie: they use to say where there's a pat bathroom th see a potential president. arizona has a long tradition like virginia on orders -- bruce babbot -- >> charlie: the former governor. it's probably not wise to say you want to be president if you're running for senator. you must have thought about this. if you think about issues like this you have to think about what we need from presidential leadership. >> not just that.
12:50 pm
>> charlie: yeah, an implied criticism let me read you the last paragraph. we must embrace intellectual in dependence and reject the politics of the nasty, punitive and fact-free and reassert a conservatism of high ideals and good will and even better argument. >> i think that's right. >> charlie: when they read that they see you saying i'm not happy with the presidential leadership. >> that is true. i'm not. >> charlie: and therefore does it follow that -- >> no, it doesn't. i think there are a number of people and i hope. -- like i said there are some things the president is doing i agree with. i hope he comes around on the other. on nafta, for example, the latest negotiating points were
12:51 pm
good. >> charlie: he's changed on a number of things he said but not the wall. do you think he'll get the wall? >> no, i don't. the notion of a 2,000 mile solitary wall -- >> charlie: we're looking at appropriations in the budget? >> we'll have better barriers in some places and surveillance and some things that need to be done but it doesn't involve a 2,000 mile solitary wall some people envision. but back with the wall or mexico some things are concerning to me as well. it's not just the policy that makes a difference it's the rhetoric that you use this talking about the wall and they're going to pay for it and
12:52 pm
you talk or you tweet out crime statistics in mexico to bug them. >> charlie: people come in here that are rapists. >> it makes a difference in terms of mexico's political backdrop. they have an election coming up and they may have a populist president on the left that would undo a lot of the progress that mexico has made with regard to trade and privatization and if we have that then that would be bad for immigration. it would be bad for a number of things we worked with the mexicans on. >> charlie: this is from barry gol goldwater written in 1960. the conscious of the conservative is pricked by anybody who would debase the dignity of a human being. he's at odds at dictator who's rule by terror and those who
12:53 pm
play god with the human race, barry goldwater. and finally this, a dedication to that girl i met on a far away beach so long ago. to your wife, cheryl. >> charlie: thank you for coming. >> thank you. >> charlie: jeff flake from arizona. the book again "conscious of a conservative." >> charlie: and finallily a loo to tomorrow night broadcast about the production that ends august 6. >> i think the store of the play calls out for courage and speaking out in times of hatred and in times of real danger and creating art against all odds and as you see an indecent the
12:54 pm
odds keep increasing and telling their story over and over and over again. it comes to new york at the time of enormous immigration reform and where we cut down on immigrants in the u.s. it was an audacious move and it's real. i think the play calls out a reminder to love. >> charlie: the new york times said it's about censorship and others. >> it's why it's a per -- pertinent play. >> charlie: did you love it when you first read it?wí i thought how is this young man write this story between these two women it's like romeo and
12:55 pm
juliet in the rain and there's a brothel upstairs and a family downstairs and inheritly theatrical. >> charlie: visit us online at and captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh
12:56 pm
>> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. >> you're watching pb
12:57 pm
12:58 pm
12:59 pm
1:00 pm
announcer: the following kqed production was produced in high definition. ♪ >> must have soup! >> the pancake is to die for! >> it was a gut-bomb, but i liked it. >> i actually fantasized in private moments about the food i had. >> i didn't like it. >> you didn't like it? >> dining here makes me feel rich. >> and what about dessert? pecan pie? sweet potato pie?


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on