tv Charlie Rose Bloomberg July 18, 2017 6:00pm-7:00pm EDT
♪ from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." president trump returned to washington from france this weekend. it was his second trip overseas in his many weeks. earlier this month, he was in germany for the g20 summit. he sat down with russian president vladimir putin in a widely covered lateral meeting. it was -- bilateral meeting. it was revealed they had a second informal meeting on the sidelines of the g20. this news. broke he's the president of the eurasia group and a frequent guest. i am pleased to have him back at the table. tell me about this.
ian: the first thing i thought of when i heard it was the fact that when sessions was having these meetings with kids react , but iten't meetings turns out that's where they are conducting business, that's what it sounds like. given the extraordinary focus and attention everything involving putin and trump and he has been meeting with a lot of people not tillerson, the translators, the russian foreign , it lastsand putin over two hours, we don't have a clear read out on what happened, and on top of that we have in our that evening that no one has heard of. we clearly know that trump does not care what the media has to
say about his desire to have a close personal relationship with the russian president and what drives it. charlie: you suggest it is his best one-on-one relationship. ian: it is clearly his best arsenal relationship. i'm -- personal relationship. i will also say never in my life major seen two made -- companies with a constellation of national interest that are dissonant while the two leaders seem to be doing everything possible to make nice. that is what people don't understand. the u.s. russia relationship is under as it's been since obama. charlie: vladimir putin has said so. ian: and the entire foreign-policy establishment in the u.s. has also said so. everyone says trump is flip-flopping on china, he says they are an enemy, flip-flops on
nato, all these things, yet onrushing he is the consistent. i want to find a way to work more closely. charlie: is it because he has a grand strategy or something else? ian: i was discussing this with richard haass on the council of foreign relations today. we are both a little flummoxed. you can definitely say trump likes the strawman. he likes -- strong man. he likes erdogan in turkey, he hees xi jinping in china, likes people who get things done. you definitely can say about trump that he also is very transactional, so he's willing to put his chips in to see if you can get something done and then see how they fall. that was with obama, when he first met obama in the oval office, and with xi jinping.
also the fact that obama's relationship with putin was damaged in the end, so there's an opportunity. but if you put those things together, they don't add up to where trump is with putin right now. they don't add up -- charlie: so what is missing when you say it doesn't add up? somei think there is strategy. the explanation i think we will learn either through weeks or through similar investigation. lying and covering up too much stuff. i have not believed that there has been direct collusion between putin and trump. charlie: you have not. are you more open to the idea of perhaps? it also depends on how you define collusion. ian: true.
first, because it is hard for me to imagine that putin plus kremlin really would have believed they could have swung the election for trump. you have to believe these guys are as cynical as can be. they believe the american system is as brutal and damaged as the russian system. as the way they see all politics. it's about cash. follow the money. that's the way you figure politics in russia. from their perspective, hillary was going to win because the establishment was going to ensure a win. i think the russians were probably more surprised than the americans that trump actually won. i believe that. but it's hard for me to imagine -- but you have no doubt that they hacked and attempted to influence the election one way or the other. ian: no doubt whatsoever. charlie: but where you can't go yet is a collusion between the president of russia and his government and his intelligence
operatives, and members of the trump team providing them something which would have clearly been beyond the pale. ian: and that they would have gotten something in return, some commitment of meaningful offers. charlie: or they wanted to do it because they thought they had some leverage on the president, and if he was elected, they would have an advantage. ian: but it clearly seems there were many people around trump, some quite high-level, that were compromised by the russians. charlie: compromised in what way? you mean michael flynn? michael flynn, paul manafort, the amount of money supporting getting $17 million in 1 -- charlie: what about. meant for it compromised by the russians rather than the ukrainians? ian: the ukrainian party he was supporting with the kremlin supported party.
where did he go when he was forced out? to moscow. given the amount of attention this investigation is getting, withumber of lawyers serious capability on the financial and anticorruption type, they clearly believe these connections are meaningful. i expect we will learn something . whether that goes directly to the president, i don't have any view. look atpoint, we can't all of this happening and say it is just smoke. it doesn't make sense. the good thing about our system is we will find out what it is. you just had a significant victory in mosul. we had a kind of encirclement over raqqa. the caliphate is being shrunk. already in iraq, that's one of
the biggest issues there is, what is next? leastet's start with at some positives, which is that osulle can now go back to m and start to rebuild. charlie: it is one of the most distracted places -- destructive places. it has been ripped apart. ian: having said that, these people want to be in their homes, and humanitarian aid from the u.s. and others will be forthcoming. given that is one of the things that seriously was destabilizing jordan, this crush of migrants, having an opportunity for them to return is a positive thing. also the fact that the caliphate was established by isis. they had land, they had a that did raise the money and get people to want to join isis.that didn't make
it more plausible you would become a lone wolf in support of this organization. i think there are people now that aren't going to die because isis has been, is being destroyed, in its capital. charlie: but isis arose after the iraq war, from remnants of al qaeda that were there because, in fact, the sunni didn't feel like they were getting a fair break. therefore, there was a whole portion of iraq not willing to oppose them because of the bad deal from the baghdad government. what's to say that won't happen again? it was the isis, but somebody else? ian: it is happening again. it is hard to imagine everyone that was the nicest has either -- in isis has either flat or is killed or imprisoned. there are still villages that need to be cleaned up. they will still perpetually violence. they are operating in southeast asia. they are operating in yemen and
other countries.i don't for a second believe we are out of and -- forrisis isis. and -- for when you destroy saddam hussein, , and alloy the party the infrastructure, both military and civil and political around the leadership in iraq, and now the shia and iran are going to be much more in charge of everything but the kurdish region. charlie: i want to stay with the kurds and then go back to another point. with respect to the kurds, is there going to be an independent kurdish state? ian: i think there will in iraq. they have a referendum coming up. i think they are willing to wait because they know they have to, but they want a marker that says we are, in favor, we have voted.
the turks cannot say they want -- charlie: but they are less resistant? ian: i think they are, because they have a state that some of the turks have been able to do business with. you have satisfied a level of kurdish independence without , as well asng kurdish separatism in turkey the problem is that. president already one can never say this publicly because of his challenges with the kurds in southeast anatolia. charlie: groups he considers revolutionary terrorism. yes. so you have that issue, and the iran issue, who will also have bigger problems with the idea of kurdish independence in iraq, that the iranians have more influence over.overtime, i don't
think either of those things can stop -- -- what influence iraq?ran have he other ian: ultimately, the iranians are spending more money, calling more shots, developing more infrastructure. they have the direct religious influence and ties with the shia population there. they will do everything possible to ensure there's never again going to be a war. charlie: how much influence do they have over bashar al-assad, because of the influence over hezbollah? ian: and because the iranians have military capabilities on the ground in syria, too. charlie: but mainly hezbollah. ian: yes. but the answer is, a lot. there had in incidents and political negotiations with the russians have been frustrated.
the russians and iranians are working closely right now on syria, and they are sharing military bases. keep in mind the russians supported u.s. sanctions against iran. charlie: they supported the nuclear deal. ian: absolutely. i don't feel like the russians -- i feel like they had a long-term strategic alignment necessarily -- charlie: when you look at this deal that took place when the president went to riyadh, and said, i'm joiningnecessarily -- with arab countries in an effort to isolate iran in the battle for supremacy in the gulf region, and then later you have this deal which the saudi's and amber rudd launch -- emirates launch a huge deal against the qataris. what's that about? ian: i think there are a couple of things at play here. the first, let's not forget that we now have a new crown printing in saudibia -- prince
arabia. cable glands strong. he wants to prove himself. has a lot of opportunity among leading princes. that succession battle is through. another prince, running internal security forces, many believe he's next on the chopping block. if you are trying to consolidate power, and the big thing that prince salman has done in the region under his authority when he was running defense was this very ill-fated war in yemen. now he's leading the charge with a bunch of countries in the region and more broadly against qatar. he put these demands in place on
the qataris that clearly were not meant to create a negotiation or a deal. isolate, andnt to force capitulation, or basically unwind the gulf cooperation council. --hink there was a domestic factors that play. anyone who is trying to calm the situation, it is difficult. charlie: when you talk to the saudi's or mri -- emirates, they think it is a severe effort by in order to support groups within their own countries that were intent of overthrowing their government. that's what they say. ian: that's what they believe. the first component is the saudi component. the second is the fact that anti-iran,and said
anti-iran. no matter what tillerson or others would have said, suddenly crown prince salman things, i have an opportunity. the third is what you said. this is not the first time that the saudi's and others have had problems with qatar. it looks like they actually leaked a document, from before, 2014, when there was an agreement the qataris were going to stop supporting the brotherhood and be more cautious and temperate in what they used al jazeera for. the contents of that secret deal were made public, and his that it wasaudis correct, which means they leaked it, probably. these countries have had serious problems with qatar. charlie: so why does qatar do it?
because they want to play above their weight? they also do it because they have a lot of money. they feel it we are the junior party here. ian: partner in the region. that's right. that's been the case very long time. they feel like balancing and hedging between the iranians and other -- charlie: and the gulf countries at the gcc also feel like al jazeera had been on the one hand stirring up things against their own autocratic power. ian: correct. with the exception of al jazeera's treatment of qatar itself, pretty much everything else in the region, if they see something else in the region to criticize, they can. have seen the muslim brotherhood as the future of the
region. even though they are a monarchy, they think long-term the monarchies are not going to work. the future will be more democratic, more religious and national. they have made that bet. the saudi's have not. trump has come in and said the right want tohe make. so qatar is on the wrong side of this. as you know, they now have a serious relationship, not just with iran doing much better, but gan's turkey, who has sent troops into qatar to support them. when i was with richard haass earlier today, we were talking about turkey. he said they are a member of nato, but they are not a partner of the united states in nato right now anymore. charlie: how is trump getting a wrong with -- along with chancellor merkel?
ian: i think of the traditional american allies, the merkel relationship is by far the most challenged. the is because merkel is macron, he'sve transactional. he invites putin, he invites trump, he can find a way to work with you, disagreeing on climate, but finds a way to work. has popularity, he's charismatic, everyone is coming to him. that has been positive for the french. merkel,ase of germany, leaving aside her election -- charlie: and aside from thecharlie: fact that she loved obama. ian: she had a good personal relationship with obama. clearly the way obama hair and don't -- handled snowden shook her.
and the listening on the phone. and the fact that when she took refugees, obama didn't help, and she was personally disappointed -- charlie: rhetorically or any other way. ian: right. i think intellectually and personally they got along very well. charlie: he said to me in an interview in germany that she was the foreign leader he most admired. i said, why? he said temperament. like used to be called no drama obama.she's the same way. ian: let's put it this way. if trump were being honest with us, merkel is probably the foreign leader that trump has the hardest time with and is least comfortable with. charlie: did the pull in speech hurt -- did the polling speech poland speeche
hurt? ian: absolutely. but it was legitimate. it just came out that trump gave a speech, he did not mention the work democracy in the speech once. for poland, this was a masterful speech. it was nation, it was civilization, it was family. charlie: there's a lot of people who believe the west is being destroyed. plays.d in poland, that it was written very well. it was all of the things that -- a part of the western charlie: unraveling. ian: right. but none of them have to do with democracy. for merkel, those things are critical. she would argue they are more important than the thing trump was bringing up. these are two personality types
that if they were on a spectrum, they would be off the charts. the fact that merkel was under so much pressure to make europe brexit done, now be the leader of the free world, it's not happening. i think this is a really challenging relationship for trump, and it's not going to improve anytime soon. charlie: great to see you. ian bremmer of the eurasia group. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪
♪ charlie: -- >> he is the 20th president of princeton university.he has held that job for many years. he is also a supreme score -- supreme court scholar. he has tried to engage princeton more deep beat with american society, welcoming navy rotc back campus, and increasing economic diversity. welcome to turn these table.i want to read something you read at princeton's graduation. "we live in a time when confidence in our shared institution is ebbing. not only journalists, but business, nonprofits, all organizations. it is tempting to complain about but we need, institutions because they enable us to pursue larger purposes together." first, why is confidence in all the institutions ebbing? >> it's a great question, david.
the best i can do is speculate. it is a worldwide trend. there may be different causes in different places. if i look at the u.s., i think about political polarization that leads us to disagree systemically with one another, and at times, as an article last dislike one even to another. that just pushes the question back at a level. why are we seeing distrust in institutions and one another? i think the growing inequality has something to do with that. perceptions of procedural unfairness has something to do with it. if you read stories about people who are not only wealthy but itm not to deserve that, but -- or if you see corruption in the public sphere, it make you distrust the inequalities. it seems like the game produces unfair outcomes.
i also think there's another reason, which has a more positive side to it. we are becoming very plural as a society. our institutions are becoming more plural. they are becoming more diverse in terms of the people were represented. that means some of the old fallbacks that some of us may have in terms of who we trust and who we don't have to be reimagined and reinvented. we have to learn how to work in society that is more diverse. david: how do you think about what higher education needs to faith into ensure american society at large, but also higher education? there are a number of answers. it is an important challenge and tough challenge. one of the things we have to do is know what our values are, stand by those values and stand by them so we can build trust in what it is we're doing, to help
people understand institutions that sometimes may look different from what we are familiar with. we have to look critical with ourselves. that is where we are falling down with that regard. you mentioned by bringing the navy rotc back to princeton. i think some of the diversity missing from ivy league institutions has been the diversity that rotc programs bring to our universities. we are fortunate at princeton, we had the army rotc with us throughout a period when it was absent from other ivy league institutions. looking at political diversity more generally on college campuses is going to be important if we are perceived, rightly or wrongly, as blue dots were arguments don't get vigorously engaged. that is a problem in terms of do.ding trust in what we
i think it's important at places like princeton that we increase social economic diversity of the student body, which is something i worked very hard on. david: i want to get to the economic diversity. let's spend a minute on free speech, which you sort of alluded to.there have been all confidence in its recently i which it seems like free speech is under attack. the one at middlebury, violent incidents at berkeley and elsewhere. how much is this something that is really a concern, and how much is the campus free speech issue a creation of the fox newses of the world? >> biggest arguments and free speech are indispensable to high-quality universities. those are incidents -- issues that all this takes seriously.incidents like the one that medullary or when heather mcdonald was prevented from speaking at claremont college, those are appalling
incidents. not physically violent in the way that the one at middlebury was, but she was prevented from speaking. that is inconsistent with what it is we need to stand for as institutions. on the other hand, i think it is the case that, with an incident like that, it is reported. charles murray came to princeton and had a respectful speech. when students had a debate with rick santorum, he complemented the students and there was little reporting. exaggeration around the incidences that are taking place on college campuses and i find that our students and faculty and university leadership are dedicated to the importance of free speech on the campus, but these are fundamental values and
we have to be attentive to making sure that all people with viewpoints are able to speak on our campuses. is a new wants to message. it sounds like you are saying that you are a strong believer in free speech and you are bothered by the attacks on freedom of speech that come from the lyrical left, but you do not think it is the existential problem that the political right has made it out to be. chris: free speech is in good shape on most campuses and we are having robust arguments that we ought to be having. people will point to a protest or two people speaking rudely to one another and say that is a sign of a free speech problem, but that is free speech taking place and free speech protects the right of the protester to stand up, as long as they are not keeping someone else from speaking.
david: do you have concerns that basic values are under more question today, including from younger citizens than in the past? am optimistic about our students and the young people in general. i find them inspiring and find that they have an extraordinary commitment to service and a strong sense of democratic values. there are times where you ask the question of what it means to act on those democratic values and how you express them through the electoral system right now. they are growing up at a time where many of them believe, as do i, that climate change is extraordinarily serious and has great urgency for the planet. they are looking at the legislators and seeing them unable to react to this and seeing deadlock in washington, where there are regular
arguments about whether or not the government should pay the debt. you are seeing polarization and a reason i speak about institutions in the way that i did at the commencement address that i gave was that i am trying i urge this generation, who think are very engaged and have respectded to for institutions. i have confidence that students understand that free speech is important to a democracy and i think they are struggling with the question of how it is that you operationalize that commitment in a diverse set of surroundings. on the one hand, they want students to feel included and respected and they also understand the importance of vigorous argument. day invited, as the class
, in hersomebody who remarks to them, because we had a lot of tumult on the campus and an occupation of my office, she said that there were uncomfortable discussions on campus and said that whoever said the discussion should be comfortable. who field of they want to be protected from uncomfortable arguments. most of them do not. occupation was the of your office about? the memory ofbout woodrow wilson, who is kind of a second founder of the university. thes an alumni who became president of the united states and he transformed the university into a great research university. we honor him and we talk about
him. the protesters want the name of woodrow wilson off of the school of international affairs and the residential college. we had a committee that considered that issue and we had a campus-wide discussion and a community-wide discussion that involved a lot of input and we came out, saying that we are keeping the name on both and we are going to change the way about how we talk about woodrow wilson to recognize both his serious flaws on the issues of the and more generally aspects of our history that we need to own up to and have not talked enough about. say that it fair to woodrow wilson is a racist? chris: i would say that. i might characterize it differently, but thing i learned
is that woodrow wilson re- segregated the civil service as president. it wasn't just that he failed. .e re-segregated he was a man operating in different times and some historians, and we asked a number of them to ask letters -- say he was a, moderate on race. that cannot be characterized that way. david: woodrow wilson is a segway to economic diversity. he is a predecessor and he went on a campaign to make princeton less elite. he was not in favor of racial diversity or in terms of sex, but he pushed to make princeton feel less like a country club.
he failed, but it launched his political career. chris: it took the university on a trajectory that changed it, including hiring our first catholic. david: and it made the school more academically rigorous. you have made this integral to your presidency. as is interesting. for decades, we have talked about ethnic and racial diversity and we have had conservatives talk about political diversity. saysis different and this that many campuses have achieved some kind of diversity, but the student body is affluent. chris: we look at our numbers and we have a financial aid program that we think of as "best in class" and makes the
university of affordable. undergraduatet education. we thought we we get diversity in the undergraduate student body. , we lookedyears ago at how we were doing and we found 7% of students were eligible for federal pell grants , that go to the least of families. david: just to interrupt, it is not just the very poor. of the to 40% or 50% bottom income. chris: you are looking at that factor and this is something we needed to change for a number of reasons. if we want to be extraordinary and what we do, we need to be seeking talent from every sector of society. if we are going to bridge the divide's that exist, we need to bring people together from
different backgrounds and we the of change it because the college education at a place like princeton, for a student coming out of a disadvantaged background, it can be transformative in their life and all of the data suggest that. this can be transformative to their prospects for the future. david: we have also seen stories. there may not have been many, but there was michelle robinson, now michelle obama. chris: a great example of this. they talk about what a struggle it is to come to princeton and enter this environment that, in the 1970's and 1980's, was a very foreign environment. they also talk about the extraordinary impact that had on their lives and the way it set themselves up for the leadership careers that they pursued.
david: the schools like princeton are known for having engaged alumni. you have heard from some alumni and said, we do second, what is wrong with the kids that we already have? have you heard that? what is your response? who love thee some institution and understand that, in order to be faithful to the ideals, it has to change. i talk about what we have done -- and, to finish that story i told earlier -- we have tripled the number of hell candidates -- dates on campus. they understand that, if we are going to be a country -- and i think this appeals to all of us -- where you can succeed,
regardless of who your parents were, places like princeton have a take more students from disadvantaged background. i will get questions like that sometimes and i will tell people that we are not lowering standards and we are taking talented students who are making a huge difference on our campus and i tell them that i love all the different students brought to our campus and i am happy es.ut our truste i don't think that we can be focused on just one thing. david: is not just a percentage. chris: people often talk about it in terms of percentages and i understand that. the real question is about how many kids we can educate well and allow to flourish.
talk about these issues of diversity and identity and you thought you were a protestant american and then you discovered through a history project that the story is different. tois: my parents sent me catechism classes. that she hadd me been born into a german protestant family. after she died and i was working on a project with my son, i discovered through online records that she was jewish and i now identify as jewish. when i started putting the pieces together, i wondered how it was possible that this had never occurred to me to explain some questions about the family history that were a bit mysterious or cloudy. when i discovered it, it felt like a missing puzzle piece coming into play. david: how have you explored it?
set ofi connected to a cousins. my mother had cut us off from relatives who might tell the story about her background and i grew up thinking that i had relatively few cousins in this country and found out that i am surrounded by them and i have another set of cousins in israel who i am close to that i never knew about. what this was for me, in addition to connecting main to an extraordinaire group of people, it has given me a group of resources to draw upon as i try to understand my own ideals and values. as it happens, what i wrote about in constitutional law, more than anything else, was religious freedom and the question of religion and religious identity was always important for me, despite the efforts to raise me as catholic.
a russian lawyer met with members of the campaign, including jared kushner and paul manafort. according to emails released by donald trump jr., it was presented as an opportunity to get damaging information about hillary clinton that would influence the campaign. a russian lobbyist was also present and he has been described as a former spy who advocates for russian interests in washington. offers a picture of this in the new atlantic article. she joins me from washington. i did not do justice to the russian names that they deserve. questiongin with the of who this person is and why she was in the meeting.
julia: as a veteran russia-watchers said, this is like a real estate lawyer from hoboken showing up in an international scandal. , the suburbsoscow of a military town. very rich and very corrupt with organized crime. that is where she cut her teeth as a prosecutor in a private attorney that brought her to new york. that is why she was in new york. she was not necessarily there to , but she trump junior got a meeting. one of her clients was eating now-fired new york bharara., preet theis well connected to
prosecutor general of russia, who was mentioned in the email as "the crown prosecutor." do thehe one who want to damaging information. charlie: is there skepticism about her and that she exaggerated? julia: nobody had heard of her in moscow. she is a real estate attorney, really, who has dealt with fixing problems between the organized crime world and the official russian legal world and the business world. that is her purview. she got involved in lobbying tsky act.he magni charlie: you quoted bill browder, who is talking to us tomorrow, as saying that she was
vindictive, ruthless, and unrelenting. julia: a good russian lawyer. the thing that makes a good russian lawyer is not necessarily what makes a good american lawyer. it is about presenting your legal arguments and discovery. this is about who you know and who you bring a briefcase full you are to, who connected to, who your clients are connected to, and that is how the judge determines. charlie: what led up to this meeting? julia: she was defending a man who is a businessman from russia and is very well connected and his father is a very well-connected businessman in russia and a former regional minister. bharara for by preet stealing money from bill bro
wder, which brought her to new york over and over again. she was defending her client here and she was also involved in lobbying against the magni tsky act and chuck grassley filed a complaint, saying that she should be investigated, along with the other person at the meeting in trump tower last summer, for lobbying and not registering as foreign agents. charlie: how is her description of the meeting -- what does it say and how does it differ from what donald trump jr. says? julia: the explanations of. if you look at their -- the explanation align. -switch. like a bait-and
information some find plausible or satisfactory and she tries to change the subject to the magnit bored andd he gets doesn't want to talk about it. you talk to other people in the meeting who said that she actually passed documents to jr. and jared kushner and paul manafort. she denies that. there is a lot we don't know about this meeting. charlie: why did jared kushner and paul manafort leave early? julia: i don't know.
just jared kushner left early. paul manafort was just looking at his phone and was kind of lord. who knows if that is what really happened? apparently, nobody thought that this would be a huge deal and it is a huge deal. charlie: where is she now? julia: she is trying to win back the land under the first -- she claims it was fraudulently sold and people are charging her in using another -- what are you see here? know: i think we need to more facts about what happened in the meeting. on one hand, it is plausible
that she went into talk about agnitsky act and pulled a bait and switch, knowing that the trump campaign manager talk to hillary clinton. on the other hand, there is the original email or rob goldstone says that the crown prosecutor -- with whom she is close and she has admitted -- has damaging information you want to pass -- he wants to pass. it is hard to square. would you most likely go to to pass this information? trained inle who are ?his world of spy craft
full scope know the of the operation and she just think she is doing a small favor or a small thing and doesn't see how this fits into a larger picture. maybe so. i don't know. i think that there is a lot of speculation and we need more facts. charlie: for those who think that she has the capabilities of being used in this way, are there other examples of how she has been involved in this kind of activity, representing somebody through one source or another? julia: she has been involved in lobbying against this act, something that has really rankled the kremlin. she is very patriotic and very pro-impputin. she hates russian and american liberals.
she is a flow of obama and a ofporter of trump -- foe obama and a supporter of trump. she is involved in lobbying against this act, which they see as the template as a huge blow to the russian government and the elites, because it gets at their reason for being. they steal a lot of money and they cannot keep it at home. they have to get out the country act.the magnistsky those sanctions cut into that. charlie: do you believe trump jr.? julia: i very much doubt it. don trump was very involved in micro-managing, especially when ng opponentssmeari and keeping track of which attacks are made when against what opponents.
♪ betty: asia-pacific markets set for a mixed start. investors are weighing the growth, the dollar at an 11 month low, gold at a new high. sachs and bank of america showing weakness in their bread-and-butter operations. betty: health care hits the brakes on capitol hill. the repeal plan sunk just 24 hours after being launched. yvonne: the bank of japan starts a two-day policy meeting. southerly week inflation