>>HELLO, EVERYONE.

WELCOME TO "AMANPOURAND COMPANY. "

HERE IS WHATIS COMING UP.

>> I THINK WE ARE HEADEDTO ASHUTDOWN BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS WON'TDO THE RIGHT THING.

>> ASA U. S. GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN LOOMSI SPEAK TO FORMERBIDEN CHIEF ECONOMIST JARED BERNSTEINABOUTWHY IN THREAT IS DIFFERENT.

> >> THEN-- >> THIS CAN BEDONE THE EASY WAY OR IT CAN BE DONETHE HARD WAY.

>>ISRAEL SENDS A WARNING TO HAMAS.

COULDTHEWAR IN GAZA FINALLY BE COMING TO ANEND?

I ASK ISRAELI JOURNALIST.

ALSO AHEAD -- > >> BASIC TRAINING ISBEING RESTORED TO WHAT ITSHOULD BE.

SCARY, TOUGHAND DISCIPLINED.

>> DEFENSE SECRETARYWITH A NEW VISION FOR THE U. S. MILITARY.

WE'LLHAVE THE DETAILS ON HEGSETH'SUNUSUAL SUMMIT.

> >> PLUS -- >> THESEAMERICAN COMPANIESNOT ONLY SOLD SOME GOODS TO THE CHINESEPOLICE, THEY ACTUALLY WERE COMPLICITINDESIGNING THE ENTIRE SYSTEM.

>> HOWAMERICAN TECHENABLED CHINA'S SURVEILLANCE STATE.

ASSOCIATED PRESS REPORTERDADE KING TELLS WHY HIS LATEST INVESTIGATIONIS CAUSING A STIR.

â™áâ™áâ™á â™á > >> "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" IS MADEPOSSIBLE BUT --THE ANDERSON FAMILYENDOWMENT.

JIM ATTWOOD ANDLESLIE WILLIAMS.

CANDACE KING WEIR.

THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMMINGENDOWMENT TO FIGHTANTI-SEMITISM.

THE FAMILY FOUNDATIONOF LEILAAND MICKEY STRAUS.

MARK J. BLECHNER.

THE FILOMEND'AGOSTINO FOUNDATION.

THE PETER G. PETERSONAND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND.

CHARLES ROSENBLUM.

COUP AND PATRICIAYUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURALDIFFERENCES INOUR COMMUNITIES.

BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG.

JEFFREY CATS AND BETH ROGERS.

ANDBY CONTRIBUTIONS TOYOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKEYOU.

THANK YOU.

> >> WELCOMETO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I'MBIANA GOLDRIGA IN NEW YORK SITTINGIN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENTIS RT HURTLINGTOWARDS A SHUT DOWN.

DEMOCRATS AREUSING THE RAREBIT OF LEVERAGE THEY HAVE TO DEMANDTHE BILL INCLUDE SEVERAL HEALTHCARE PROVISIONS.

A HIGH-STAKES MEETINGBETWEENCONGRESSIONAL LEADERS AND PRESIDENTTRUMP SEEMED TO ONLY AMPLIFYTHEIR DISAGREEMENTS.

TAKE A LISTEN.

>> THEIRBILL HAS NOT ONE IOTA OFDEMOCRATIC INPUT.

THAT IS NEVER HOWWE HAVE DONETHIS BEFORE.

>> WE ARE NOT GOING TOSUPPORTA PARTISAN REPUBLICAN SPENDING BILL.

>> I THINK WE ARE HEADED TO ASHUTDOWN BECAUSE THE DEMOCRATS WON'TDO THE RIGHT THING.

>> THE CONSEQUENCESARE ONTHEM, AND I THINK IT IS ABSOLUTELYTRAGIC.

>> THIS ISPURELY AND SIMPLYHOSTAGE TAKING ON BEHALF OF THE DEMOCRATS.

>> SO IS THERE ANY CHANCE OF BREAKINGTHE STALEMATE?

MUCH OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WILL BEHOPING SO, AND WITHOUTA LAST-MINUTE AGREEMENT FOOD ASSISTANCEPROGRAMS AND STUDENT LOANS COULDBE IMPACTED.

PARKS AND MUSEUMS COULDCLOSE, AND PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS THREATENEDMASS FIRINGS OFFEDERAL WORKERS.

TO BREAK IT ALL DOWNI'M JOINED BY JARED BERNSTEIN WHOSERVED AS CHAIROF THE WHITE HOUSE COUNCIL OF ECONOMICADVISORS UNDER PRESIDENT BIDEN.

ITIS GOODS TO SEE YOU.

YOU HAVE WORKEDTHROUGHSHUTDOWNS BEFORE IN YOUR CAREER.

HOWIS THIS ONE DIFFERENT,IF AT ALL, AND WHAT ARE YOU GOINGTO BE MOSTFOCUSED ON IF WE DO, IN FACT, HAVEA SHUTDOWN OVER THE NEXT72 HOURS?

>> ITHINK THIS ONE IS MORE WORRISOME INA NUMBEROF WAYS.

FOR ONE THING, SOME OF THESHUTDOWNS IN THEPAST HAVE BEEN PARTIAL SHUTDOWNS BECAUSESOME OF THE AGENCIESHAVE BEEN FUNDED AND THEIR WORKERSCOULD STAY AT WORK.

IN THIS CASE, NONE OF THE AGENCIESHAVE BEEN FUNDED SO WE ARETALKING JUST ABOUT A MAGNITUDE OFWELL OVER 800,000 GOVERNMENTWORKERS BEING FURLOUGHED.

THAT MEANSTHEY CAN'TWORK, YET THEY WILL BE PAID.

THAT'STHE LAW.

SOTHEY GET THEIR BACK PAY AFTER THAT.

THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT AREJUST PARTICULARLY CRAZY ABOUT THAT.

FIRST OF ALL, THERE'S A LOTOF ESSENTIAL WORK, SO-CALLED ESSENTIALWORKERSWHO STILL WILL BE WORKING, WORKERSAT THETSA, PEOPLE WHO GET OUT YOUR SOCIALSECURITY CHECKS.

THOSE FOLKS WILL BE AT WORK.

THEYWILL BE WORKING WITHOUT PAY.

AIRTRAFFIC CONTROLLERS WORKINGWITHOUT PAY.

THAT'S JUST A HORRIBLETHING TOHAVE TO GO THROUGH, PARTICULARLY INAN ECONOMY WHERE PEOPLE ARESO STRESSED BY AFFORDABILITY.

BUTREMEMBER, EVERYBODY GETS THEIR BACKPAY AFTER THIS IS OVER.

SO IT ISJUST EXTREMELYWASTEFUL AND, YOU KNOW, A BIG ON-GOAL KICKIN MY VIEW BY DENT OF THESE FOLKSNOT BEING ABLE TO KEEP THELIGHTS ON.

>> UP TO 800,000 POTENTIALLYFEDERALEMPLOYEES FURLOUGHED, AND THEN YOUHAVE THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATESAS I NOTED JUST AMOMENT AGO THREATENING TO FIRE FEDERALWORKERSAS WELL.

WHAT'S THE IMPACT ON THEWORKFORCE ANDIS THE FIRING EVEN LEGAL ATTHIS POINT?

>> WELL, FIRSTOF ALL, THE IMPACT ON THEWORKFORCE ALONGSIDE JUSTREALLY DAMAGING MORALE, WHICH I THINKIS ALREADY PRETTYLOW FOLLOWING THE DOGE CUTS, IS HIGHERUNEMPLOYMENT.

NOW, WE HAVE ALREADY HAD THE UNEMPLOYMENTRATE CREEPING UP.

STILL RELATIVELYLOW, 4.

3%, BUT WE'VE SEEN THE BLACK RATECREEP UPTO 7.

5%, UP FROM 6% JUST IN MAY.

SO A LOT OF THAT INCREASE, AGOOD CHUNK OF THAT INCREASE HAS BEENLAY-OFFS OFGOVERNMENT WORKERS.

THIS, OF COURSE,WOULDEXACERBATE THAT.

IN TERMS OF ITS LEGALITY,WELL, UNFORTUNATELY THE CONSERVATIVESON THE SUPREME COURT HAVE GIVEN THEPRESIDENT A LOT MORE LEEWAY THAN MANYOF USTHINK THE LAW ALLOWS.

SOTHE LEGAL QUESTION IS AN OPEN ONE.

>>YOU ALSO SAY THE DEMOCRATS NEED ANIRONCLAD AGREEMENT THAT REPUBLICANSWON'T RESCINDFUNDS LATER.

THAT IS A CORE DEMANDOF DEMOCRATS AS WELL IN ADDITION TOEXTENDINGTHE ACA SUBSIDIES.

HOW CAN THEY EVEN ASSUME THAT IF THISADMINISTRATION ATSOME POINT GUARANTEES THAT THAT THEYWON'T WALK THAT BACK LATER?

>> RIGHT.

THISIS CHARLIE BROWN WITH THE FOOTBALL.

>> RIGHT.

>>ALL OVER AGAIN WITH MUCHHIGHER CONSEQUENCES.

FIRST OF ALL,LET'S BE SURE EVERYONEGETS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

THESEARETHESE ARCANE BUDGET ISSUES WE ALLHAVE TO THINK ABOUT EVERY SIX MONTHSOR SO.

RECENTLYREPUBLICANS, LED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP,UNILATERALLY DECIDED NOT TO SPENDMONEY THAT HAD BEEN ALLOCATED TOBE SPENT IN THIS FISCAL YEAR.

THAT'SCALLEDA RESCISSION.

THE ONLY WAY THAT'SLEGALIS IF BOTH SIDES AGREE TO IT BECAUSETHESE APPROPRIATIONS ARE LEGISLATIVE.

THEY'RE INTHE LAW.

SO IT WAS MY VIEW OF --I'MNOT A LAWYER HERE, SO I WANT TO BECLEAR ABOUT THAT.

BUT IT IS MY VIEWTHAT WAS AN ILLEGAL MOVE TO RESCINDTHAT SPENDING.

THEYWENT TO THE SUPREME COURT AND THESUPREME COURT SAID, AS IT HAS DONEALLTOO OFTEN THESE DAYS, WELL, WE'RENOT GOING TO RULE ONTHE MERITS.

WE ARE GOING TO RULE ONWHOEVER BROUGHTTHIS TO US REALLY HAD THE ABILITYTO DOSO.

IT IS ONE OF THESE PROCESS DECISIONS.

SO IT ISA VERY PROBLEMATIC DEVELOPMENT ANDONE THAT, AGAIN,I THINK IS ILLEGAL, BUT FROM THE PERSPECTIVEOF DEMOCRATS WHY WOULD YOU SHAKE HANDSAND MAKE A DEAL WITH SOMEBODY ONA SPENDING PLAN IF YOU DON'T BELIEVETHEY'RE GOING TOSPEND IT?

NOW, TO DIRECTLY ANSWERYOURQUESTION, THERE ARE A FEW CHANGES--THEY'REPRETTY TECHNICAL --THAT COULD BE MADETHAT WOULD MAKE IT HARDER FOR REPUBLICANSTO BREAK THIS LAW.

PART OF IT HASTO DO WITH TIMING.

ONE REASON THEY ARE ABLE TO DO THOSERESCISSIONS IS BECAUSETHEY'RE DOING THEM RIGHT TOWARDS THEEND OF THE FISCAL YEAR.

IF YOU HADALAW THAT PROHIBITS THAT, LOOK, ATLEAST YOU COULD SUE THEM.

IDON'T KNOW HOW FAR THAT WOULD GO THESEDAYS, BUT I STILLTHINK DEMOCRATS ARE WELL WITHIN THEIRRIGHTS TO NOTSHAKE HANDS WITH SOMEONE WHO YOU CAN'TTRUST.

>> RIGHT, ESPECIALLY IFULTIMATELY THE DESIRE, AS THIS ADMINISTRATIONHAS SHOWN,IS TO GO TO THE SUPREME COURT.

THESUPREME COURT TAKESIT AND JUST PUNTS.

SO WE STILL DON'TKNOW ADEFINITIVE AS TO THE LEGALITY HERE.

IN TERMSOF THE POLLING DURINGSHUTDOWNS, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" SIENNASHOWS26% WOULD BLAME TRUMP AND CONGRESS.

19%BLAME DEMOCRATS.

ABOUT A THIRD BLAMEBOTH EQUALLY.

DO YOU AGREE THAT THEPARTYIN POWER USUALLY TAKES THE BIGGESTHIT, ANDIS THERE A DIFFERENCE NOW GIVEN HOWUNPOPULAR AND WEAK THE DEMOCRATICPARTY APPEARSTO BE FOR A NUMBER OF POLLS THAT WE'VESHOWNOVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS?

IMEAN EZRA CLINE HAD WRITTEN THE DEMOCRATSNEED TO START ACTING LIKESHUTDOWNS ARE NORMAL AND TRY TO ACTUALLYWIN THE ARGUMENT.

DOYOU SEE LEADERSHIP EITHER IN THE HOUSE,DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIPIN THE HOUSE OR THE SENATE, STEPPINGUP AND DOINGJUST THAT?

>> I SEE THEM VERY MUCHTRYING TO DO SO.

HOW THAT WILL WORKIS A MATTER OFA PUBLIC OPINION.

NOW, YOU KNOW, YOUREAD OUTTHOSE STATISTICS.

I THINK IT IS REALLYIMPORTANT TO NOTETHAT WE'VE ACTUALLY HAD SINGLE-DIGIT NUMBERS OF SHUTDOWNS OVER MANYYEARS.

WE'VEOFTEN GOT TO THIS POINT WHERE THEY'VEBEEN THREATENED.

I HAVEBEEN IN THE GOVERNMENT WHERE EVERYBODYIS READY TOUNDERGO ALL OF THIS UPHEAVAL DUE TOA SHUTDOWNAND THEN A MINUTE BEFORE MIDNIGHTTHEY DECIDE NOT TO DO IT.

BY THE WAY, THE BETTINGMARKETS HAVE THIS AT A NORTH OF80% PROBABILITY, AND I THINK THEY'REABOUT RIGHT, IT MAYBE EVEN A LITTLE LOW.

I THINK WE WILLLIKELY GET ASHUTDOWN, BUT THERE'S JUST NOT ENOUGHCASES HERE IN THESAMPLE TO REALLY KNOW WHICH WAY PUBLICOPINION BOUNCES.

SOMETIMES IT CANBE A VERY PARTICULARAND INTERESTING THING THAT HAPPENS.

SOME FAMILYWAS PLANNING TO GO TO A PARK ANDTHEY WEREN'T ABLE TO GO AND THEY CANCELLEDTHEIR VACATION, AND TSA LINES AREGETTING LONGER ANDLONGER, AND IT BECOMESALMOST AN ANECDOTAL BUILDUP.

AT THATPOINT WHO THE PUBLICBLAMES IS UP FOR GRABS.

SO I WOULDN'TBETOO CONVINCED AS TO WHICH WAY THISGOES.

NOW, ITIS TRUE THAT THE --IT IS TRUETHAT WHEN YOU CONTROL THE PRESIDENCY,THE SENATE,THE HOUSE AND ARGUABLY EVEN THE SUPREMECOURT, WHEN ALL THE LEVERS OF GOVERNMENTARECONTROLLED BY REPUBLICANS THEY PROBABLYARE MORE LIKELYTO GET THE BLAME.

FRANKLY, I THINKTHAT'S FAIR BECAUSEI THINK DEMOCRATS ARE ARGUING WITHTHEM, YOU'VEGOT TO AGREE WITH US THAT YOU'RE NOTGOING TORESCIND THIS SPENDING, WHICH, AGAIN,I THINK IS ACONDITION FOR HAVING A DEAL.

SO WE'LLSEE WHERE THE PUBLICGOES, BUT, YES, THE REPUBLICANS AREPROBABLY MORELIKELY TO OWN THIS END OF THE DAYJUST BY DENT OF HOW MUCH OFTHE GOVERNMENT THEY CONTROL.

>> YEAH,AND RESCINDINGTHE SPENDING, THAT'S CLEARLY A FIGHTTHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS BEEN LONGINGTO HAVE AS WELL.

SO I CAN'T IMAGINEHIM AGREEING TOSOMETHING ON THAT IN THE LAST MINUTE.

WE WILL SEE.

IN MYOPENING QUESTION TO YOU I ASKED WHATARE YOU GOING TO BE WATCHING OVERTHE NEXT72 HOURS, AND I ASKED THAT BECAUSEON FRIDAY WEHAVE A KEY ECONOMIC REPORT COMINGOUT, THE JOBSREPORT, THAT DURING A SHUTDOWN WEWOULD NOT BEGETTING.

IT IS NOTABLE IN YOUR SUBSTACKYOUHAVE ARGUED IT IS LESS ABOUT COOKINGTHE BOOKS AND NUMBERSIN TERMS OF CONCERNSABOUT HOW THIS ADMINISTRATION CANPOSSIBLY GET AROUND ECONOMIC DATATHAT THEY DON'T LIKE AND MORE ABOUTDELAYING ANDSUPPRESSING THEM.

HOW BIG OF A RISKIS THAT ANDHOWDO YOU PANTS ANTICIPATE MARKETS TORESPOND TO A FRIDAY WITHOUT A JOBSREPORT?

>> LET'S START WITH THE LASTPARTOF YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE THAT'S THEEASIEST ONE, AND THE ANSWERIS BADLY.

WE HAVE ALREADY ACTUALLYSEEN MARKETS BEING A BITSHOOK UP BY THE POTENTIAL OF NOT GETTINGTHE JOBS REPORTIN A TIMELY MANNER.

BY THE WAY, TOBE CLEAR TOOUR VIEWERS, WHEN THE GOVERNMENT REOPENSTHAT JOBS REPORT WOULDCOME OUT.

SO IF IT IS A SHUTDOWN THATLASTS A COUPLE OF WEEKS, YOU WOULDGET THE JOBS REPORT FOR SEPTEMBERINTHE MIDDLE OF OCTOBER INSTEAD OF THEBEGINNING.

YES, THAT'S DISCONCERTING TO MARKETSWHO USE THATINFORMATION, ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOWAS WE'RE TRYING TO FIGUREOUT JUST HOW MANY CRACKS ARE DEVELOPINGIN THE JOB MARKET.

BUT ALSO TO THE CENTRAL BANK.

REMEMBER,THE FEDERAL RESERVE, OUR FEDERAL RESERVEHAS A MEETING ATTHE END OF OCTOBER, AND THIS JOBSREPORT WOULD BE AREALLY KEY DATA INPUT INTO --INTO THAT MEETING.

NOW, IN TERMS OFMY POINT ABOUTDELAYING THE DATA, IDO THINK THAT IT IS KIND OF AFEATURE, NOT A BUG, FOR FOLKS WHO--FOR FOLKS IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATIONWHO DON'T WANT ANYONETO SEE ANY MORE DATA OR INFORMATIONSHOWING THATTHE JOB MARKET IS, IN FACT, DEVELOPINGSOME CRACKS.

YOU SAWTHAT THE COMMISSIONER OF THE BUREAUWHO PUBLISHES THAT DATA GOT FINISHED--GOT FIREDWHEN THEY DIDN'T LIKE ONE OFTHE REPORTS.

SO I DO THINK THAT THIS,YOUKNOW, DELAYING OR SUPPRESSING THEDATA IS AMORE LIKELY FORM OF MONKEYINGAROUND WITH THAT THAN ACTUALLY TRYINGTO GO IN THERE AND COOK THEBOOKS, THE NUMBERS THEMSELVES.

THAT'SREALLY QUITE HARDTO DO.

QUICK LAST POINT ON THIS.

TOMORROW,WEDNESDAY, WE GET ADP, WHICH IS ADIFFERENTPRIVATE SOURCE OF EMPLOYMENT DATA.

MOST OFUS HAVE LONG DISCOUNTED THAT BECAUSETHERE'S MUCH MORE INFORMATION INTHE BLS REPORT, BUT WE'RE GOINGTO HAVE TO ALL BE LOOKING AT THE ADPA LOT MORE CLOSELY BECAUSE ITLOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, IT MAY BE OURONLY ALTERNATIVE FOR THENEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

>> YEAH, NODOUBT.

AS YOU NOTED,WITHOUT RELIABLE DATA YOU RISK THEFED SORTOF STEERING BLIND ON IMPORTANT INDICATORSLIKE INFLATION AND THEEMPLOYMENT SITUATION HERE IN THE COUNTRYAS WELL.

JARED BERNSTEIN, I WISH I HAD YOUON FOR A BETTER STORY.

ITIS ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE YOU, BUT NEVERA GOOD --NEVER AGOOD SUBJECT MATTER JUST HOURS AHEADOF APOTENTIAL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN.

>>TRUE.

>> DOESN'T REALLY BENEFIT MANYAMERICANS, IF ANY AT ALL.

HAVE A GREATDAY.

THANKS SO MUCH.

> >> NOW, COULD AN END TO THE WAR INGAZA FINALLY BEIN SIGHT?

AFTER ISRAELI PRIME MINISTERBENJAMINNETANYAHU OSTENSIBLY AGREEDTO PRESIDENT TRUMP'S PEACE PLAN ITLOOKS SLIGHTLYMORE LIKELY.

THE ANSWER LIES WITHHAMASWHO HAS BEEN OFFERED AND ULTIMATUM,ACCEPT THEDEAL OR FACE CONSEQUENCES.

>> I HAVEA FEELING THAT WE'REGOING TO HAVE A POSITIVE ANSWER.

BUTIFNOT, AS YOU KNOW, BIBI, YOU WOULDHAVE OURFULL BACKING TO DO WHAT YOU WOULDHAVE TODO.

>> CONVINCING HAMAS TO AGREE TOTERMSLIKE ITS OWN DISARMAMENT COULD BEA ROAD BLOCK AND JUSTHOW ALIGNED TRUMP AND NETANYAHU REALLYARE IS UNCLEAR.

WHILE THE PROPOSAL CREATES A PATHWAYFOR A PALESTINIAN STATE, THEPRIME MINISTER SAYS ISRAELI WILL,QUOTE,FORCIBLY RESIST THE IDEA.

LET'SBRING INISRAEL CORRESPONDENTIN JERUSALEM.

YOU ARE VERY FAMILIARWITH HIM.

YOU WROTE THE BIOGRAPHYON HIM.

WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU THATPRESIDENT TRUMP WAS ABLE TO GETHIM TO DO SOMETHING HIS PREDECESSORSWERENOT, AND THAT IS PUBLIC PARTICULARLYTO ACCEPTA PEACE FIRE DEAL?

>> I THINK BEHINDTHE SCENES THERE'S BEENINTENSE PRESSURE ON NETANYAHU IN RECENTWEEKSTO AGREE FINALLY TO --SORRY --TO A PUBLIC AND CLEAR PLAN FOR ENDINGTHISWAR, SOMETHING THAT HE HAS RESISTEDFOR ALMOST TWOYEARS NOW.

YOU KNOW, YOU SAWALOT OF BON HOMIE,TRUMP SAYING NICE WORDS ABOUT NETANYAHU,YES, AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE.

BUTWE KNOW BEHIND THE SCENES IT HASN'TBEEN ALWAYS THATFRIENDLY, THAT TRUMP HAS STARTED TOLOSE HISPATIENCE WITH THIS WAR, ANDTHIS HAS LED TO THESE FINAL FEW DAYSOF GETTING THIS PLAN TOGETHER ANDFORCINGNETANYAHU TO STAND THERE AND ACCEPTIT.

>> SO ASIDE FROM THE TRADITIONALHYPERBOLE WE HAVE COME TOKNOW FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP, CALLINGIT ONE OF THE GREAT DAYSIN CIVILIZATION, FOR PEACE, STRIPPINGTHATAWAY, WHAT IS NEW HERE IN TERMS OFTHE DETAIL?

IT HAS BEEN ARGUEDA SIMILAR PLAN WAS PUT ON THE TABLEAND THENREJECTED ULTIMATELY LAST YEAR BYPRESIDENT BIDEN, AND THERE IS SOMECRITICISM PERHAPSHE WASN'T ABLE TO PRESSURE HIM TOACCEPT THE DEALTHE WAY THAT PRESIDENTTRUMP EFFECTIVELY WAS.

>> WELL, THAT'STRUE AND ITIS ALSO TRUE THAT THE CEASE-FIRE THATWENT INTO EFFECT IN JANUARY WHICHHAD TWO PHASESTO IT --THE FIRST PHASE, WHICH WASCARRIED OUT.

THE SECONDPHASE,WHICH ISRAEL BASICALLYBEND BY CLOSING GAZA AND GOING BACKTO WAR IN MARCH, WAS VERY MUCHALSO LIKE THIS PLAN.

SO WE'VE HADTWO VERYSIMILAR PLANS TO THE ONE THAT WASPRESENTED YESTERDAYIN THE WHITE HOUSE.

NETANYAHU MANAGEDTO GET FROM TRUMP INTHE LAST FEW DAYS BEFORE THE FINALPLAN WASPRESENTED A COUPLE OF I THINK IMPORTANTELEMENTSWHICH WILL MAKE IT VERY DIFFICULTFOR HAMAS TO ACCEPT THE PLAN.

ONEIS THAT THE ENTIRE RELEASE OF ALLTHE REMAINING ISRAELI HOSTAGES INGAZA.

WE KNOW THERE'S 48 HOSTAGES, ABOUT20 OFWHOM ARE BELIEVE TO STILL BE ALIVE.

THAT WILL HAPPEN ATTHE VERY FIRST STAGE OF THE --OF THE CEASE-FIRE WHEN BASICALLY THEMOMENTISRAEL STOPS THE WAR, HAMAS IS SUPPOSEDTO IN THE SPACEOF THREE DAYS TO LOCATE AND BRINGOUT ALL OFTHE HOSTAGES, BOTH THOSE WHO ARE ALIVEANDTHEIR BODIES.

THAT BASICALLY MEANSTHAT HAMAS GIVES UP ALL OFITS BARGAINING CHIPS.

I MEAN IT ISVERY CRUDE TO TALKABOUT HOSTAGES AS BARGAINING CHIPS,BUT THAT IS HOW HAMAS SEES THEM.

THISIS HAMAS'SLEVERAGE, SO THEY HAVE GIVE UP THEIRLEVERAGE VERY MUCH AT THE BEGINNINGOFTHE PROCESS.

THAT'S ONE THING THATHAMAS WILL FINDVERY DIFFICULT TO SWALLOW.

THE OTHERTHING IS THAT THEISRAELI WITHDRAWAL FROM GAZA STRIPIS BOTHGRADUAL AND WE DON'T KNOW --THEREISN'T YET IN THE PLAN ACLEAR TIMETABLE ABOUT HOW THATTAKES PLACE.

ALSO, THE LAST STAGEWITHIN THE PLANISRAEL EE MAINS WITHIN PARTS OFGAZA, IN THE PERIMETER, SORT OF LIKEA KILOMETEROR SO STRIP WITHIN GAZA'S BORDERSANDALSO ALONG THE GAZA BORDER WITHEGYPT, AND THAT FOR HAMAS I THINKIS GOING TO BE AHUGE, A HUGE ISSUE.

THEY ARE NOTACHIEVING A FULL WITHDRAWAL OF ISRAEL.

THERE IS IN THE PLAN AFULL WITHDRAWAL FROM ALL OF GAZA'STERRITORY,BUT THAT'S ONLY WHEN --WHEN ISRAELACCEPTS THAT THEREIS NO LONGER ANY THREAT TO IT FROMGAZA, AND IT ISHARD TO SAY HOW AND WHEN THAT --YOUKNOW,THAT SITUATION IS ACHIEVED.

SO I THINKNETANYAHUGOT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS ALSO SOME--A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT CHANGES WHICHDIDN'T EXIST IN THE PREVIOUS PLAN.

THE PREVIOUS PLANS SAW A MOREPHASED RELEASE OF THE HOSTAGESAND ALSO SPOKE ABOUT A MUCHEARLIER ISRAELI WITHDRAWAL OF ALLOF GAZA.

SO I THINK THOSE ARETHE CHANGES.

BUT, STILL, ESSENTIALLYWHAT WE'VE SEEN HEREIN THE TRUMP PLAN IS NOT VERYDIFFERENT FROM WHAT WAS TALKED ABOUTIN THE SECONDAND THIRD PHASES OF THE CEASE-FIRETHAT ISRAELACCEPTED IN JANUARY AND THEN ABANDONEDAND OFLAST YEAR'S BIDEN ADMINISTRATION PLAN.

>> YEAH,IT DID SEEM THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP LOSTALL PATIENCEWITH A PHASED PLAN IN TERMS OF THERELEASE OF HOSTAGES.

HE KEPT ON SAYING HE WANTS THEM ALLOUT ATONCE, AND SO NOW THIS PLAN CALLS FORESSENTIALLYALL OF THEM TO BE RELEASED OVER THECOURSE OF THREEDAYS.

PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU DIDWARN HAMASHOWEVER IF THEY REJECT THIS DEAL THATISRAEL WOULD ACT.

HERE IS WHATHE SAID.

>> IF HAMAS REJECT YOUR PLAN,MR.

PRESIDENT, OR IF THEY SUPPOSEDLYACCEPT IT AND THEN --THEN BASICALLY DO EVERYTHING TOCOUNTER IT, THEN ISRAEL WILL FINISHTHE JOB BYITSELF.

THIS CAN BE DONE THE EASYWAYOR IT CAN BE DONE THE HARDWAY.

>> SO THIS STOOD OUT TO ME BECAUSEITWAS THE THREAT THAT ISRAEL HAD BEENPUTTING FORWARD TO HAMAS OVER THELAST MONTH BEFORETHEY WENT IN TO GAUZE CITY, SAYING,YOU KNOW, YOUCAN END THIS WAR NOW OR WE AREGOING TO GO INTO GAZA CITY AND HAMASDIDN'T BLINK AT THAT POINT.

ISTHIS ADDED PRESSURE FROM QATAR ANDALL OF THEOTHER ARAB AND MUSLIM COUNTRIES THATHAVE SIGNED ON TOTHIS DEAL,IS THAT WHAT YOU THIS COULD PERHAPSGET HAMAS TOFINALLY AGREE TO SOMETHING THAT THEYDIDN'T BEFORE?

YOU MENTIONED HOW CRUDE AND HORRIFICTHEY AREAS AN ORGANIZATION IN USING HOSTAGESAS LEVERAGE.

THE SAME CAN BE SAIDABOUT THEIR OWNPEOPLE WHOTHEY'VE SEEN KILLED AND DIE OVER THELAST TWO YEARSAS WELL.

>> WELL, I DON'T THINK OBVIOUSLYWHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST TWOYEARS SHOULD GIVEANYONE REASONABLE --ANY ROOM FOR HAMASTO THINK THEY CARE ABOUT THE PEOPLEOF GAZA.

THEY'VE BROUGHT DOWN ON THEM DEATHAND DESTRUCTION.

ULTIMATELY HAMAS WANTS TO SURVIVEAS AN ORGANIZATION, AND IT IS ANORGANIZATION THAT HAS DIFFERENT ELEMENTS.

IT HASA POLITICAL LEADERSHIP, IT HAS ITSSOCIAL ELEMENTS WITHINGAZA, BUT ALSO OTHER PALESTINIAN AREAS,ANDTHERE'S THE MILITARY WING.

NOW, THEMILITARY WINGFACES BASICALLY LOSING ITS ARMSIN GAZA AND ITS POWER BASE THERE.

ON THE OTHER HANDTHE POLITICAL WING WHO ARE BASED OUTSIDEOF GAZA ANDMAINLY IN THOSE TWO COUNTRIES, INQATAR AND INTURKEY, WHO ARE ALSO SUPPOSEDLYPARTNERS WITH DONALD TRUMP IN THISDEAL,THEY'RE EXPECTED TO NOW PRESSURE THEMVERY HEAVILY TO TRY TO ACCEPT THISDEAL.

NOW, THIS DEAL WILL ONLY BE --EVENIF THEY ACCEPT THISDEAL, IT WILL BEA YES, BUT.

THE BUT IS THATTHE DETAILS STILL NEED TO BE HASHEDOUT AND THERE ARE A LOT OFDETAILS ABOUT THE HOSTAGE AND PRISONEREXCHANGE,ABOUT THE TIMETABLE FOR ISRAELIWITHDRAWAL, HOW THISDISARMAMENT OF HAMAS IN GAZA IS GOINGTO TAKE PLACE AND WHAT WILLBE THIS INTERNATIONAL STABILIZATIONFORCE WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO COME INTOGAZA.

ALL OF THESE THINGS HAVE TO BE WORKEDOUT BEFORE A CEASE-FIRE CANCOME INTO EFFECT.

EVEN IF HAMAS SAYSYES TOTHE TRUMP DEAL, IT IS NOT YET A CEASE-FIRE.

BUT THIS ISWHERE REALLY THE QATARIS ANDTHE TURKISH GOVERNMENT ALSO PROBABLYCOMEINTO, YOU KNOW, THEIR ROLE INBOTH BRINGING HAMAS'S SAY YES, EVENIF IT IS A QUALIFIEDYES, AND THEN TO --THEY WILL PROBABLYBE THE MAIN MEDIANS, PROBABLY THEQATARIS WILL BE THE MAIN MEDIATORSFOR THE ACTUAL DEEP DETAIL NEGOTIATIONSTHAT WILL TAKE PLACE OVER WEEKSUNTIL THERE IS A CEASE-FIRE DEAL.

>> WE SHOULD NOTE YOUMENTIONED THE INTERNATIONAL STABILIZATIONFORCE.

NO COUNTRY HASYET TO SIGN OFF ON THAT, THAT'S ANIMPORTANT POINT TO MAKE RIGHTNOW AS WELL.

ON PAPER, ISRAELIS ESSENTIALLY GETTING MOST OF WHATIT HAD BEENDEMANDING IN TERMS OF WAR GOALS,DISMANTLING HAMAS, GETTING ITS HOSTAGESBACK.

WHY, INYOUR VIEW, IS NETANYAHU STILL HEDGING?

IKNOW WE ARE HEARING FROM SOME FAR-RIGHT MEMBERS OFHIS COALITION WHO ARECRITICIZING THIS DEAL PUBLICLYAT HOME, AND THOMAS FRIEDMAN POINTEDOUTNETANYAHU IS KNOWN TO SAY ONE THINGTO ONE AUDIENCE AND ADIFFERENT THING TO ANOTHER AUDIENCE.

WHAT IS MORE IMPORTANT,WHAT HE SAID WITH THE PRESIDENT THEREAT THE WHITE HOUSE YESTERDAY OR WHATHEIS TELLING HIS CONSTITUENTS BACK HOMEIN HEBREW?

>> WELL, THEY'REBOTH IMPORTANT.

I THINK DONALD TRUMPOVER THE LAST EIGHT OR NINE MONTHSHAS LEARNED THAT HE NEEDS TO KEEPNETANYAHU ON AVERY SHORT LEASH WHEN HE --YOU KNOW,WHEN THESE NEGOTIATIONSARE TAKING PLACE.

SO TRUMP IS CERTAINLY HUGELYIMPORTANT AUDIENCE, YOU KNOW, ANDTHE AMERICAN MEDIAENVIRONMENT THAT TRUMP IS SO MUCHA PART OF.

WE SAW NETANYAHU GIVING INTERVIEWSTOFOX AND TO VARIOUS RIGHT-WING INFLUENCERSWHEN HEWAS IN THE U. S. OVER THE LAST FEWDAYS.

SO THAT'SONE AUDIENCE HE IS TALKING TO.

HEIS TALKING TO THEISRAELI PUBLIC BECAUSE AT SOME POINTOVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS THERE WILLBEAN ELECTION IN ISRAEL AND HE NEEDSTO TRYAND SOMEHOW REGAIN SOME OF THE VOTERSWHO HEHAS LOST, AND WE'VE SEEN IN THE POLLSHE HAS LOST A LOTOF HIS VOTERS.

AT THE SAME TIME THERE'SA THIRD CONVERSATION HE IS HAVING,AND THAT'S WITH HIS BASE.

NOW, THIS DEAL, THE FIRST POLLS AREABOUT TOCOME OUT SO I CAN'T GIVE YOU THE EXACTNUMBERSBUT WE CAN EXPECT THIS DEAL TO BEWILDLY POPULARIN ISRAEL.

WE ALREADY KNOW OVER 70%OF THE ISRAELIS AREIN FAVOR OF SUCH A DEAL OF ENDINGTHE WAR WITHA HOSTAGE RELEASE, BUT THEREIS ROUGHLY 25%, 30% OF ISRAELIS WHOWANT TO CONTINUE THE WAR UNTIL HAMASISTOTALLY OBLITERATED AND GAZA IS TOTALLYOBLITERATED, AND THEY'RE A MINORITYBUT THEY'RE A BIG CHUNK OFNETANYAHU'S OWN POLITICAL BASE.

HENEEDS THAT BASE INTHE NEXT ELECTION.

IT IS NOT JUSTTHE PARTIES WHO ARE HIS COALITIONPARTNERS, HENEEDS THIS ENTIRE COALITION TO STAYIN POWER AFTERTHE ELECTION.

SO HE'S ALSO HAVINGA CONVERSATION WITHTHEM, AND HE'S SAYING TO THEM, LOOK,I MAY HAVE SIGNEDUP TO SOME KINDOFNOTION ALLEY DE NOTIONAL IDEA TO APALESTINIAN STATE, DON'T WORRY, ITIS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

I MAYHAVE SIGNED UP AT SOME POINT THE PALESTINIANAUTHORITY WILL RESUME CONTROL OF GAZA.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

HE IS HAVING ALMOST THREE PARALLELCONVERSATIONS RIGHT NOW, AND HEWILL CONTINUE HAVING THEM THROUGHOUTTHE NEXT FEW MONTHS IN THE RUN UPTOTHE ELECTION.

>> YEAH, WELL, I WOULDIMAGINE THAT HE NEEDS THIS WAR TOBEOVER IF HE STANDS A CHANCE TO WINANOTHER TERM AS WELL.

GOD HELP USIF WE ARETALKING ABOUT THIS WAR EXTENDING INTO2026.

WE ARE ALREADY APPROACHING THETRAGIC TWO-YEAR MARK NEXT WEEK.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU.

> >> WELL, UP NEXT, ASLAWMAKERS SCRAMBLE FOR A DEAL TO STOPA GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN, PRESIDENTTRUMP ADDRESSED AN UNUSUAL GATHERINGOF MILITARY BRASSAT A MARINE CORPS BASE IN VIRGINIA.

IT IS ALL PARTOF DEFENSE SECRETARY PETE HEGSETH'SPLAN TO OVERHAULTHE MILITARY, WHICH HE SAYS HAS BECOMEDISTRACTED BY POLITICALCORRECTNESS.

HEGSETH USED THE OPPORTUNITYTO ANNOUNCE AN ENDTO DIVERSITY EFFORTS WHILE TRUMP COVEREDEVERYTHING FROM TARIFFS TO THE NOBELPEACE PRIZE TO HISFEELINGS ABOUT RUSSIAN PRESIDENT VLADIMIRPUTIN.

SO WHATEXACTLY IS AMERICA'S NEW DEFENSE STRATEGY?

COREY SHOCKY IS A FORMER STATE ANDPENTAGON OFFICIAL CURRENTLY AT THEAMERICANENTERPRISE INSTITUTE AND SHE JOINSME NOW.

COREY, GOODTO SEE YOU.

YOU HAVE COVERED THISINDUSTRY FOR MUCH OFYOUR CAREER.

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN ANYTHINGQUITE LIKE THIS,ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE HIGH-PROFILENATURE OF THE ANNOUNCEMENTLAST WEEK WITH THE DEFENSE SECRETARYCALLING IN ALL OFTHESE HIGH-RANKING GENERALS AND ADMIRALSTO COME AND GATHER IN QUANTICO,INVIRGINIA?

>> YEAH, PULLING TOGETHEROF 300 TO 400 OF THESENIOR MILITARY LEADERS, BOTH THECOMMANDERS AND THEIR SENIORNONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS, FOR A LECTUREABOUTTHE WARRIOR ETHOS.

ON THE ONE HANDIT SEEMS RIDICULOUS THAT PEOPLE WHOSPENT 30TO 40 YEARS OF THEIR ADULT LIVES INMILITARYSERVICE FOR OUR COUNTRY NEED TO BETOLD ABOUTTHE WARRIOR ETHOS BY THE CIVILIANSECRETARYAND THE PRESIDENT, BUT THERE WAS AMUCH DARKER UNDERCURRENT THAN THATWHICH WAS THEPRESIDENT TALKING ABOUT ENEMIES WITHIN,TELLING THE MILITARY THAT THEY TAKETHEIR OATHTO DEFEND THE COUNTRY AGAINST ALLENEMIES, FOREIGNAND DOMESTIC, ANDSAYING THAT WE HAVE DOMESTIC ENEMIESINPARTICULAR INDEMOCRATICALLY CONTROLLED CITIES INSTATES ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

THAT'SAVERY DISTURBING AND DANGEROUS THINGTHAT THEPRESIDENT AND THE SECRETARY HAVE BEENUP TO THISMORNING, AND THEONLY POSITIVE ELEMENT THAT WE SHOULDTAKE AWAY FROMIT WAS HOW DISCIPLINED AND PROFESSIONALTHE RESPONSE OFTHE MILITARY WAS.

THEY DID NOT ENGAGEIN THE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT THEPRESIDENTAND THE SECRETARY DID.

>> AND PRESIDENTTRUMP, I'MGLAD YOU BROUGHT THIS UP, BECAUSEHE PRAISED DEPLOYMENTS TO DEMOCRATICCONTROLLED CITIES LIKE PORTLAND, CHICAGOAND TO THE BORDER AS WELL, ANDEVEN SUGGESTED USING AMERICAN CITIESAS, QUOTE,TRAINING GROUNDS FOR U. S. TROOPS.

LET'S PLAY MORE OF WHAT HESAID ON THAT FRONT.

>> IT IS A WAR,TOO.

IT IS A WAR FROM WITHIN, CONTROLLINGTHE PHYSICAL TERRITORY OF OUR BORDERISESSENTIALLY TO NATIONAL SECURITY.

WE CAN'T LET THESE PEOPLE IN.

IWANT TO SALUTE EVERY SERVICE MEMBERWHO HAS HELPED US CARRY OUTTHIS CRITICAL MISSION.

IT IS REALLYA VERY IMPORTANT MISSION,AND I TOLD PETE WE SHOULD USE SOMEOF THESE DANGEROUSCITIES AS TRAINING GROUNDS FOROUR MILITARY.

NATIONAL GUARD, BUTMILITARY.

>> WHATDO YOU THINK OF THAT IDEA, COREY,USINGAMERICAN CITIES AS TRAINING GROUNDFOROUR MILITARY?

>>IT IS A TERRIBLE IDEA.

ITIS AN ILLEGAL IDEA.

SINCE 1875, THERE WAS AN ACTTHAT PREVENTED THE DEPLOYMENT OF AMERICANTROOPS DOMESTICALLY UNLESS THE PRESIDENTDECLARES AN INSURRECTION IS OCCURRINGOR AGOVERNOR REQUESTS IT.

THE GOVERNORSOF THE STATES THEPRESIDENT WANTS TO DEPLOY MILITARYTROOPS TO ARE VEHEMENTLY OBJECTINGTO IT, AND THE CONSTITUTIONALITY,THELEGALITY OF WHAT THEPRESIDENT IS PROPOSING IS DEEPLYSUSPICIOUS.

IT IS ALSO BAD FOR THERELATIONSHIP BETWEENOUR MILITARY AND THE AMERICAN PUBLIC.

YOUKNOW, THE PUBLIC DOESN'T LIKE DOMESTICMILITARY MISSIONS.

THE MILITARY DOESN'TLIKEDOMESTIC MILITARY MISSIONS.

GUARDINGTHEBORDER ISONE THING.

REPRESSING CIVIL DISSENTINAMERICAN CITIES IS GOING TODANGEROUSLY POLITICIZE THE RELATIONSHIPBETWEEN OUR MILITARYAND OUR PUBLIC.

IT IS A BADIDEA.

>> PETE HEGSETH CHARACTERIZEDTHE SPEECH THIS DAY AS YET ANOTHERLIBERATIONDAY, THIS TIME FOR THE MILITARY.

LET'SPLAY SOME OF WHAT HE SAID.

>>A FEW MONTHS AGO I WAS AT THE WHITEHOUSE WHEN PRESIDENT TRUMPANNOUNCED HIS LIBERATION DAY FOR AMERICA'STRADE POLICY.

IT WAS ALANDMARK DAY.

WELL, TODAY IS ANOTHERLIBERATION DAY.

THELIBERATION OF AMERICA'S WARRIORS,INNAME, IN DEED AND IN AUTHORITIES.

YOU KILL PEOPLE AND BREAK THINGS FORA LIVING.

YOU ARE NOTPOLITICALLY CORRECT, AND DON'T NECESSARILYBELONG ALWAYS IN POLITE SOCIETY.

WE ARE NOT AN ARMY OF ONE.

WE ARE A JOINT FORCEOF MILLIONS OF SELFLESS AMERICANS.

WE ARE WARRIORS.

>> WHAT DOES THATMEAN IN PRACTICE FOR THE RANK ANDFILETHAT'S THERE, THAT HAS DEVOTED ANDDEDICATEDDECADES OF THEIR LIVES AND CAREERS?

THESE AREALL HIGH-RANKING OFFICIALS THAT WERESITTING INTHAT ROOM.

WHEN THEY HEARD THAT FROMTHE DEFENSE SECRETARY?

>> WELL, ITHINK THE REACTION WASQUITE TELLING, WHICHWAS DISCIPLINED SILENCE BECAUSE, YOUKNOW, THE MILITARY HAS A RESPONSIBILITYTO SHOW UPWHEN THE CIVILIAN LEADERSHIP WANTSTHEM TO, BUT THEYALSO HAVE APROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY NOT TOBEHAVE INA PARTISAN POLITICAL WAY.

WHAT THESECRETARY WASDOING WASASSERTING A MUCH LESS LEGALLY ANDCULTURALLY CONSTRAINED SET OF BEHAVIORSBYTHE AMERICAN MILITARY, ANDTHEY SAT THERE IN SILENCE AND LETTHE SECRETARY ANDTHE PRESIDENT SAY THEIR PIECE, WHICHIS EXACTLY WHAT THEY SHOULDHAVE DONE.

BUT IT IS A WEIRD THINGTO THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO SPENT 30OR 40YEARS OF THEIR ADULT LIVES IN MILITARYSERVICENEED TO BE TOLD ABOUTA WARRIOR ETHOS FROM --ESPECIALLYFROMTHIS SECRETARY OF DEFENSE.

>> HE ALSOSLAMMED WHATHE DESCRIBED AS A WOKE DEPARTMENTIN THE MILITARY.

LET'S PLAY SOME SOUNDTHERE.

>>WE'VE WEEDED OUT SO-CALLED TOXIC LEADERSUNDERTHE GUYSOF DOUBLE-BLIND PSYCHOLOGY ASSESSMENTS,PROMOTING RISK AVERSE CONFORMISTSINSTEAD.

YOU NAME IT, THE DEPARTMENTDID IT.

FOOLISH AND RECKLESS POLITICAL LEADERSSET THE WRONGCOMPASS HEADING, AND WE LOST OUR WAY.

WEGAME THE WOKE DEPARTMENT, BUT NOTANYMORE.

>>HE'S ESSENTIALLY SAYING THAT THE DEFENSEDEPARTMENT UNDERHIS LEADERSHIP,UNDERPRESIDENT TRUMP WILL BE A ITOCRACY.

DOYOU BELIEVE HE HAS A POINT?

CRACKING DOWNON DIVERSITY, HAVETHEY WEAKENEDLEADERSHIP MILITARY?

>> HE HAS A POINT.

SOME IN MILITARYSERVICE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SOCIALPOLICIES THATCIVILIAN LEADERS IMPOSE ON THE MILITARY.

THAT'SA PRETTY STANDARD COMPLAINT FROM THEAMERICAN MILITARY THOUGH, AND SO ITHINK SECRETARY HEGSETH IN WHAT HEIS PUSHING FORWARD IS JUST --IT ISSORTOF ACARTOON MANLY MILITARY,AND SECRETARY HEGSETH ACTUALLY HASBEEN BRAGGING THATTHE MILITARY HAS MADE ITS RECRUITINGGOALS, AND IT ACTUALLY COULDN'T HAVEMADE ITSRECRUITING GOALS WITHOUT LOTS OF PARTICIPATIONBY THEVERY PEOPLE HE'SCASTIGATING AND SAYING HAVE NO PLACEIN THEAMERICAN MILITARY UNDER HIS CIVILIANSTEWARDSHIP.

SO I THINK IT IS TIRE SOMEPOLITICAL CORRECTNESS BY THE TRUMPADMINISTRATION.

IT IS JUST DIFFERENTTIRESOME POLITICAL CORRECTNESS THANIN THE LAST ADMINISTRATION.

>>AND HE KEPT REFERENCING THE HIGHESTMALE STANDARD.

WHAT DOES THAT SAY IN TERMSOF WOMEN BEING WELCOMED ANDRECOGNIZED IN THE MILITARY?

>> WELL, WHAT HE IS SUGGESTING ISTHAT THE WOMEN WHO ARE CURRENTLY INSERVICE DIDNOT MEET THE STANDARD,AND IT IS PART OF AN UNDERCURRENTOF DE VALUING THE SERVICE OF MINORITIESAND WOMEN IN THE AMERICAN MILITARY.

ITIS NOT GOOD FOR THE FORCE, TO BE FRANK,BUT IT IS NOT NEARLY AS DANGEROUSAS OTHER THINGS THE PRESIDENT ANDTHE SECRETARY SAID TODAY.

I MEAN THE PRESIDENT ENCOURAGING THEMILITARYTHAT IT IS PART OF THEIROATH OF OFFICE TO GO AFTERPOLITICAL ENEMIES OF THE PRESIDENT,ANDTHE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE SAYING, "IFYOU DON'T LIKETHIS, YOU SHOULD RESIGNYOUR COMMISSION. "

THAT'S A VERY DANGEROUSWAY TOPOLITICIZE THE AMERICANMILITARY, AND SOMETHING THATCONGRESS IN THEIRRESPONSIBILITY, IS THE OTHER SOURCEOF CIVILIAN AUTHORITY OVERTHE MILITARY, OUGHT TO STAMP DOWNON.

>> FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO JUSTGET YOUTO WEIGH IN ON HOW PETEHEGSETH CHARACTERIZED SORT OF HISETHOS, I GUESS, INONE ACRONYM.

I THINK YOU KNOW WHEREI'M GOINGBUT LET'S PLAY THAT SOUND QUICKLYAND WE WILL HAVE YOU RESPOND.

>>SHOULD OUR ENEMIES CHOOSE FOOLISHLYTO CHALLENGE US, THEY WILL BE CRUSHEDBY THE VIOLENCE, PRECISIONAND FEROCITY OF THEWAR DEPARTMENT.

IN OTHER WORDS TOOUR ENEMIES, FAFO.

>> OKAY.

FOR THOSETHAT DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS THEYCAN LOOK IT UP.

COREY, I'MSURE I DON'T HAVE TO TELL YOU WHATTHAT MEANS.

YOUR REACTION?

>> WELL, THAT SOUNDSLIKEA MARINE SERGEANT WOULD SAY TO LANCECORPORALS, NOT SOMETHING APPROPRIATEFOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO SAYTO 300 OR 400 CIVILIAN --EXCUSEME, 300 OR 400 ASSEMBLEDMILITARY LEADERS.

>> YEAH.

>>IT IS JUVENILEAND I THINK THE SECRETARY AND THEPRESIDENT DID NOTWELL-SERVE THE AMERICAN MILITARY TODAY.

>> COREY, ITIS REALLY GOOD TO SEE YOU.

THANK YOUSO MUCHFOR YOUR ANALYSIS.

REALLY APPRECIATEIT.

>> THANK YOU.

> >>NEXT, TO SILICON VALLEY WHERE MAJORU.

S. TECH FIRMSARE URGED TO STOP EXPORTS TO THE CHINESEPOLICE.

WHAT SOME LAWMAKERS ARE ASKING THATTHEY APPEARBEFORE CONGRESS.

THIS COMES AFTERA RECENTASSOCIATED PRESS INVESTIGATIONREVEALED A DIRECT ROLE U. S. COMPANIESHAVE BUILD INBUILDINGCHINA'S MASSIVE POLITE STAGE.

>>BIANA, THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR SOMUCHFOR JOINING US.

YOU HAD A RECENT PIECETHAT UNCOVERED A LAYER OF SURVEILLANCETHAT'S GOING ONINCHINA THAT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY UNREPORTED,BUTYOU IN YOUR REPORT THROUGH DOCUMENTSTHAT WERE HANDEDOVER FROM A WHISTLEBLOWERFOUND CONNECTIONS TO AMERICAN COMPANIES.

WHAT DID YOU FIND?

>> YEAH.

BASICALLY WHAT WE FOUND IN THESE DOCUMENTSISTHAT, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST THERE'SBEEN REPORTING ABOUT HOWAMERICAN COMPANIES HAVE PROVIDED COMPONENTSOR PRODUCTSTO THE CHINESE POLICE, BUT WHAT WEFOUND IS THAT ACTUALLY THEY AMERICANCOMPANIESNOT ONLY SOLD SOME GOODS TO THECHINESE POLICE, THEY ACTUALLY WERECOMPLICITIN DESIGNING THE ENTIRE SYSTEM FROMTHE TOP DOWNAND WORKING VERY CLOSELY WITH THECHINESE AUTHORITIESIN BUILDING THE SYSTEM.

AND SO WHENYOU LOOK AT, YOUKNOW, THE CHINESE POLICING APPARATUSAS IT IS TODAY, IMEAN IT WOULDN'T HAVE EXISTED WITHOUTTHEASSISTANCE OF AMERICAN COMPANIES.

FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, YOU KNOW,BACK 25 YEARS AGO AMERICAN COMPANIESWERE THERE RIGHT ATTHE START, DESIGNING AND BUILDINGTHESE SYSTEMSTO A LARGE DEGREE SO THAT THE CHINESEPOLICECOULD CARRY OUT, YOU KNOW,GOVERNMENT REPRESSION, CENSORSHIPAND CONTROL OF ITS OWN PEOPLE.

>>YOU WRITE, QUOTE, SOME DIRECTLY PITCHTHEIR TECH AS TOOLS FOR CHINESE POLICETO CONTROLCITIZENS, MARKETING MATERIAL FROMIBM,DELL, SISCOANDSEAGATETHEYSITEDCOMMUNIS T TACTICS.

WHAT IS THEGOLDEN SHIELD?

>> IT IS BASICALLYCHINA'S DIG TATPOLICING APPARATUS.

WHEN IT WAS STARTEDIT WAS A WAY OF KIND OFGETTING HOLD OF THE INTERNET.

THEINTERNET WAS THIS THING THATTHE CHINESE AUTHORITIES SAW AS BEINGUNCONTROLLABLE.

ANYONE COULDJUST GO LOG ON ON LINE AND SAYWHATEVER THEY WANTED.

THE CHINESEAUTHORITIES WANTED SOME WAY TO BEABLE TO CONTROLIT, AND FROM THAT PROJECT CAME THISWHOLEDIGITAL POLICING APPARATUS.

THEY SAWTHAT THECHINESE GOVERNMENT HAD THIS NEED FORDIGITAL CENSORSHIPAND SURVEILLANCE, AND THEY PITCHEDTHEIR PRODUCTS FORTHE GOLDEN SHIELD, FOR THE USE OFTHE CHINESE POLICE.

YOU KNOW, SOMEOF THECOMPANIES, THEY KIND OF VARY IN WHATTHEY WERE SELLING.

YOU KNOW, SOME COMPANIES SAY, OH,WE WERE JUSTONLY SELLING HARD DRIVES OR WE WEREJUST SELLINGKIND OF, YOU KNOW, GENERAL PURPOSEEQUIPMENT AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

BUTWHENYOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THESE MARKETINGMATERIALS YOU FIND THAT A LOTOF THESE COMPANIES WERE VERY WELLAWARE OF WHAT THEIRPRODUCTS WERE GOING TO BE USED FOR.

SOME OFTHE MOST DAMNING MATERIAL WE FOUNDWASACTUALLY THESE CLASSIFIED GOVERNMENTBLUEPRINTS THAT SHOW THATIBM ACTUALLY WORKED WITH A CHINESEMILITARY ANDDEFENSE CONTRACTOR TO BUILD OUT THEGOLDEN SHIELD, PHASE TWO.

AND IN THOSEBLUEPRINTSYOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THEM SAY THINGSLIKE,YOU KNOW, CONSOLIDATE COMMUNIST PARTYRULE.

YOU SEETHESE DOCK UMENTS, YOU SEE DATABASESTHAT SHOWTHEY'RE MONITORING PEOPLE LIKE, YOUKNOW, FOLLOWERSOF DISSIDENT RELIGIOUS GROUPS OR PEOPLEIN THE FARWESTERN REGIONOF XINJIANG WHERE MANY WESTERN GOVERNMENTSSAY THERE WASA GENOCIDE.

SO YOU SEE THESE DOCUMENTSAND YOU SEE THAT THESECOMPANIES WERE ACTUALLY QUITEACTIVE IN PITCHING THEIR GEAR TO THECHINESE POLICE, AND THIS ISSOMETHING THAT CONTINUES ALL THE WAYUP UNTILQUITE RECENTLY, EVEN THOUGH THERE'SBEENREPEATED WARNING ABOUT THE WAY THECHINESE POLICEWERE USING THIS KIND OF TECHNOLOGY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DIG INTOTHESE MARKETING MATERIALS, SOMETIMESYOUSEE REFERENCES TO RACE.

YOUKNOW, ONE POST WE FOUND FROM DELLADVERTISEDALL RACE RECOGNITION WITH ONE OF THEIRFACIALRECOGNITIONPOWERED LAPTOPS.

THEY'RE TALKING ABOUTTHINGS LIKEBLACK LISTED INDIVIDUALS, KEY PERSONNEL,WHICH IS THIS TERM THAT THEY USE TOTRACK PEOPLE THAT THEY THINKARE POLITICALLY SENSITIVE.

SO, YOUKNOW,A LOT OF AMERICAN COMPANIES IN THEPAST HAVEBASICALLY CLAIMED IGNORANCE.

THEYSAY, OH, WE DON'TREALLY KNOW HOW OUR GEAR IS BEINGUSED.

WE DON'T REALLYHAVE ANY CONTROL OVER THAT.

BUT WHATOURARTICLE SHOWS IS THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

>> FOR THE RECORD, IBM SAYSIF OLDER SYSTEMS --BECAUSE SOME OFTHE CONTRACTS WEREBACK IN THE EARLY 2000s.

IF OLDERSYSTEMS ARE BEING ABUSED TODAY ANDIBM HAS NO KNOWLEDGE THAT THEYARE, THE MISUSE IS ENTIRELY OUTSIDEOF IBM'S CONTROL.

IT WAS NOT CONTEMPLATEDBY IBM DECADES AGO AND INNO WAY REFLECT ON IBM TODAY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IN YOUR STORY YOU SAIDTHAT THE XINJIANG GOVERNMENT HAS SAID,WE ARE USING THISBASICALLY, THESE TECHNOLOGIES TO PREVENTAND COMBAT TERRORISTS ANDCRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

THERE'S ABSOLUTELYNO SUCH THING AS LARGE-SCALE HUMANRIGHTS VIOLATIONS.

DOES THAT RINGTRUE CONSIDERING WHAT YOUHAVE SEEN ON THE GROUND?

>> ABSOLUTELYNOT.

I HAVE GONETO XINJIANG PERSONALLY, YOU KNOW,ALMOST HALF A DOZEN TIMES,AND I HAVE SEEN PEOPLE, YOU KNOW,BE ORDERED INTOLINES AND HAVING THEIR PHONES CHECKEDPERSONALLY.

I HAVE SEEN,YOU KNOW, PARTICULARLY MEMBERS OFTHE UYGHURETH MISSIONITY SINGLEDOUT WHILE MEMBERS OF ANOTHERETHNICITY ARE WAVEDTHROUGH CHECK POINTS.

SO THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT HAS OBVIOUSLYGONE ON A BIG PUSH TO PROMOTE WHATITIS DOING IN XINJIANG AS BEING ABOUTCOMBATTING TERRORISMBECAUSE THEY REALIZED IT WAS DAMAGINGTHEIR REPUTATION.

>>YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE INYOUR STORY THIS DESCRIPTION OF WHATIS CALLED BASICALLY ADIGITAL CAGE.

EXPLAIN TO OUR AUDIENCEWHAT THAT IS.

AND YOU PROFILE A FAMILY, BUT YOUSAY THAT THIS MIGHT EFFECT UP TO 100,000HUMAN BEINGSIN CHINA.

WHAT'S A DIGITAL CAGE?

HOWDOESIT WORK?

>> WHAT THE DIGITAL CAGEIS ISTHAT THERE'S THESE INVISIBLE DIGITALELECTRONIC SYSTEMS THAT ARE KIND OFIN PLACE THAT ARE ABLE TO MONITORAND INSOME CASES CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OFTHE CHINESE PEOPLE.

FOR THE VAST MAJORITYOF CHINESE PEOPLE THISIS NOT A PROBLEM BECAUSE, YOU KNOW,MOST PEOPLEARE NOT EXPLICITLY POLITICAL.

THEY'RENOT GOING ON THESTREETS OR, YOU KNOW, CHANTING ORDOING ANYTHING ALONGTHOSE LINES.

SO THESE SYSTEMS ARENOT AIMED NECESSARILY AT THEM.

THEMOMENT YOU DO SOMETHING THAT CAPTURESTHESTATE'S ATTENTION FOR WHATEVER REASON,YOU KNOW, YOU SAYSOMETHING AGAINST THE PARTY OR WHATEVERIT IS, THEN ALL OF ASUDDEN YOU MIGHT GET BLACK LISTED.

THEN IF YOU ARE BLACKLISTED, ALL OF A SUDDEN YOUR LIFECANTOTALLY CHANGE.

YOU SUDDENLY HAVEPOLICE FOLLOWING YOUAROUND OR YOU TRY TO BUY TRAIN TICKETSAND YOUARE INTERCEPTED ON THE OTHER SIDEWHERE THERE ARE OFFICERS WAITING FORYOU.

I KNOW THIS VERY WELL MYSELF BECAUSEAS AJOURNALIST, YOU KNOW, I'M ALSO APERSON THAT THE STATE DOES MONITORVERY CLOSELY.

OBVIOUSLY I'M NOTIN THE ME SITUATION BECAUSE THEY TREATMEWITH A DIFFERENCE KNOWING I'M A FOREIGNJOURNALIST.

BUT THERE'S ASENSE YOU ARE ALWAYS BEING WATCHEDAND AT ANY TIME THEAUTHORITIES COULD INTERVENE IN THESITUATION.

YOUKNOW, THIS KIND OF DIGITAL POLICINGISACTUALLY INVISIBLE TO MOST PEOPLE,AND THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT MAKESIT SO INSIDIOUS .

IT IS REPRESSIONBUT ITIS INVISIBLE REPRESSION.

>> WHAT ARESOME OF THE HUMANCOSTS OF THIS?

I MEAN WHAT IS THECONSEQUENCE TO SOME OFTHE PEOPLE THAT YOU HAVE BEEN TALKINGTO IN YOUR STORIES?

>>THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I WOULD REALLYLIKE TO, YOU KNOW, IHOPE COMES ACROSS IN THE STORY,IS THAT THE SURVEILLANCE, IT MAY NOTBE PRISON, IT MAY NOT NECESSARILYBE TORTURE DIRECTLY,BUT IT IS A FORM OF PSYCHOLOGICALTORTURE.

THAT'S THEWAY A LOT OF MY INTERVIEWEES PHRASEDIT, RIGHT.

I MEAN JUST THE SENSEOF CONSTANTLY BEING WATCHED AND MONITORED,IT CAN TURN YOU INTOA SOCIAL PARIAH.

I MEAN, YOU KNOW,ONE OFTHE INTERVIEWEES IN OUR PIECEIS BASICALLY A PRISONER IN HIS OWNHOME.

HE IS BASICALLY STUCKAT HOME.

EVERY TIME HE GOES OUT THERE'SPOLICE OFFICERSFOLLOWING HIM.

THEY MIGHT TELL HIMNOT TO GO CERTAIN PLACES.

HIS OWN FAMILY, THEY'RE FREAKED OUTBY THEOFFICERS CONSTANTLY FOLLOWING THEM.

AND THEY'VE CUTOFF ALL CONTACT WITH HIM, RIGHT.

ANDSO, YOUKNOW, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TARGETS OFTHIS DIGITALPOLICING APPARATUS, I MEAN IT IS REAL--ITREALLY EXTRACTS A HUGE TOLL.

AND THEMOMENT YOU ENDUP CROSSING THE LINE IN ANY WAY, THENTHEYCAN COME AFTER YOU AND THEY CAN ARRESTYOU, AND THEN THEYHAVE ALL OF THIS INFORMATION THATTHEY'VECOMPILED ON YOU THAT LISTS OUT, YOUKNOW, WHAT YOU HAVEDONE WRONG, AND THEN THEY CAN ENDUP PUTTING YOU IN PRISON.

YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THERE'S THINGSLIKE POLICEOFFICERS FOLLOWING YOU, AND THEN WHENYOU DO SOMETHING THEY DON'TLIKE, EVEN IF IT IS TECHNICALLY LEGAL,THEY END UPBEATINGYOU UP.

I MEAN THAT'S SOMETHING THATONEOF THE INTERVIEWEES IN OUR STORY FACED.

SHEWAS BEATEN BY BRICKS BY THE POLICEAND HEENDED UP IN THE HOSPITAL.

EVEN WHENHE WAS IN THE HOSPITAL, YOUKNOW, THERE WERE OFFICERS OUTSIDEHIS HOSPITAL WARD,INSIDE, HANGING A SURVEILLANCE CAMERAABOVEHIS FACE ON AN IV DRIP.

I MEAN ITISREALLY SURVEILLANCE TO AN EXTREME.

>> SO YOU POINT OUT INYOUR REPORTING THAT IT IS NOTJUST IBM THATSOLD THEIR SOFTWARE INTO CHINA INTHE FIRSTPLACE DECADES AGO.

YOU SAID, YOUKNOW, HERE IT SAID ORACLE, HAUL ETPACKARD, ARC GSI, SOLD HUNDREDSOF THOUSANDS WORTH OF GEOGRAPHIC ANDMAPPING EQUIPMENT AND SOFTWARE TOCHINESE POLICE.

NVIDIA AND INTEL,THE CHIP COMPANIES,PARTNERED WITH CHINESE SURVEILLANCECOMPANIES TO ADDAI CAPABILITIES TO CAMERAS USED FORVIDEO SURVEILLANCE.

OTHERS LIKE AMAZON WEB SERVICES, MICROSOFT,WESTERNDIGITAL, AND IT IS AN ENORMOUS LISTOF COMPANIES YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

BEFORE I LET YOU ANSWER HERE, YOUPOINT OUT THATORACLE,HEWLETT PACKARD AND BROADCOM WHICHACQUIREDPIVOTAL IN 2023, DID NOT COMMENT ONTHE RECORD.

HP, MOTOROLA AND WATIDIDNOT RESPOND.

IBM,DELL, CISCO AND AMAZON WEBSERVICES SAID THEY ADHERETO EXPORTCONTROL POLICIES.

ESRI DENIED INVOLVEMENT BUT DID NOTREPLY TOEXAMPLES.

MICROSOFT SAID IT FOUNDNO EVIDENCE ITKNOWINGLY SOLD TECHNOLOGY TO MILITARYPOLICE AS PARTSOF UPDATES TO THE GOLDEN SHIELD.

WHATKIND OFSOFTWARE DID THEY SELL?

ARE THEYPOSSIBLY MAINTAINING?

>> YEAH, SOMECOMPANIES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ACTUALLYACTIVELY MARKETING TO THE CHINESEPOLICE FOR THEPURPOSES OF THE CONTROL OF THEIR OWNPEOPLE, RIGHT.

SO THAT --YOU KNOW,INTHAT PARTICULAR CASE COMPANIES MIGHTSAY WE DIDN'TREALLY KNOW HOW OUR GEAR WAS BEINGUSED, BUTTHE MARKETING MATERIAL THERE SAYSOTHERWISE, RIGHT.

THETHING THAT THIS REALLY TELLS YOU ISTHAT THERE'S A REALLY WIDE VARIETYOF COMPANIES THAT ARE INVOLVED, RIGHT?

I MEAN THERMOFISCHER, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY'RE SELLINGDNATESTING KIDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEYWERE ACTUALLY EXPLICITLY MARKETINGTHE ABILITY OFTHEIR TEST KITS TO ALSO TESTMEMBERS OF CHINA'S UYGHURAND TIBETANETHNICITIES AS WELL, RIGHT.

SO WHATYOU SEE HERE IS YOU REALLY HAVE ABROAD ARRAY OF AMERICAN TECH COMPANIES.

THEY ALL KIND OF RUSHEDINTO CHINA, YOU KNOW, IN THE EARLY2000s BECAUSETHEY SAW CHINA AS BEING THIS HUGEUNTAPPED MARKET.

A LOT OF THEMIGNORED WARNING ABOUT HOW THAT TECHNOLOGYWAS BEING USED,AND THEN THEY END UP, YOUKNOW, SELLING, OFTEN KNOWINGLY, TOTHECHINESE POLICE FOR PURPOSES OFREPRESSION.

>> THERE'S A RESPONSEFROM NVIDIA THAT KIND OFBEGS A DIFFERENT QUESTION.

NVIDIASAYS,LOOK, IT DOES NOT MAKE SURVEILLANCESYSTEM OR SOFTWARE.

IT DOES NOT WORK WITH POLICE IN CHINA,DID NOT DESIGNTHE H220 CHIP FOR POLICE SURVEILLANCEAND RELATIONSHIPS WITH CHINESE SURVEILLANCEFIRMS NOLONGER CONTINUE.

THERE'S AN ARGUMENTTECH COMPANIESARE GOING TO MAKE THAT, LOOK, I'MSELLING A GENERAL USETECHNOLOGY, RIGHT.

A CHIP IS A CHIP.

YOU COULD PUT IT IN YOUR PHONE, INYOUR GRAPHICS PROCESSOR AND PLAY VIDEOGAMES FOR IT.

YOU COULD USE IT FOR AI IN LARK-LANGUAGEMODELS, YOU CAN'T PENALIZE US FORTHAT.

NVIDIA IS KIND OF A SPECIAL CASE WHERETHE U. S. GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO TAKE15% OF ANY CHIP SALES THAT IT MAKESTOCHINA, RIGHT?

WHAT'S THE DANGER HERE?

>>YEAH, SO NVIDIA IS A REALLYINTERESTING CASE AS YOU POINT OUT,BECAUSE CHIP COMPANIES LIKENVIDIA AND INTEL WILL MAKE THE ARGUMENTTHAT THEY REALLY CAN'TCONTROL WHERE THEIR CHIPS GO.

THETHING ABOUT THATTHOUGH IS THAT WE FOUND EVIDENCE THATBOTHNVIDIA AND INTEL ACTIVELY PARTNEREDWITHCHINESE SURVEILLANCE COMPANIES FORPOLICING APPLICATIONS.

AND IN NVIDIA'SCASE THEYACTUALLY WORKED WITH A CHINESE POLICERESEARCH INSTITUTE.

YOU KNOW, THEY WERE TESTINGFACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE WITHNVIDIA CHIPS.

AND SO WHAT YOU ARESEEING HERE IS THAT THESE COMPANIESAREON THE WANT HAND SAYING THEY'RE NOTEXPLICITLY BEING DESIGNED FOR THEPURPOSESOF SURVEILLANCE, BUT THEY'RE VERYMUCHASSISTING COMPANIES IN FIGURING OUTHOW THEIR CHIPS CANBE USED FOR SURVEILLANCE APPLICATIONS.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, WE GRILLED THEMABOUT IT.

I MEANWE POINTED TO SPECIFIC RELATIONSHIPSTHAT THEYHAD WITH SPECIFIC CHINESE COMPANIES.

IN MANY OF THE CASES THEY KIND OFDISMISSED THEM SAYING, OH,YOU KNOW, THAT WAS IN THE PAST.

AFTERTHE U. S. GOVERNMENT SANCTIONED THOSE CHINESECOMPANIES WE NO LONGER HAVE ANY BUSINESSTIES WITH THEM, BUT SOMEPARTNERSHIPS WITH OTHER COMPANIESCONTINUE.

I MEAN WE SAW IN THE CASEOF NVIDIA THAT THEY ACTUALLYTOUTED HOW TWO CHINESE COMPANIES WHODO SELLTO CHINESE POLICE WEREUSING NVIDIA CHIPS.

AND SO THAT REALLYBEGS THEQUESTION, I MEAN ARE THEY JUST ADHERINGTO THE LETTER OF THE LAW, NOT THESPIRIT OF IT?

THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, ALL THE AMERICANCOMPANIES THAT WE SPOKETO SAY THAT THEY COMPLY WITH U. S. EXPORT CONTROLS, BUT WHAT WE'RE SEEINGIS THAT THEY'RE REALLY KINDOF WALKING RIGHT UP TO THE LINE OFWHAT IS PERMISSIBLE.

WE DID NOT FIND, YOU KNOW, HARD EVIDENCEOFVIOLATION OF EXPORT CONTROLS.

EXPORTCONTROLSARE VERY COMPLICATED, BUT IN A LOTOF THESE CASES WHATTHESE COMPANIES ARE DOING IS THATTHEY'REACTIVELY WORKING WITH CHINESE SURVEILLANCECOMPANIES SO LONGAS THEY'RE NOT BEING SANCTIONED.

ANDSO, YOU KNOW, EVENTHOUGH THESE CHIPS ARE NOT BEING DESIGNEDFOR THE PURPOSES OFSURVEILLANCE, THEY STILL VERY MUCHEND UP INSURVEILLANCE APPLICATIONS, AND WITHTHEASSISTANCE OF THESE CHIP COMPANIES.

>> SINCE YOU HAVE PUBLISHED YOURREPORT, SENATORS LIKE JOSH HAWLEYFROM MISSOURISAID, LOOK, MAYBE THESE PEOPLE, THESECOMPANIES NEED TOBE SUMMONED IN FRONT OF CONGRESS BECAUSETHERE SEEMED TO BEFAIRLY SIZABLE LOOPHOLES INSIDE THEEXISTING EXPORT LAWSTHAT ENABLED THIS TO HAPPEN.

THIS,YOU KNOW, FROMWHAT YOU'RE SHOWING HERE IS THAT ITIS NOTJUST KIND OF THE ACTIVISTS THAT ARECOMPLAINING AND IT IS NOT JUSTDEMOCRATS, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE SOMEKIND OF A BIPARTISAN CONSENSUSTHAT THIS KIND OFBEHAVIOR NEEDS TO BE REGULATED.

>>ABSOLUTELY.

YOU KNOW, THIS HASBEEN AN ISSUE FOR DECADES, RIGHT?

THERE'S BEEN CONGRESSIONAL HEARINGSABOUT THIS SINCE THEMID 2000s, BUT EVERY TIME, YOUKNOW, MEMBERS OF CONGRESS ORPEOPLE IN THE U. S. GOVERNMENT HAVETRIED TO DO SOMETHINGABOUT THIS TO CLOSE THOSE LOOPHOLESTHERE'SBEEN PUSH BACK FROM AMERICAN TECHCOMPANIES, YOU KNOW.

SO THEYSPEND A LOT OF MONEY LOBBYING ON THEISSUE, ENSURINGTHAT BILLS THAT COULD POTENTIALLYCLOSETHE LOOPHOLE NEVER COME TO A VOTE.

YOU KNOW, YOUHAVE ALL OF THESEBUREAUCRATIC PROCEDURES.

THE DEPARTMENTOF COMMERCE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR EXPORTCONTROLS,AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY TRIED NUMEROUSTIMES TO CLOSE SOME OFTHESE LOOPHOLES BUT THEY HAVE ALWAYSENDED UP RUNNINGOUT OF TIME AND FACING OPPOSITIONBEFORE THEY'RE ACTUALLY ABLETO PUT THROUGH THOSE CHANGES.

AND SO THIS HAS BEEN A LONGSTANDINGISSUE, ABSOLUTELY A BIPARTISAN ONE.

>> IT IS WORTH NOTING THE WHITE HOUSEANDTHE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, YOU KNOW,DID NOT RESPOND TOYOUR REQUEST FOR COMMENT IN THIS STORY.

ONE OTHER IDEA THAT WAS FASCINATINGIN YOUR PIECEIS THAT RIGHT NOW YOUR PIECE FOCUSESON THE INFLUENCE THAT AMERICAN TECHNOLOGYCOMPANIES HAD ON THE SURVEILLANCETHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CHINESE STATEAND THAT CHINESE COMPANIES COULD HAVEADVANCED THATTECHNOLOGY FURTHER.

BUT WHAT IS ALSOINTERESTING IS THAT YOU ALSO POINTOUTTHAT, LOOK, THIS TYPE OF SURVEILLANCEISBEING USED WELL BEYOND CHINA.

THAT THERE IS FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARETHAT'S BEING USED, WHETHER ITIS ON THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE UNITEDSTATESOR IN GAZA BY ISRAEL, RIGHT?

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I MEANONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE REALLY WANTEDTO EMPHASIZEIN WRITING THIS REPORT IS THAT THISIS NOT JUST A CHINA PROBLEM.

I THINKA LOT OF PEOPLETEND TO THINK OF, YOU KNOW, CHINAAS BEING THIS KINDOF DIGITAL TOTALITARIAN STATE.

THERE'SA LOT OF DISCOURSE ABOUT THAT, RIGHT?

BUT IT IS NOT JUST ACHINA ISSUE.

IN FACT, I THINK IT ISQUITE TELLING THAT ITWAS AMERICAN COMPANIES THAT BROUGHTA LOT OF THIS TECHNOLOGYTO CHINA BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT ITIS ALSO AN AMERICAN PROBLEM,AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT ONE OF OURINTERVIEWEESACTUALLY SAID WHEN SHE WAS SPEAKINGWITH US.

SHE SAID, YOU KNOW,RIGHT NOW IT MIGHT BE US CHINESE THATARE SUFFERINGBUT SOONER OR LATER AMERICANS ANDPEOPLE FROM OTHER COUNTRIES WILLSUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES AS WELL.

>>INVESTIGATIVEREPORTER WITHTHE ASSOCIATED PRESS, DICK KING, THANKYOUFOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVINGUS.

> >> IFYOU WANT TO FIND UP WHAT IS COMINGUP ON THE SHOW EACHNIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER.

THANK YOU FORWATCHING "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" ONPBS.

JOIN US AGAINTOMORROW NIGHT.