>> HELLO, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY. "

HERE IS WHAT IS COMING UP.

>> WHEN YOU SEE CROOKED ELECTIONS --AND WE HAVE PLENTY OF THEM, AND BY THE WAY, WE HAD THE LAST TIME, BUT GO TO 2020 AND LOOK AT THE FACTS THAT ARE COMING OUT.

RIGGED, CROOKED ELECTIONS.

>> AS REPUBLICANS FACE POTENTIAL BIG LOSSES IN THE MIDTERMS, PRESIDENT TRUMP CASTS DOUBT ON THE SYSTEM.

SO, HOW CAN AMERICANS SAFEGUARD ELECTIONS FROM HIS THREATS?

I ASK UCLA LAW PROFESSOR RICHARD HASON.

> >> THEN, ONE YEAR WITHOUT USAID, WE EXPLORE THE GLOBAL IMPACTS SINCE THE ORGANIZATION WAS DISMANTLED, WITH MICHELLE NUN, PRESIDENT OF A LEADING HUMANITARIAN AGENCY, CARE.

> >> PLUS -- >> I DON'T THINK IT REALLY LAYS BARE THE EXTENT OF EPSTEIN'S GRIP ON THESE TWO PEOPLE, AND ON THE TOP OF THE BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT.

>> THE EPSTEIN STORM RAGES ON, LEAVING POLITICAL AFTERSHOCKS IN THE UK.

"WALL STREET JOURNAL" REPORTER MAX COLCHESTER DIES INTO THE LATEST BATCH OF EMAILS AND ALLEGATIONS WITH MICHEL MARTIN.

> >> "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY THE ANDERSON FAMILY ENDOWMENT, JIM ATTWOOD AND LESLIE WILLIAMS, CANDACE KING WEIR, THE SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA PROGRAMMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT ANTISEMITISM, THE STRAUSS FAMILY FOUNDATION, THE PETER G. PETERSON AND JOAN GANZ COONEY FUND, CHARLES ROSENBLUM, KOO AND PATRICIA YUEN, COMMITTED TO BRIDGING CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN OUR COMMUNITIES, BARBARA HOPE AND BY CONTRIBUTIONS TO YOUR PBS STATION FROM VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

THANK YOU!

>> WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM, EVERYONE.

I AM IN NEW YORK SITTING IN FOR CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR.

"CROOKED," "RIGGED," WORDS USED TIME AFTER TIME BY PRESIDENT TRUMP, QUESTIONING, WITHOUT EVIDENCE, THE INTEGRITY OF AMERICA'S ELECTIONS.

AS REPUBLICANS FACE THE PROSPECT OF HUGE LOSSES IN THE UPCOMING MIDTERM ELECTIONS, HE'S RAMPING UP THAT CRITICISM EVEN MORE, ECHOING HIS ACTIONS FROM 2020.

IN RECENT DAYS, TRUMP CALLED FOR NATIONALIZING VOTING, SAYING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD GET INVOLVED BECAUSE ELECTIONS ARE RIDDLED WITH CORRUPTION.

SPEAKING TO NBC LAST NIGHT, HE WALKED BACK THOSE CALLS TO NATIONALIZE, BUT CONTINUED TO SOW DOUBT.

>> THERE ARE SOME AREAS IN OUR COUNTRY THAT ARE EXTERNALLY CORRUPT, THEY ARE VERY CORRUPT ELECTIONS.

TAKE A LOOK AT DETROIT, TAKE A LOOK AT PHILADELPHIA, TAKE A LOOK AT ATLANTA.

IF WE NEED TO PUT IN FEDERAL PUT CONTROLS AS OPPOSED TO STATE CONTROLS --REMEMBER THIS, THEY ARE REALLY AN AGENT, THEY ARE REALLY ACCUMULATING THE VOTES FOR WHO WINS AN ELECTION.

IF THEY CAN'T DO IT HONESTLY, AND IT CAN'T BE DONE PROPERLY AND TIMELY, THEN SOMETHING ELSE NEEDS TO HAPPEN.

>> THIS ALL COMES AFTER LAST WEEK, THE FBI DESCENDED ON FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA, SEIZING 700 BOXES OF ELECTION MATERIALS FROM 2020, INCLUDING BALLOTS.

PLUS, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS SO FAR SUED MORE THAN 20 STATES FOR REFUSING TO TURN OVER VOTER FILES.

THE BRENNAN CENTER THINK TANK WARNS THAT THIS IS PART OF A CAMPAIGN TO UNDERMINE FUTURE ELECTIONS.

SO, HOW CAN AMERICA'S ELECTIONS BE PROTECTED, AND WILL THE MIDTERMS BE CONDUCTED AND COUNTED FAIRLY?

RICHARD HASON IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE SAFEGUARDING DEMOCRACY PROJECT AT THE UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW AND JOINS US NOW, FROM CALIFORNIA.

WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

SO, WE JUST HEARD THERE, THE PRESIDENT, ONCE AGAIN, MAKE A SERIES OF ALLEGATIONS AND CLAIMS ABOUT THE U. S. ELECTIONS, NONE OF THEM SUBSTANTIATED.

BUT, LET'S TRY TO GO THROUGH THEM, ONE BY ONE, BECAUSE THE PRESIDENT CLAIMS THAT SOME PARTS OF THE COUNTRY HAVE "EXTREMELY CORRUPT ELECTIONS. "

IS THAT TRUE?

ARE THERE CORRUPT ELECTIONS, IN ANY PART OF THE COUNTRY THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF?

>> WELL, IT'S GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.

I THINK THAT, IF YOU LOOK AT U. S. ELECTIONS, OVERALL, OUR ELECTIONS HAVE NEVER BEEN CONDUCTED WITH MORE INTEGRITY.

WE HAVE ALL KINDS OF CHECKS ON THE ELECTION OFFICIALS.

THERE IS A LOT OF TRANSPARENCY.

THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF BOTH GOVERNMENT AND JOURNALISTIC INVESTIGATIONS LOOKING INTO CLAIMS TRUMP HAS MADE ABOUT NONCITIZENS VOTING, OR ABOUT MAIL-IN BALLOT FRAUD AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT IS NO COINCIDENCE THAT HE IS SINGLING OUT DETROIT, PHILADELPHIA, AND ATLANTA, THESE ARE ALL CITIES WITH LARGE MINORITY POPULATIONS, LARGE DEMOCRATIC STRONGHOLDS.

IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN TRUE THAT SOME OF THE BIG CITIES, IN THE 1950s AND '60s, HAD FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS.

WE HAD PROBLEMS IN CHICAGO, YOU KNOW, AS LATE AS THE EARLY 1980s.

BUT, AT THIS POINT, IN THE UNITED STATES, OUR ELECTIONS ARE GENERALLY FAIR.

AND WHEN YOU DO SEE FRAUD, IT TENDS TO BE ISOLATED, AND IT ALSO TENDS TO BE INEFFECTIVE, UNLESS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT A VERY SMALL ELECTION WERE JUST A FEW BALLOTS COULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

>> RIGHT, AND DO WE SEE ANY DIFFERENCE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF VOTING?

SPECIFICALLY IN THOSE CITIES THAT YOU MENTIONED, LARGE CITIES, MANY OF THEM, MINORITY MAJORITY CITIES, AS YOU NOTED, AND THEY ARE DEMOCRATIC CITIES, SO DETROIT, PHILADELPHIA, ATLANTA.

>> SO, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST --AND DETROIT IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THIS -- IS INCOMPETENCE IN ELECTION ADMINISTRATION.

IT IS NOT A SURPRISE THAT BIG CITIES THAT LACK RESOURCES SOMETIMES HAVE PROBLEMS WITH HOW THEY DO ALL OF THEIR GOVERNMENT SERVICES.

IN MICHIGAN, IN PARTICULAR, THIS WAS AN ISSUE IN DETROIT GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF THIS DECADE, AND DETROIT AND MICHIGAN REALLY CLEANED UP ITS ACT.

WE SAW, IN 2024, THE ELECTIONS WERE RUN THERE IN A MUCH MORE EFFICIENT WAY.

SO, I THINK, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT PROBLEMS WITH ELECTIONS, THERE IS BOTH ISSUES OF COMPETENCE, AND ISSUES OF CRIMINALITY TRYING TO RIG ELECTIONS.

WE HAVE SEEN POCKETS OF INCOMPETENCE IN THIS COUNTRY.

IT HAS GOTTEN BETTER, BECAUSE EVERYONE IS WATCHING, AND WE HAVE MORE PROFESSIONALIZED ELECTION STAFF RUNNING ELECTIONS.

BUT, IN TERMS OF CRIMINALITY -- WHICH, TRUMP IS TALKING ABOUT "CROOKED ELECTIONS," "RIGGED ELECTIONS," THERE IS JUST NO LEVEL THIS IS HAPPENING ON THE LEVEL OF THE GOVERNMENT ON THE SCALE THAT COULD AFFECT THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS FOR CONGRESS OR THAT COULD AFFECT THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS THAT WE HAVE EVERY FOUR YEARS.

>> THE PRESIDENT ALSO SAYS THAT STATES ARE MERELY AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHEN IT COMES TO COUNTING VOTES.

AS IT RELATES, AND AS IT IS STATED IN THE CONSTITUTION, IS HE CORRECT?

>> HE IS ABSOLUTELY INCORRECT.

SO, WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN, THERE WAS A LOT OF POWER THAT STATES HAD.

IN FACT, ALL OF THE POWER TO RUN THE GOVERNMENT IS RESERVED TO THE STATES, UNLESS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS A SPECIFIC GRANT OF AUTHORITY IN THE CONSTITUTION.

SO, IN PARTICULAR, IN ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION, IT SAYS THAT STATES MAKE THE RULES THROUGH THEIR LEGISLATURES, FOR SETTING THE TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER FOR RUNNING CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS, SUBJECT TO CONGRESSIONAL OVERRIDE.

SO, CONGRESS CAN PASS LAWS THAT CAN REGULATE HOW ELECTIONS -- FOR CONGRESS --ARE TO BE CONDUCTED.

WHEN CONGRESS DOESN'T DO THAT, IT IS THE ROLE OF THE STATES, AND FOR STATE AND LOCAL ELECTIONS, THERE IS NO LEGISLATIVE POWER IN ARTICLE ONE, SECTION 4.

AND IMPORTANTLY, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION THAT GIVES THE PRESIDENT AND THE EXECUTIVE ANY POWER OVER RUNNING ELECTIONS.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF COURT CASES, GOING BACK TO LAST AUGUST, WHEN DONALD TRUMP ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER PURPORTING TO ASSERT SOME POWER OVER THE FORM THAT IS USED FOR REGISTERED VOTERS, OVER SOME SORTS OF PROCEDURES THAT ARE DONE.

AND IN CONDUCTING ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, WE HAVE HAD MULTIPLE COURTS SAY, THE PRESIDENT HAS NO ROLE TO PLAY.

SO, THERE IS NO OFFICIAL ROLE IN THE THE CONSTITUTION FOR THE PRESIDENT WHEN IT COMES TO RUNNING ELECTIONS IN THIS COUNTRY.

>> AND YET, HE CONTINUES TO PUSH THAT NARRATIVE AND HE HAS MANY POWERFUL REPUBLICANS WHO ARE NOT NECESSARILY USING THE LANGUAGE HE IS, BUT ARE BACKING UP HIS CLAIMS TO AT LEAST QUESTION VOTER INTEGRITY AND WHETHER OR NOT THERE ARE -- THERE IS MASSIVE FRAUD IN ELECTIONS, INCLUDING THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, MIKE JOHNSON.

AND WHAT IS NOTABLE ABOUT MIKE JOHNSON, IS THAT HE IS A CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER, BY TRAINING, BY EDUCATION, WHEREAS THE PRESIDENT IS NOT.

AND YET, SHE CONTINUES TO ESPOUSE SOME OF THE PRESIDENT'S TALKING POINTS BY SAYING THIS.

>> WE HAD THREE HOUSE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES WHO WERE A AHEAD ON ELECTION DAY, IN THE LAST ELECTION CYCLE AND EVERY TIME NEW BALLOTS CAME IN, THEY JUST MAGICALLY WITHERED AWAY UNTIL THEIR LEADS WERE LOST.

AND NO SERIES OF BALLOTS THAT WERE COUNTED AFTER ELECTION DAY, WERE OUR CANDIDATES AHEAD ON ANY OF THOSE COUNTS.

IT JUST --IT LOOKS, ON ITS FACE, TO BE FRAUDULENT.

CANNOT PROVE THAT?

NO.

>> OKAY, HOW DO YOU INTERPRET THAT?

>> WELL, HE MAY CALL HIMSELF A CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER, BUT THAT IS ONE OF THE MOST ASININE COMMENTS I HAVE HEARD, EXCEPT COMING FROM THE PRESIDENT, ABOUT HOW OUR ELECTIONS ARE RUN.

HERE IS HOW IT HAPPENS, EVERYONE VOTES BY ELECTION DAY, AND BALLOTS COME IN.

SOME STATES EXCEPT BALLOTS THAT ARE POSTMARKED BY ELECTION DAY BUT ARRIVE A FEW DAYS LATER, BUT IN STATES WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF MAIL BALLOTS, THEY HAVE TO BE CHECKED TO MAKE SURE SIGNATURES MATCH, TO MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE VOTING OUR --ARE ENTITLED TO VOTE, AND IT TAKES TIME TO DO THAT, SO EVERYONE HAS VOTED AND IT TAKES TIME TO COUNT THE BALLOTS.

NOW, IF DEMOCRATS ARE MORE LIKELY, IN SOME PLACES, TO VOTE BY MAIL, AND IF DEMOCRATS ARE MORE LIKELY, IN SOME PLACES, TO VOTE LATER THAN REPUBLICANS, IT'S NOT SURPRISING THAT THE EARLY ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE RETURNS -- WHICH ARE HEAVILY WEIGHTED TOWARD MOST PEOPLE WHO VOTED ON ELECTION DAY --WILL SKEW REPUBLICAN.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A RANDOM SAMPLE ON THE FIRST DAY.

WHAT HAPPENS IS, A LOT OF THESE ELECTIONS ARE NOT TOO CLOSE TO CALL, BUT THEY ARE TOO EARLY TO CALL.

ALL THE BALLOTS ARE IN, BUT THEY HAVEN'T YET BEEN PROCESSED AND COUNTED.

AND SO, WE HAVE SEEN, TIME AND TIME AGAIN, WHEN WE SEE THIS SO- CALLED "BLUE SHIFT," WHEN REPUBLICANS APPEAR TO HAVE MORE VOTES AT THE BEGINNING OF THE COUNT, BUT NOT AT THE END, WE HAVE SEEN TRUMP, AND NOW WE HAVE SEEN THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE TRYING TO TURN THIS INTO SOME KIND OF FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY.

IT'S NOTHING OF THE SORT.

IT'S WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A RANDOM SELECTION OF BALLOTS.

IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING NEFARIOUS.

ALL OF THE STATES THAT ARE COUNTING THE BALLOTS HAVE CHAIN OF CUSTODY.

THEY ARE WATCHING THOSE BALLOTS.

YOU CAN, IN MANY PLACES, LOOK ON A LIVE CAMERA TO SEE THE BALLOTS BEING STORED.

THERE IS NOTHING GOING ON OTHER THAN, IT TAKES TIME TO PROCESS THOSE BALLOTS.

>> YOU MENTIONED MAIL-IN BALLOTS, AND THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING AND A PROCESS TRADITIONALLY SUPPORTED BY REPUBLICANS, IT EVEN HELPS THEM IN THE SENSE THAT THOSE WHO PARTICIPATE IN MAIL-IN BALLOTS, A LOT OF THEM ARE REPUBLICANS AND A LOT OF THEM ARE ELDERLY VOTERS, AS WELL.

WE SAW THIS PARTICULARLY HIGHLIGHTED DURING THE PANDEMIC.

AND THEN, THE PRESIDENT SPOKE OUT HEAVILY, AND CONSECUTIVELY, AGAINST MAIL-IN BALLOTS.

AND THAT HAS RAISED THE QUESTION OF, AGAIN, OF VOTERS WHO MAY NOT BE AS WELL-INFORMED AS YOU ARE, ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS ANY VALIDITY TO THE --PRESIDENT QUESTIONING MAIL-IN BALLOTS.

SO, CAN YOU ANSWER FOR US, ARE THEY SAFE?

AND IF THEY ARE, WHY YOU THINK THE PRESIDENT HAS SUCH ISSUE WITH IT?

>> WELL, LET ME START WITH YOUR SECOND QUESTION, FIRST.

DONALD TRUMP CONSISTENTLY CLAIMS THERE IS FRAUD IN ELECTIONS.

HE CLAIMED IT IN 2016, HE CLAIMED THAT 3 MILLION NONCITIZENS VOTED BY MAIL.

NOT COINCIDENTALLY, THE AMOUNT BY WHICH HILLARY CLINTON, HIS OPPONENT, WON IN THE POPULAR VOTE.

AND THERE WERE EXTENSIVE INVESTIGATIONS IN 2016.

IT TURNED OUT THERE WERE ABOUT 30 POTENTIAL CASES, OF NONCITIZENS VOTING IN THE ENTIRE UNITED STATES, OUT OF WELL OVER 100 MILLION BALLOTS CAST.

IN 2020, AS YOU SAID, DURING THE PANDEMIC, WE SHIFTED TO MAIL-IN VOTING SO TRUMP SHIFTED HIS RHETORIC TO MAIL-IN BALLOTS, CLAIMING THEY ARE RIFE WITH FRAUD.

THIS WAS EXTENSIVELY INVESTIGATED.

THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OF MAIL- IN BALLOT FRAUD GOING ON AT ANY SCALE THAT COULD INFLUENCE THE OUTCOME OF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, IN ANY STATE!

AND NOW, THAT WE ARE OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, HE IS CONDEMNING MAIL- IN BALLOTS AND IS CLAIMING NONCITIZENS VOTING, AND HE IS CLAIMING THE VOTE IS RIGGED IN ALL THESE COUNTIES.

TO ME, IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMEONE WHO IS SCARED THAT HE IS GOING TO LOSE THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS, AND MAYBE THE OPTIMISTIC STORY HERE IS, HE IS TRYING TO EXPLAIN AWAY WHY HIS PARTY MIGHT LOSE.

THE LESS OPTIMISTIC STORY, IS THAT HE IS TRYING TO LAY THE GROUNDWORK FOR FEDERAL INTERVENTION, SOMEHOW, TO TRY TO INTERFERE --LEGALLY, OR ILLEGALLY --IN THE 2026 MIDTERM ELECTIONS.

>> AND IT IS INTERESTING, BECAUSE HE WAS ACTUALLY CONVINCED TO WALK BACK SOME OF HIS CRITICISM, WHEN IT COMES TO MAIL-IN VOTING.

BEFORE THE 2024 ELECTION, BY OTHER REPUBLICANS WHO SAID, "NO, THIS COULD ACTUALLY BENEFIT YOU, IF MORE PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY ABLE TO MAIL IN THEIR BALLOTS. "

AND NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN, HE IS PICKING UP THIS ISSUE AGAIN.

WE SHOULD NOTE THAT, FOR YEARS, YOU HAVE ARGUED THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHOULD PLAY A LARGER ROLE IN OVERSEEING ELECTIONS.

IN FACT, YOUR 2012 BOOK, "THE VOTING WARS," YOU CALLED FOR A NATIONAL, NONPARTISAN ELECTION ADMINISTRATION.

YOU HAVE NOW CHANGED YOUR MIND SINCE THEN, AND I'M WONDERING WHY?

>> WELL, I THINK THE DONALD TRUMP EXPERIENCE OVER THE LAST DECADE OR SO HAS CONVINCED ME THAT AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS TOO WEAK FOR NATIONAL, NONPARTISAN ELECTION ADMINISTRATION, SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW ELECTIONS ARE CONDUCTED IN VIRTUAL ALL OTHER ADVANCED DEMOCRACIES IN THE WORLD FROM CANADA, TO AUSTRALIA, TO GERMANY, TO ITALY, IN THESE COUNTRIES, THERE IS A NATIONAL, NONPARTISAN BODY THAT CONDUCTS ELECTIONS.

THEY ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE GOVERNMENT, THEY HAVE ALLEGIANCE TO THE INTEGRITY OF THE SYSTEM.

IT IS A MUCH MORE RATIONAL WAY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IN CANADA, IF YOU WALK INTO THE POLLING PLACE IN ONE PROVIDENCE OR ANOTHER, THE BALLOT IS GOING TO LOOK THE SAME, THE MACHINERY IS GOING TO BE THE SAME, THE WAY THEY TABULATE VOTES IS THE SAME.

SO, I ARGUED, BACK IN 2012, WE SHOULD JOIN THE 21st CENTURY ADVANCED DEMOCRACIES IN DOING THIS, BUT WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IS THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS TRIED, IN MANY WAYS, TO HAVE A FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF, SUBSTANCE ABUSE INDEPENDENT AGENCIES IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND TRYING TO ASSERT HIS POWER WHEREVER HE CAN.

AND I AM WORRIED THAT WHOEVER COMES AFTER TRUMP, WHOEVER WOULD BE THE NEXT WOULD BE AUTHORITARIAN, THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO CAPTURE CONTROL OF THIS AGENCY.

SO, WHAT I SAW AS PRIMARILY A WEAKNESS, THE DEVOLUTION OF POWER, THAT THE CENTRALIZATION OF POWER TO THE STATES AND TO COUNTIES TO RUN ELECTIONS, IS ACTUALLY GOING TO SERVE AS A BULWARK AGAINST AUTHORITARIANISM, BECAUSE IT'S VERY HARD FOR SOMEONE LIKE TRUMP TO MANIPULATE THE PROCESSES IN STATES AND COUNTIES WHERE HE HAS NO OFFICIAL CONTROL.

>> WE SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT WHILE MIKE JOHNSON MAY HAVE BEEN PLAYING INTO TRUMP'S NARRATIVE, NOT ALL REPUBLICANS HAVE SUPPORTED HIS CALL TO NATIONALIZE ELECTIONS.

IN FACT, MANY HAVE SPOKEN OUT AGAINST IT.

PRESIDENT TRUMP BEING ONE OF THEM, HE IS RETIRING, BUT OTHERS THAT ARE NOT ALSO SPOKE OUT AGAINST NATIONALIZING ELECTIONS.

BUT, AS IT COMES TO AND RELATES TO THOM TILLIS AND MANY REPUBLICANS, THEY DO SUPPORT VOTER I. D. AT ELECTION VOTING SITES, AND THE S. A. V. E. ACT, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE DOCUMENTS, LIKE A PASSPORT, OR ANY SORT OF IDENTIFICATION, LEGAL IDENTIFICATION, TO REGISTER TO VOTE, HERE IS WHAT SENATOR TILLIS SAID.

>> I AM JUST AGAINST NATIONALIZING THE ELECTION NOW, AS MUCH AS I WAS BACK IN 2022, WHEN THE DEMOCRATS TRIED TO DO IT.

NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK THIS S. A. V. E. ACT WOULD BE A GREAT BILL IF WE CAN GET TO 60 VOTES IN THE SENATE, BECAUSE THE WORLD HAS CHANGED.

8 MILLION PEOPLE ARE COMING ACROSS THE BORDER, THAT COULD BE, THEORETICALLY, 8 MILLION ILLEGALLY PRESENT PEOPLE WHO CAN VOTE IN SOME STATES THAT ARE MORE LIBERAL.

>> SO, WHAT, IN YOUR VIEW, REQUIRING IDENTIFICATION AND DOCUMENTS, SHOWING YOUR CITIZENSHIP, WOULD THAT BE A LEGITIMATE THING, TO DEMAND OF VOTERS?

DO YOU HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THAT?

>> SO, THERE, I THINK WE NEED TO SEPARATE TWO THINGS.

ONE, DO YOU NEED TO SHOW IDENTIFICATION AT THE POLLS TO STAY WHO YOU ARE?

SOME STATES HAVE THAT.

SOME STATES USE SIGNATURES TO FIGURE OUT THE PERSON IS WHO THEY SAY THEY ARE, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO SHOW A GOVERNMENT ISSUED I. D. THE PART OF THE S. A. V. E. ACT THAT IS THE CONTROVERSIAL PART, IS LESS THE VOTER I. D. PART, BUT THE PART THAT WOULD REQUIRE PROVIDING DOCUMENTARY PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP BEFORE YOU CAN REGISTER TO VOTE, RIGHT?

SO, YOU HAVE TO COME UP WITH YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICATE IF YOU ARE BORN IN THE UNITED STATES, AND IF YOU CHANGE YOUR NAME, WHEN YOU GOT MARRIED, YOUR MARRIAGE LICENSE, OR NATIONALIZATION PAPERS, OR A PASSPORT, IN ORDER TO REGISTER TO VOTE.

WE KNOW FROM THE EXPERIENCE WHEN KANSAS TRIED TO PUT A LAW LIKE THIS IN PLACE A DECADE AGO, IT IS TREMENDOUSLY DISENFRANCHISING AND BEFORE A FEDERAL COURT PUT IT ON HOLD, THERE WERE 30,000 PEOPLE WHO WERE OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE TO BE REGISTERED TO VOTE, WHO WERE NOT REGISTERED.

AND THIS WENT TO TRIAL, AND THAT THEN SECRETARY OF STATE OF KANSAS, CHRIS KOVACH, TRIED TO PROVE THAT NONCITIZENS VOTING WAS A BIG PROBLEM THAT JUSTIFIED REQUIRING THIS.

HE SAID, WHAT HE PRESENTS AS EVIDENCE, WAS THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG, AND THEN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE WHO HEARD THIS EVIDENCE --A REPUBLICAN APPOINTEE --SAID, "THERE IS NO ICEBERG, IT IS MOSTLY AN ICE COLD MADE OF ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR. "

SO, THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE DOCUMENTARY PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP WHEN NONCITIZENS VOTING IS AN INCREDIBLY SMALL PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY, WHEN YOU REGISTER TO VOTE, YOU SIGN, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT YOU ARE A CITIZEN.

IF YOU SIGN THAT AND YOU ARE A NONCITIZEN, YOU CAN BE EXPELLED FROM THE COUNTRY, YOU COULD BE COMMITTING A FELONY.

WE DON'T SEE IT.

SO, THIS WOULD BE A VERY DISENFRANCHISING LAW, ONE THAT WOULD NOT REALLY MAKE OUR ELECTIONS ANY CLEANER.

>> FINALLY, I DO WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT ALL OF THE HEADLINES THAT HAVE NOW BEEN IN QUESTIONS RAISED, FOLLOWING THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, TULSI GABBARD, ACCOMPANYING FBI AGENTS LAST WEEK, AS THEY SEARCHED THE FULTON COUNTY ELECTION OFFICE.

THEY SAY SOME 700 BOXES THERE, WITH U. S. OFFICIALS, INCLUDING THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ASKING WHY SHE WAS THERE, HE DIDN'T REALLY HAVE A CLEAR ANSWER FOR THAT.

THERE WAS FOLLOW-UP REPORTING SHOWING THAT SHE HAD PUT THE PRESIDENT ON THE PHONE, AND HE ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH SOME OF THOSE FBI AGENTS, THE FULTON COUNTY IS NOW SUING AND PRESSING BACK AGAINST THIS ISSUE.

BUT, I DO WANT TO UPDATE YOU ON ONE HEADLINE WE JUST GOT, AND THAT IS THAT TULSI GABBARD'S OFFICE HAD OBTAINED AND TESTED VOTING MACHINES IN PUERTO RICO, AS WELL.

AND THERE HAD BEEN A LOT OF QUESTION AS TO WHY THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE HAD BEEN WITNESS AND ACCOMPANYING FBI AGENTS TO A VOTING SITE, BECAUSE THAT IS NOT HER PURVIEW.

NOW THAT WE HAVE SOME MORE NEWS ABOUT SEIZING VOTING MACHINES, OR LOOKING INTO THEM IN PUERTO RICO, WHAT QUESTIONS DOES THAT RAISE, FOR YOU?

>> WELL, AGAIN, I THINK THERE IS A POTENTIALLY OPTIMISTIC STORY AND PESSIMISTIC STORY.

THE OPTIMISTIC STORY IS THAT TULSI GABBARD, LIKE TRUMP, IS A CONSPIRACY THEORIST.

THAT TRUMP HAS TASKED HER, ACCORDING TO "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL" WITH INVESTIGATING VOTER FRAUD AND THE CONNECTION TO PUERTO RICO IS APPARENTLY THROUGH SOME CONSPIRACY ABOUT VENEZUELAN AND MANIPULATING VOTING MACHINES BEING USED IN PUERTO RICO, FOR WHICH THERE IS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE.

SO, THE OPTIMISTIC STORY IS THAT THEY ARE KIND OF JUST SPINNING OUT MORE CONSPIRACY THEORIES.

THE PESSIMISTIC THEORY IS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO USE THE INTELLIGENCE APPARATUS, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT --WE SAW THE FBI RAID ON THE FULTON COUNTY OFFICES --AS A KIND OF TEST RUN, A PRETEXT, FOR POTENTIALLY TRYING TO SEIZE BALLOTS, OR VOTE TABULATING MACHINERY, OR ELECTION MACHINERY.

AS VOTES ARE SUPPOSED TO BE TABULATED IN THE 2026 ELECTION.

SO, I THINK EVERYONE, ON THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL, NEEDS TO BE ON GUARD.

THE IDEA THAT WE NEED TO BE ON GUARD AGAINST INTERFERENCE BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, INTERFERENCE WITH ELECTIONS, SHOWS YOU JUST HOW MUCH AMERICAN DEMOCRACY HAS DETERIORATED IN THE LAST DECADE.

>> ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10, HOW WORRIED ARE YOU ABOUT THE SECURITY OF OUR UPCOMING MIDTERM ELECTIONS AND PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION TWO YEARS AFTER?

>> WELL, I THINK I AM ABOUT A SEVEN OUT OF 10, IN TERMS OF BEING WORRIED.

I WAS A NINE OUT OF 10, EARLIER.

BUT, IT SEEMS THAT DONALD TRUMP HAS A LITTLE BIT LESS POWER TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, CONSOLIDATE HIS POWER OVER THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, OVER THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, OVERSTATES, THEN I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO.

I THINK WE HAVE TO GET PAST THIS MOMENT, AND IT IS GOING TO TAKE DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS, TOGETHER, WORKING TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES.

>> YES, SEVEN IS A BIT TOO HIGH AND ALARMING FOR MY TASTE, BUT I GUESS IT'S BETTER THAN NINE.

RICHARD HASON, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> GREAT TO BE WITH YOU.

> >> WELL, THIS WEEK MARKS A START MOMENT FOR GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN RELIEF.

IT HAS BEEN ONE YEAR SINCE THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION DISMANTLED USAID.

AND WITH THOSE CUTS, WE HAVE SEEN THE CLOSURE OF HIV CLINICS IN SOUTH AFRICA, THE TERMINATION OF MEDICAL PROGRAMS IN AFGHANISTAN, AND THE END OF SO MANY PROGRAMS HELPING NOW NUTRITION AND PREVENTABLE DISEASE ALL AROUND THE WORLD.

AND THIS COULD BE JUST THE BEGINNING.

FOREIGN AID CUTS BY THE U. S. , UK, AND OTHER DEVELOPED NATIONS COULD LEAD TO MORE THAN 9 MILLION ADDITIONAL DEATHS BY 2030.

THAT IS ACCORDING TO A NEW STUDY BY THE LANCET MEDICAL JOURNAL.

PLUS, WITH GOEBEL CONFLICTS ON THE RISE, INTERNATIONAL AID ORGANIZATIONS FACE ACUTE CHALLENGES, ONE OF THOSE BEING CARE.

A MAJOR HUMANITARIAN AGENCY THAT HAS BEEN IN ACTION FOR 80 YEARS.

MICHELLE NUNN IS PRESIDENT AND CEO OF CARE, AND JOINS US FROM ATLANTA.

MICHEL, THANKS FOR COMING TO THE PROGRAM, APPRECIATE THE TIME.

BEFORE WE GET INTO WHAT THIS YEARS CUTS HAVE MEANT FOR YOU AND THE IMPACT IT HAS HAD ON C. A. R. E. , I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO TELL OUR VIEWERS WHAT C. A. R. E. DOES AND WHAT IT HAS BEEN DOING FOR SO MANY YEARS.

>> YEAH, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

C. A. R. E. HAS BEEN, FOR 30 YEARS, LITERALLY DELIVERING CARE AROUND THE WORLD, SO IF YOU EVER SEND A CARE PACKAGE, IT ACTUALLY STARTED WITH THE ORGANIZATION, C. A. R. E. A HANDFUL OF AMERICANS WHO SAID, "WE ARE NOT GOING TO WATCH PEOPLE FACE STARVATION IN POST-WORLD WAR II EUROPE. "

THEY INVENTED THE CARE PACKAGE AND OVER 100 YEARS, THEY DEVELOPED OVER 100 MILLION CARE PACKAGES AND ICON OF GENEROSITY AND CONNECTION --THAT IS THE SMALL GIFTS OF KINDNESS, TRANSFORMED INTO A MOVEMENT OF CHANGE MAKING, AND C. A. R. E. , LAST YEAR, REACHED OVER 58 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE WORLD.

WE FOCUS ON WOMEN, AND ALSO FAMILIES, AND WE --WE ARE TRYING TO DEFEAT POVERTY, AND WE ARE SAVING LIVES EVERY SINGLE DAY.

>> AND HOW DID C. A. R. E. BEGIN, AS AN ORGANIZATION?

YOU MENTIONED 80 YEARS AGO, OBVIOUSLY COMING OUT OF THE SECOND WORLD WAR, JUST TELL US THE ORIGINS, REALLY QUICK?

>> IT'S SUCH A BEAUTIFUL STORY, IT'S ORDINARY AMERICANS, A HANDFUL OF ORDINARY AMERICANS GOT TOGETHER, THEY PULLED IN OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AND THEY SAID, "WE CAN DO SOMETHING.

WE ARE GOING TO SEND WHAT WERE ARMY RATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN USED IN WORLD WAR II TO THOSE WHO ARE FACING STARVATION. "

AND THOSE ARE OUR FORMER ENEMIES.

NOT ONLY ARE WE SENDING THEM TO FRANCE AND ENGLAND, BUT WE WERE ALSO SENDING THEM TO GERMANY, JUST MONTHS AFTER FIGHTING THE WAR.

AND SO, IT REALLY IS A BEAUTIFUL STORY OF SOLIDARITY.

IT WAS PART OF ACTUALLY HELPING REBUILD EUROPE.

HARI TRUMAN WAS ONE OF THE FIRST DONORS TO THE CARE PACKAGES AND MILLIONS OF OF OTHER AMERICANS GALVANIZED TO EXPRESS THAT GENEROSITY AND THAT GENEROSITY IS EXACTLY WHAT IS NEEDED RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE FACE, ACTUALLY, MORE PEOPLE IN CONFLICT RIGHT NOW, TODAY, THAN SINCE WORLD WAR II.

SO, THIS IS A MOMENT, ACTUALLY, FOR CARE, AND GENEROSITY, AND CONNECTION.

>> AND THE IMPACT OF CUTS, LIKE THIS, YOU SAY C. A. R. E. IS CUTTING NEARLY $300 MILLION NOW FROM ITS OPERATING BUDGET, THIS YEAR.

THAT CARRIES SIGNIFICANT WEIGHT.

TALK ABOUT THE IMPACT OF WHAT ONE YEARS' WORTH OF CUTS LIKE THAT, TO THAT MAGNITUDE, WHAT THAT MEANS FOR THOSE THAT ARE IN DESPERATE NEED OF AID?

>> WELL, IT IS DEVASTATING.

AND SO, IF YOU THINK ABOUT, FOR INSTANCE, JUST WHAT C. A. R. E. HAS LOST IN TERMS OF OUR CAPACITY TO DELIVER IMPACT, WE WERE SUPPORTING 18 MILLION PEOPLE WITH THAT 300 MILLION+ DOLLARS.

SO, WE ARE HAVING TO REIMAGINE THE WORK OF BOTH C. A. R. E. AND ALSO THE LARGER HUMANITARIAN SECTOR.

AND YOU SAW WHAT "THE LANCET" CAME OUT WITH EARLIER, POTENTIALLY UP TO 9 MILLION PEOPLE WHO COULD LOSE THEIR LIVES AS A RESULT OF THESE CUTS.

THAT TRANSLATES INTO CHILDREN WHO COULD BE RECEIVING MEDICAL ATTENTION AND NUTRITION, BUT WHO COULD DIE OF STARVATION AND OF MALNUTRITION AS A RESULT OF THESE CUTS.

IT MEANS THAT WOMEN, WHO OTHERWISE WOULD HAVE SUPPORT WHEN THEY ARE GIVING BIRTH, LOSE THAT CAPACITY TO ACTUALLY HAVE MEDICAL PROVISION AND THE DELIVERY OF A SAFE CHILD.

AND THEN, IT TRANSLATES TO GIRLS AND BOYS WHO WERE ACTUALLY WORKING TOWARDS HER EDUCATION, FINISHING SECONDARY SCHOOL, AND A PATH BEFORE THEM THAT WOULD ENABLE THEM TO BE RESILIENT AND CONTRIBUTING COMMUNITY MEMBERS LOSING OUT ON THAT CAPACITY.

JUST, LITERALLY, THE WALL SHUTTING DOWN ON THEIR DREAMS AND HOPES.

AND YET, WE CAN, AND WE SHOULD, WE NEED TO REBUILD THE CONSTITUENCY FOR THIS KIND OF HUMANITARIAN GENEROSITY THAT HAS BEEN SO MUCH A PART OF THE AMERICAN STORY, AND ALSO, I THINK, OF THE GLOBAL STORY.

WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF PROGRESS, BUT WE CAN'T SEE THAT RECEIPT AND WE ARE SEEING THAT RECEIPT.

ACTUALLY, THIS YEAR IS THE FIRST YEAR THAT WE ARE SEEING MORE CHILD DEATHS THAN THE YEAR BEFORE.

THE FIRST TIME IN 25 YEARS THAT HAS HAPPENED.

>> WOW.

AND WHEN YOU ARE PUT IN THIS POSITION OF HAVING TO MAKE THESE STARK CUTS, WHERE DO YOU EVEN BEGIN?

HOW DO YOU, THEN, PRIORITIZE WHO IS ACTUALLY NOT GOING TO BE CUT, OR WHO IS AFFECTED THE LEAST POSSIBLE?

AND ULTIMATELY, WHO IS GOING TO HAVE TO SUFFER THE MOST BECAUSE OF THIS?

>> WELL, WE TRIAGE WHEREVER WE CAN, SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY TAKE THOSE WHO ARE MOST IN NEED.

FOR INSTANCE, WE LOOK AT WHAT CHILDREN ARE EXPERIENCING.

THERE IS A VERY MEDICALLY AND CLINICALLY SOUND WAY OF DIAGNOSING THOSE WHO NEED MORE AND IMMEDIATE ATTENTION, BUT WHAT IT DOES MEAN IS, LITERALLY, I WAS IN THE HORN OF AFRICA THE LAST --10 DAYS AGO.

SEEING AND HEARING FROM PEOPLE THAT SAID FORMER HOSPITAL CLINICS ARE LIKE GHOST TOWNS, THAT PEOPLE WHO HAD BUILT UP TO TWO MEALS PER DAY, REFUGEES, ARE NOW BACK DOWN TO ONE MEAL PER DAY, SO IT'S AN INCREDIBLY EXCRUCIATING PROCESS.

AND I WILL ALSO SAY THAT PART OF THE CHANGES NOW IN THE LAST YEAR OF THE SECTOR AND THE HUMANITARIAN WAY THAT COUNTRIES, INCLUDING THE U. S. , ARE INVESTING, IS MUCH MORE TRANSACTIONAL.

SO, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT WE ARE INVESTING WHERE THERE IS THE GREATEST NEED, SO THAT MEANS PLACES LIKE SOMALIA --WHERE WE HAVE STAVED OFF FAMINE FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, EVEN THOUGH THERE HAS BEEN A DEVASTATING DROUGHT --ARE NOW FACING, IN THE COMING MONTHS, ACUTE MALNUTRITION FOR LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN.

AND I FEAR THAT WE ARE GOING TO SEE THOSE DESPERATE IMAGES OF CHILDREN WHO NEED OUR SUPPORT, BUT WHERE WE ARE SIMPLY NOT INVESTING.

AND THAT CAN, AND MUST CHANGE.

WE MUST LIFT UP OUR VOICES TO OUR GOVERNMENTS, AND WE ALSO HAVE THE CAPACITY TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, THROUGH PHILANTHROPY.

AND THAT IS WHAT C. A. R. E. IS DOING.

>> HAVE YOU SEEN AN INCREASE IN PHILANTHROPIC DONATIONS?

>> WE HAVE SEEN AN INCREASE AND WE HAVE LITERALLY WHAT WE CALL A TRIAGE FUND THAT ENABLES US TO DELIVER MEDICATION AND FOOD WHERE THEY ARE MOST NEEDED.

IT CAN'T MAKE UP RIGHT NOW FOR WHAT WE ARE SEEING FROM CUTS AND GOVERNMENTS, INCLUDING THE U. S. , BUT ALSO GOVERNMENTS IN EUROPE.

AND SO, WE NEED TO, AGAIN, ADVOCATE FOR --AND THERE WAS JUST A BIPARTISAN BILL THAT WAS PASSED IN THE U. S. THAT LIFTED UP, RE-LIFTED UP THE INVESTMENT IN $20 BILLION, BEYOND WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAD ASKED FOR.

SO, WE NEED THAT KIND OF BIPARTISAN SUPPORT TO SAY, THESE ARE SMART INVESTMENTS.

NOT ONLY ARE THEY HUMANE INVESTMENTS, BUT THEY ARE INVESTMENTS THAT KEEP US SAFER.

WHEN WE FIGHT AGAINST HEALTH SCOURGES, WHEN WE ENSURE THAT REGIONS ARE MORE SECURE, WHEN WE REALLY FOCUS ON ECONOMIC SECURITY, WE SEE MORE PROSPERITY IN OUR OWN BORDERS.

WE SEE MORE MEDICAL SECURITY IN OUR OWN BORDERS.

AND WE KNOW THAT THIS IS TRUE, FROM 80 YEARS OF DOING THIS WORK.

>> YOU MENTIONED THE MOST VULNERABLE BEING IMPACTED, OBVIOUSLY THAT IN CHILDREN.

BUT, YOU ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON WOMEN, WOMEN IN WAR ZONES, RAPE SURVIVORS IN CONFLICT ZONES ARE RUNNING OUT OF TEST KITS, NOW.

AND ALSO, OTHER KITS THAT CAN HELP DISEASE.

CAN YOU JUST GIVE US SOME MORE INSIGHT, AND EXAMPLES, FOR HOW THAT IS PLAYING OUT IN THE REAL WORLD?

IN THE CONFLICT ZONES.

>> YEAH, THINK ABOUT THE DRC WHERE THERE HAVE BEEN MILLIONS OF WOMEN THAT HAVE BEEN RAPED OVER THE LAST DECADE.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THAT DOES HAPPEN, AND SO OFTEN, IT IS GIRLS, IT IS YOUNG WOMEN, IT IS WOMEN WHO ARE SUFFERING AT THE BRUNT OF THAT VIOLENCE.

AND RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE WITHDRAWN WHAT WERE 3.

5 MILLION WHAT WE CALL PET KITS.

WHICH, LITERALLY, IF A WOMAN IS RAPED, IF A GIRL IS RAPED, IT PREVENTS PREGNANCY AND IT PREVENTS THE CONTRACTION OF HIV.

SO, THOSE ARE NO LONGER READILY AVAILABLE.

SO, IF YOU JUST TRANSLATE THAT ONE EXPERIENCE AND THINK ABOUT THAT, MULTIPLE TIMES, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF TIMES OVER, THAT IS THE IMPACT.

THAT IS THE HUMAN COST OF THESE CUTS.

>> AND I KNOW YOUR LATEST CRISIS REPORT ALSO SHOWS PLACES LIKE ZAMBIA, MADAGASCAR, BARELY REGISTERING GLOBALLY, AT THIS POINT.

WHEN SOME OF THESE CRISES DISAPPEAR FROM OUR FRONT PAGES, OUR NEWSPAPERS, AND TELEVISION PROGRAMS, WHAT HAPPENS TO THESE COUNTRIES AND THESE PEOPLE IN DESPERATE NEED OF AID, WHEN THE WORLD STOPS FOLLOWING IT?

>> UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR DEATHS AND THEIR SUFFERING BECOME INVISIBLE TO US AND THAT MEANS WE DO NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ACT AND RESPOND.

SO, C. A. R. E. DID PUT OUT A REPORT THAT SAID, "THESE ARE SOME OF THE BIGGEST CRISES AROUND THE WORLD THAT ARE RECEIVING THE LEAST ATTENTION. "

AND PREDOMINANTLY, THEY ARE IN AFRICA.

BUT, YOU KNOW, LACES LIKE SUDAN, WHICH IS NOW THE BIGGEST HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN THE WORLD, WE HAVE 30 MILLION PEOPLE THAT ARE IN NEED OF HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE, THAT IS TO OUT OF EVERY THREE PEOPLE LIVING IN SUDAN.

THEY ARE THE MOST DISPLACED PEOPLE IN THE HUNGRIEST PEOPLE IN SUDAN, AND YET, IT GARNERS RELATIVELY LITTLE ATTENTION, AND IT IS POSSIBLE, ENTIRELY POSSIBLE, FOR US TO MAKE THE KIND OF INVESTMENTS THAT MITIGATE THAT HUNGER AND MITIGATE AND ALLEVIATE THAT SUFFERING, BUT WE DO HAVE TO SEE IT AND WE DO HAVE TO ACT UPON IT.

>> SO, WHEN YOU HEAR THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ARGUE THAT THE OLD SYSTEM JUST WASN'T WORKING, THERE WAS CORRUPTION, THERE WAS FRAUD, PERHAPS TOO MUCH DEPENDENCY, AND NOW, THEY ARE PUSHING FOR --AS EVEN SECRETARY OF STATE RUBIO SAID --JUST SOME SORT OF STREAMLINING AND REFORM, NOT GETTING RID OF IT, ENTIRELY.

HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

AND ARE YOU IN COMMUNICATION WITH TOP GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS?

>> I MEAN, C. A. R. E. HAS WORKED WITH 14 ADMINISTRATIONS OVER OUR 80 YEAR HISTORY, WE HAVE WORKED WITH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS AND EACH PRESIDENT NEEDS TO PUT FORWARD A FOREIGN POLICY.

AND I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS LOOKING AT.

MULTISECTORAL COMBINATION OF SUSTAINABLE ENGAGEMENTS, MAKING SURE WE ARE HARNESSING MARKET- BASED APPROACHES, WORKING WITH GOVERNMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THEY OWN, FOR INSTANCE, THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM REFORMS THAT ARE BEING PUT IN PLACE.

BUT, YOU CANNOT --YOU CANNOT PULL BACK ON, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 40% AND 80% OF INVESTMENTS, AND EXPECT THAT THERE WON'T BE ENORMOUS CONSEQUENCES.

SO, WE CAN REFORM, AND WE CAN INVEST, AND WE CAN REINVENT, BUT WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE COLLABORATIVE, LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS, AND THAT YOU ARE BASING IT UPON HUMANITARIAN NEED AND NOT JUST SHORT-TERM TRANSACTIONAL INTEREST.

IT IS IN OUR LONG-TERM INTEREST TO ENSURE THAT, FOR INSTANCE, PANDEMICS ARE ADDRESSED WHERE THEY FIRST COME TO LIFE.

AND WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT LIVES ARE NOT LOST THERE, BUT ALSO THAT THAT DOESN'T TRANSLATE INTO CROSSING BORDERS.

SO, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT ONLY THE RIGHT THING TO DO, BUT IT'S THE SMART THING TO DO, AS WELL.

>> AND IT PROMOTES SOFT POWER THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, WHICH THE U. S. HAS HAD FOR SO MANY YEARS.

NOT ONLY BECAUSE THIS IS THE RIGHT AND GENEROUS STEP FOR AMERICANS AND FOR THE U. S. GOVERNMENT TO TAKE, BUT ALSO JUST FROM A FOREIGN POLICY PERSPECTIVE.

MANY HAVE ARGUED THAT IT HAS HELPED PUT THE UNITED STATES AHEAD, IN TERMS OF HOW OTHER COUNTRIES AND HOW ITS CITIZENS VIEW THE UNITED STATES, RELATIVE TO SOME OF ITS COMPETITORS.

AND IT IS LOSING.

IT IS LOSING CREDIBILITY AT THIS POINT, EVEN WITHIN THE LAST YEAR.

SO, FOR THOSE WATCHING AT HOME, AND THINKING, OKAY, WHAT DOES C. A. R. E. LOOK LIKE NOW?

WHAT CAN I BE DOING?

WHAT IS CARRIE DOING?

YOU HAVE NOW INTRODUCED NEW C. A. R. E. PACKAGES, TELL ME WHAT THAT ENTAILS, WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE, AND WHY?

>> YEAH, AND I WOULD JUST SAY, AMERICA HAS BEEN BOTH GREAT AND GOOD WHEN IT HAS BEEN COMPASSIONATE AND CARING, AND THAT IS ACTUALLY A SUPERPOWER OF THE UNITED STATES --TO BE A COMPASSIONATE NATION, AND WHEN WE ARE, WE ARE AT OUR BEST.

AND THE C. A. R. E. PACKAGE IS THE EMBODIMENT OF THAT, IT IS LITERALLY AN ICON OF GENEROSITY THAT IS KNOWN AROUND THE WORLD, THAT ORIGINATED RIGHT HERE, IN THE UNITED STATES.

WE ARE REIMAGINING THAT C. A. R. E. PACKAGE.

THE FIRST DELIVERY OF THOSE C. A. R. E. PACKAGES WAS IN MAY OF, ACTUALLY, 1946, SO WE ARE CELEBRATING THE 80th ANNIVERSARY THIS SPRING.

AND THESE C. A. R. E. PACKAGES, THAT YOU CAN SEE ON SCREEN ARE LITERALLY THE RE- IMAGINATION OF A WAY FOR US TO GET A PACKAGE THAT CAN BE CARRIED BY A WOMAN, SHE CAN CARRY HER BABY ON THE FRONT.

IT HAS 36 DIFFERENT INTERVENTIONS IN THAT C. A. R. E. PACKAGE, INCLUDING A TARP, SOLAR ENERGY, A COOK STOVE, WATER FILTRATION.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT LIKE HERMIONE'S PURSE.

THERE IS SO MUCH THAT COMES OUT OF THERE.

AND IT CAN SUSTAIN A FAMILY -- A FAMILY OF OVER FIVE --FOR OVER A MONTH.

>> WOW.

>> SO, THAT'S THE TYPE OF SUPPORT.

AND ORDINARY AMERICANS AND CITIZENS AROUND THE WORLD CAN SAY, WE WANT TO JOIN FORCES, WE WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS C. A. R. E. MOVEMENT AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE ASKING PEOPLE TO BE A PART OF.

>> MICHELLE NUNN, REPRESENTING THE BEST OF OUR COUNTRY, WHEN WE PUT OUR MINDS TOGETHER, WHEN WE ARE GENEROUS, THERE IS NOBODY THAT CAN MATCH US AROUND THE WORLD.

SO, MORE OF THIS, PLEASE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU ARE DOING.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

> >> NOW, TO A POLITICAL CRISIS UNFOLDING IN BRITAIN.

AFTER THE LATEST RELEASE OF THE JEFFREY EPSTEIN FILES REVIEWED DETAILS OF PETER MENDELSSOHN'S TIES TO THE CONVICTED OFFENDER.

IN THE WORLD IN THE IS KIER WHO ADMITTED TO HAVING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF MENDELSSOHN'S TIES TO EPSTEIN, WHEN POINTING HIM ADVISER IN 2024, BUT PRESIDENT TRUMP SIX CLAIMS HE HAS NO IDEA OF THE DEPTH AND DARKNESS OF IT, MENDELSSOHN WAS REMOVED FROM HIS POST LAST YEAR.

THE BRITISH LEADER APOLOGIZED TO EPSTEIN'S VICTIMS AS MORE INFORMATION COMES TO LIGHT.

>> I AM SORRY, SORRY FOR WHAT WAS DONE TO YOU.

SORRY THAT SO MANY PEOPLE WITH POWER FAILED YOU.

SORRY FOR HAVING BELIEVED MENDELSSOHN'S LIES AND APPOINTING HIM.

>> "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL"'S MAX COLCHESTER SPEAKS TO MICHEL MARTIN ABOUT THE IMPACT THIS IS HAVING ON POLITICS AND BEYOND.

>> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAX COLCHESTER, FOR TALKING WITH US.

>> HI, GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.

>> YOU COVER BRITISH POLITICS AND NATIONAL SECURITY AND YOU HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS FALLOUT FROM THE RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS RELATED TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN, THE CONVICTED SEX OFFENDER WHO TOOK HIS OWN LIFE A COUPLE YEARS AGO.

I KNOW A NUMBER OF HIGH PROFILE INDIVIDUALS HAVE BEEN LINKED TO HIM, ALTHOUGH NO ONE HAS BEEN CRIMINALLY CHARGED AS A RESULT OF IT.

NOW, IT HAS BEEN KNOWN THAT THE PERSON, ANDREW, FORMALLY PRINCE ANDREW, HE WAS STRIPPED OF HIS ROYAL TITLES.

IT HAS BEEN KNOWN THAT PRINCE ANDREW WAS CONNECTED TO EPSTEIN IN SOME WAY, BUT IN THIS LATEST RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS, THERE HAS BEEN ADDITIONAL FALLOUT.

AS BRIEFLY AS YOU CAN, TELL US WHAT THAT IS, AND WHY THIS LATEST DOCUMENT RELEASE HAS CAUSED A HUGE REACTION IN THE UK?

>> YEAH, AS YOU SAY, THIS IS NOT A NEW SCANDAL IN THE UK, IT HAS BEEN ROLLING FOR OVER A DECADE.

BUT, I THINK WITH THE LATEST BATCH OF FILES THAT THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RELEASED SHOWS, IS THAT REALLY, SOMETHING THAT WAS SUSPECTED, BUT LONG DENIED, WHICH IS THAT EPSTEIN, HAVING BEEN RELEASED FROM JAIL IN 2009 FOR SOLICITING SEX FROM MINORS, QUICKLY THEN MANAGED TO GET PRIVILEGED ACCESS RIGHT TO THE TOP OF TWO PILLARS OF THE BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT, BUCKINGHAM PALACE, AND DOWNING STREET.

AND THESE LATEST BATCH OF EMAILS SHOWED THAT VIA PETER MENDELSSOHN WHO, AT THE TIME, WAS THE UK BUSINESS SECRETARY, AND A VERY FAMOUS FIGURE ON THE LEFT, HERE, WAS INTIMATELY INVOLVED WITH EPSTEIN, WAS SHARING A LOT OF INFORMATION WITH HIM, AND ALSO, IT SHOWS HOW THE VENN PRINCE ANDREW WAS VERY MUCH A CLOSE FRIEND OF EPSTEIN'S AT THE TIME.

>> AND THIS ALL OCCURRED AFTER IT HAD BEEN PUBLICLY KNOWN THAT JEFFREY EPSTEIN HAD THIS --HE WAS CRIMINALLY CHARGED!

HE SERVED TIME.

MANY PEOPLE CONSIDER THE TIME HE SERVED TO HAVE BEEN VERY LIGHT, COMPARED TO THE GRAVITY OF WHAT HE WAS ACCUSED OF, BUT NEVERTHELESS, IT WAS PART OF HIS RECORD, AT THAT POINT.

WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS CONNECTED TO PETER MANDELSON AND WHY HAS THIS LANDED WITH SUCH FORCE IN THE UK?

>> SO, PETER MANDELSON WAS A SENIOR FIGURE IN THE THEN LABOUR GOVERNMENT, BACK IN 2009, 2010, AND WHAT THIS CASH OF EMAILS SHOWS IS THAT MANDELSON WAS FORWARDING SENSITIVE MARKET, SENSITIVE INFORMATION THAT HE WAS RECEIVING AS A SENIOR MEMBER OF THE BRITISH CABINET, ON TO EPSTEIN.

AND THIS IS INFORMATION THAT COULD HAVE BEEN TRADED ON.

AND SO, SINCE THESE EMAILS HAVE COME TO LIGHT, BRITISH POLICE HAVE ANNOUNCED THEY ARE INVESTIGATING MANDELSON AND THIS IS TURNING INTO AN ALMIGHTY CRISIS, HERE.

>> HAS MR.

MANDELSON SPOKEN ABOUT WHY HE WAS FORWARDING THIS INFORMATION TO JEFFREY EPSTEIN?

>> MANDELSON HAS NOT ADDRESSED THAT ALLEGATION, DIRECTLY.

HE HAS PREVIOUSLY EXPRESSED REGRET, OF BEING FRIENDS WITH EPSTEIN AND HAS PREVIOUSLY SAID HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY OF THE SEXUAL ACTS THAT EPSTEIN ALLEGEDLY CONDUCTED.

BUT, THIS IS, NONETHELESS, A VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATION FOR HIM TO FACE.

IT REALLY DOES LAY BARE SOMETHING THAT HE LONG DENIED, WHICH IS THAT HE HAD LARGELY CUT OFF TIES WITH EPSTEIN.

AND ALSO, IT HAS CAUSED A LOT OF ANGER, HERE, AMONGST THE LABOR PARTY, WHICH IS NOW BACK IN POWER, BECAUSE MANDELSON, UP UNTIL LAST YEAR, WAS THE AMBASSADOR TO THE U. S. FOR THE UK AND HAD BEEN HANDPICKED BY THE BRITISH PRIME MINISTER, KEIR STARMER, TO TAKE ON THAT ROLE AND STARMER SAYS THAT BEFORE GIVING HIM THE JOB, MANDELSON WAS VERY CLEAR THAT HE HAD --THAT THERE WERE NO, YOU KNOW, MORE SKELETONS IN THE CUPBOARD WHEN IT CAME TO EPSTEIN.

>> AND ALSO, THE FORMER PRINCE ANDREW AND HIS FORMER WIFE, SARAH FERGUSON, IS ALSO MENTIONED IN THIS LATEST CASH OF DOCUMENTS.

IS THERE NEW INFORMATION ABOUT THEM, AND IS THAT ALSO SOMETHING THAT IS DISTURBING TO THE BRITISH PUBLIC?

>> YEAH.

THIS VERY MUCH CONFIRMS WHAT MANY PEOPLE ALREADY SUSPECTED ABOUT PRINCE ANDREW.

AGAIN, HE HAS NOT BEEN FOUND GUILTY OF ANY CRIMES AND HE DENIES ALL ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM.

BUT, WHAT THESE EMAILS, AGAIN, SHOW IS THAT HE WAS VERY CLOSE TO EPSTEIN AND YOU CAN SEE HIM CORRESPONDING WITH EPSTEIN, ORGANIZING VISITS TO BUCKINGHAM PALACE, THERE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS OF HIM KNEELING OVER A WOMAN, PRESUMABLY IN EPSTEIN'S NEW YORK APARTMENT, OR NEW YORK HOUSE.

THERE ARE MESSAGES, WHERE HE SEEMS TO BE WELCOMING A RUSSIAN WOMAN, THAT EPSTEIN SUGGESTS HE MEET IN LONDON, SO ALL OF THIS JUST ADDS TO THE PICTURE THAT PEOPLE HAVE OF HIM, THAT HE WAS, ESSENTIALLY, CORRUPTED BY EPSTEIN, THAT HE WAS --HE HAD ESSENTIALLY BEEN CORRUPTED BY THE PROMISE OF SEX AND MONEY, AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY DAMAGING FOR THE WINDSOR FRANCHISE.

>> AND WHAT ABOUT HIS FORMER WIFE, SARAH FERGUSON, IN RECOGNIZING THAT COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THEM DON'T SEEM TO HAVE NATIONAL SECURITY IMPLICATIONS, OR IMPLICATIONS AROUND CONFIDENTIAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION?

BUT, HER NAME HAS ALSO SURFACED, AND IN WHAT CONTEXT?

>> SO, SARAH FERGUSON, WHO IS ANDREW'S EX-WIFE, HER NAME HAS SURFACED, BECAUSE SHE PRETTY MUCH --WEEKS AFTER EPSTEIN CAME OUT OF JAIL --STARTED EMAILING HIM SAYING, "HEY, CAN I COME AND SEE YOU?

I NEED SOME ADVICE ON THIS AND THAT. "

MENTIONING THAT SHE WAS STRUGGLING TO PAY HER RENT, SUGGESTING SHE BRINGS HER TWO DAUGHTERS TO MEET HIM.

SO, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE WAS A VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP, NEARLY A NEEDY RELATIONSHIP, REALLY, BETWEEN FERGUSON AND EPSTEIN, WHERE SHE WAS CONSTANTLY BADGERING HIM TO WORK OUT HOW TO BEST WORK WITH THE WINDSOR FOUNDATION, OR WHO SHE SHOULD MEET AND IT REALLY LAID BARE THIS WEIRD ACCESS THAT EPSTEIN HAD TO THE TOP OF THE BRITISH ROYAL FAMILY.

>> PEOPLE ARE ACCUSTOMED TO SCANDALS, UNSAVORY THINGS, NOT ATTRACTIVE THINGS BEING ATTACHED TO THE ROYAL FAMILY, AND MEMBERS OF THE BRITISH SOCIAL AND POLITICAL HIERARCHY, BUT THERE SEEMS TO BE A REAL REACTION, THIS TIME.

IT JUST SEEMS SHARPER AND MORE INTENSE AND THERE IS ALSO THE PROSPECT OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

WHY YOU THINK THE REACTION IS AS IT IS THIS TIME?

>> BECAUSE I THINK IT REALLY LAYS BARE THE EXTENT OF EPSTEIN'S GRIP.

ON THESE TWO PEOPLE WITHIN THE TOP OF THE BRITISH ESTABLISHMENT.

AND IT ALSO LAYS BARE SOMETHING ELSE, WHICH IS THAT, FOR A LONG TIME, THIS WAS DENIED.

AND YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER, AS OFTEN IN THE CASE IN THE U. S. , THE WAY THAT SCANDALS PLAY OUT IN THE UK, IS THAT FIRST, THE INSTITUTION DENIES IT IS A PROBLEM, AND THEN IT SEEKS TO DISCREDIT THOSE WHO SAY THERE IS A PROBLEM, AND THEN YOU GET A WEASELLY WORDED APOLOGY AND SOMEONE STEPS BACK, AND THEN THERE IS A FINAL ACT IN WHICH THE ESTABLISHMENT TURNS ON THE INDIVIDUAL AND DEVOURS THEM AND THIS IS THE ACT WE ARE NOW SEEING PLAY OUT WHEN IT COMES TO EPSTEIN.

ANDREW AND MANDELSON ARE BOTH BEING DENOUNCED BY THE ESTABLISHMENT, AND AS THE ESTABLISHMENT LOOKS TO CLOSE RANKS, IT PROTECTS ITS OWN.

>> IN YOUR REPORTING, YOU DESCRIBED EPSTEIN'S RELATIONSHIP WITH TRENT 27 IN USUALLY INTIMATE TERMS, INCLUDING AN EMAIL WHERE MANDELSON WRITES, "YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON THAT KNOWS ALL ABOUT ME, DON'T GO AWAY. "

WHAT DOES THAT TELL US?

>> WELL, I THINK IT SAYS THAT MANDELSON TRUSTED EPSTEIN IMPLICITLY AND WE DON'T KNOW WHY HE TRUSTED HIM SO MUCH, OR THE FULL EXTENT OF WHAT EPSTEIN DID FOR MANDELSON.

WE CAN SEE FROM THE EPSTEIN FILES THAT EPSTEIN APPEARS TO HAVE GIVEN MONEY TO MANDELSON.

THERE ARE BANK TRANSFERS SHOWING THAT AROUND $75,000 WAS WIRED TO MANDELSON IN THE EARLY 2000'S.

MANDELSON SAYS HE DOESN'T REMEMBER THAT WIRE TRANSFER.

THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT EPSTEIN PAID FOR MANDELSON'S PARTNER TO GO ON AN OSTEOPATHY COURSE.

SO, THERE IS SOME FINANCIAL GAIN TO BE HAD, THERE.

BUT, IT DOESN'T EXPLAIN THE EXTENT OF THE TRUST THAT MANDELSON SHOWED EPSTEIN.

AND WHEN YOU READ THE EMAILS BETWEEN THE TWO MEN, IT'S A VERY ODD RELATIONSHIP.

IT'S SORT OF LIKE A GODFATHER TO HIS GODSON.

EPSTEIN SAYING, "YES, I THINK YOU SHOULD DO THIS NEXT IN YOUR CAREER. "

AND, YOU KNOW, "I THINK YOU NEED TO DEAL WITH THE PRIME MINISTER LIKE THIS," AND, "YOU SHOULD PURSUE THIS BUSINESS INTEREST. "

IT IS A VERY ONE-SIDED RELATIONSHIP AND IT REALLY SHOWS THE POWER EPSTEIN MUST HAVE HAD OVER THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, HE WAS OFFERING ACCESS TO A VERY RAREFIED WORLD, HE WAS OFFERING MONEY, AND IN SOME INSTANCES, SEX, AS WELL.

AND THAT SEEMS TO BE A VERY, VERY POTENT MIX OF PEOPLE, AND THAT SEEMS TO HAVE WON A LOT OF VERY POWERFUL PEOPLE OVER.

>> SO, JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU ARE SAYING MANDELSON HAS SAID HE HAS NO RECOLLECTION OF RECEIVING THESE FUNDS?

>> CORRECT.

HE SAYS HE NEEDS TO INVESTIGATE IT FURTHER, HIMSELF.

SO, WE WILL SEE IF HE COMES BACK TO THAT.

>> SO, IN THIS COUNTRY, ONE OF THE REASONS WHY THIS STORY HAS SUCH POWER --I MEAN, IT HAS POWER FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.

ONE IS, THE FACT IS THAT THESE YOUNG WOMEN, IN SOME CASES, GIRLS, BEING SORT OF TRADED AROUND LIKE, YOU KNOW, TOYS, AMONG THESE POWERFUL MEN, IT'S DISGUSTING, IT'S ALSO ILLEGAL, AND IT SPEAKS TO A SENSE THAT WHAT HAPPENS TO WOMEN AND GIRLS --ESPECIALLY VULNERABLE WOMEN AND GIRLS -- HAS JUST NOT BEEN TAKEN AS SERIOUSLY AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN.

BUT, THE OTHER REASON THIS STORY HAS FORCE IS THAT IT SORT OF SPEAKS TO THIS INTERCONNECTEDNESS OF THIS GLOBAL ELITE WHERE APPARENTLY, THE WORLD'S RULES DON'T APPLY AND I AM WONDERING IF THOSE THREE LINES TO THE STORY ARE ALSO RESONATING IN THE UK?

>> YES, THEY ABSOLUTELY ARE.

I THINK, WHAT YOU SEE THROUGHOUT THE EMAILS WHEN YOU READ THEM --ESPECIALLY AS IT PERTAINS TO THE UK --IS THAT EPSTEIN IS ESSENTIALLY LEVERAGING EACH OF THE PEOPLE HE HAS ACCESS TO, TO GAIN ACCESS TO MORE PEOPLE, SO IN THE INSTANCE OF PRINCE ANDREW, YOU CAN SEE THAT HE BEFRIENDS ANDREW AND INTERESTINGLY, IT IS ANDREW WHO REACHES OUT TO EPSTEIN, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

IT'S ANDREW REACHING OUT SAYING, "HEY, I WOULD LIKE TO COME TO PARIS ON A PRIVATE TRIP, CAN I HAVE ACCESS TO A FLAT BED? "

AND EPSTEIN SAYS, "YES. "

AND THEN, EPSTEIN TURNS AROUND TO OTHER PEOPLE AND SAYS, "I KNOW ANDREW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO VISIT BUCKINGHAM PALACE? "

AND HE SORT OF USES THAT AS A MARKETING EFFECT.

SO, WHY ANDREW FELT IT WAS OKAY TO REACH OUT TO EPSTEIN AFTER HE HAD JUST BEEN RELEASED FROM JAIL, I DON'T KNOW, AND IT IS A QUESTION HE HASN'T ADDRESSED.

HE DENIES, YOU KNOW, THAT HE DID ANYTHING WRONG, BUT IT'S STILL A QUESTION OF JUDGMENT.

EQUALLY, WITH PETER MANDELSON WHEN EPSTEIN IS RELEASED FROM JAIL, HE SENT AN EMAIL CALLING IT, "LIBERATION DAY," WHICH IS REALLY QUITE ASTOUNDING, SO IT REALLY SEEMS THAT THEY JUST DIDN'T TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY AND THEY DIDN'T GIVE IT THE WEIGHT THAT IT SHOULD HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN GIVEN.

AND IT DOES SPEAK TO THIS IDEA THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT SETS OF RULES FOR DIFFERENT SETS OF PEOPLE AND THAT BECAUSE EPSTEIN WAS WELL-CONNECTED AND WEALTHY, YOU KNOW, THE ALLEGATIONS AGAINST HIM WEREN'T SO SERIOUS IN THEIR MINDS, AND THEREFORE, COULD BE IGNORED.

>> IS THIS TRANSCONTINENTAL ASPECT OF THIS INTERESTING?

OR, DOES THAT STAND OUT TO YOUR AUDIENCE IN ENGLAND?

>> YEAH, I THINK SO.

I MEAN, WHAT IS INTERESTING HERE IS THAT WE ARE SEEING A DEGREE --I MEAN, NO ONE HAS BEEN PUNISHED IN COURT, RIGHT?

BUT, THEY ARE BEING PUNISHED IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION.

AND THAT IS WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE, IN THE UK, NOW.

THOSE WHO WERE INVOLVED ARE BEING OUTED, AND NAMED, AND SHAMED, AND THE INSTITUTIONS THEY WERE A PART OF OUR TURNING ON THEM AND ISOLATING THEM.

SO, IN ANDREW'S CASE, FOR INSTANCE, HE WAS OFFICIALLY KICKED OUT OF HIS ESTATE RESIDENCE IN WINDSOR, AND SENT TO A FARM IN EAST ENGLAND WHERE HE WILL NOW LIVES, AND THAT WAS THE ROYAL FAMILY'S WAY OF SAYING, "THIS GUY IS NO LONGER A PUBLIC MEMBER OF OUR PLAN AND YOU WON'T BE SEEING HIM VERY MUCH ANYMORE. "

>> IS THE ROYAL FAMILY MAKING A STATEMENT BY LETTING IT BE KNOWN THAT HE HAS BEEN UNCEREMONIOUSLY EVICTED FROM HIS LAVISH QUARTERS AND SEND SOMEPLACE ELSE?

>> COMPLETELY.

THAT'S THE WHOLE CHOREOGRAPHY, HERE, OF WHAT WE SAW.

AS YOU MENTIONED, HE WAS STRIPPED OF HIS TITLES LAST YEAR, WHEN THE FIRST BATCH OF EPSTEIN FILES WAS RELEASED.

AND THE PALACE SAID, HE COULD NO LONGER BE CALLED PRINCE, HE IS NO LONGER ALLOWED TO USE THE TITLE, "DUKE OF YORK," AND HE WAS ASKED TO LEAVE THIS HUGE, 30 ROOM MENTIONED THAT HE INHABITS IN THE WINDSOR ESTATE, BUT HE WAS STILL LIVING IN THAT MANSION, WHILE THEY WERE DOING SOME FARM THING IN EAST OF ENGLAND WHERE HE WOULD LIVE.

BUT, IT SEEMS THAT THE EXPEDITED THAT HOUSE MOVE IN THE WAKE OF THIS LATEST REVELATION, BECAUSE WHAT CAME OUT WAS SO DAMNING, WHICH WERE THESE PICTURES OF HIM KNEELING OVER AN IDENTIFIED --UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN, AND A BATCH OF EMAILS THAT SEEMED TO SHOW THAT HE WAS REALLY UP TO NO GOOD, OR SEEMED TO SUGGEST THAT HE WAS UP TO NO GOOD WITH EPSTEIN.

>> SO, IN THE UNITED STATES, THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL IS A FORMER PERSONAL LAWYER OF PRESIDENT TRUMP.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PREVIOUSLY DEFENDED THE PRESIDENT IN AN IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDING, OKAY?

THESE PEOPLE, WHO HAVE STRONG PERSONAL, PROFESSIONAL TIES TO PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE NOW IN A POSITION TO OVERSEE ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATION THAT MAY TAKE PLACE.

THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL, TODD BLANCHE, HAS SAID THERE ARE NO MORE DOCUMENTS TO BE RELEASED, THAT THEY ARE DONE.

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS WHO HAVE BEEN PUSHING FOR THIS, DISAGREE WITH THAT.

BUT, THAT ISSUE, YOU KNOW, REMAINS SORT OF UNRESOLVED.

SO, MY QUESTION IS, IN THE UK, IS THERE MORE TO COME?

ARE THERE FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS TAKING PLACE?

IS THERE A FURTHER EFFORT TO INVESTIGATE WHAT THESE TIES MAY HAVE BEEN, BETWEEN THESE INDIVIDUALS AND EPSTEIN?

>> YEAH, I THINK THAT IS ONE OF THE KEY DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE U. S. AND THE UK, NOW.

IN THE UK, WE ARE STARTING TO SEE DEEPER POLICE INVOLVEMENT, THERE IS AN INVESTIGATION INTO MANDELSON OVER HIS DISCLOSURE OF SENSITIVE, MARKET SENSITIVE GOVERNMENT INFORMATION TO EPSTEIN, WHICH COULD HAVE POTENTIALLY ALLOWED EPSTEIN TO ENGAGE IN INSIDER TRADING.

THE POLICE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT EVIDENCE THAT PRINCE ANDREW WELCOMED A 20-YEAR-OLD TO THE UK, AND MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN SEXUAL ACTIVITIES AT WINDSOR, SO THE POLICE ARE LOOKING AT PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE THERE, AN INVESTIGATION HAS NOT BEEN LOST, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THEY ARE LOOKING AT.

SO, THIS ISN'T OVER, HERE.

AND ALSO, THERE IS, POTENTIALLY, A HUGE POLITICAL AFTERSHOCK RUMBLING HERE, WHICH IS TO LOOK AT --THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS NOW ABOUT THE PRIME MINISTER, KEIR STARMER, ABOUT WHY HE APPOINTED MANDELSON TO BE THE U. S. AMBASSADOR, HOW MUCH HE KNEW ABOUT MANDELSON'S FRIENDSHIP WITH EPSTEIN BEFORE MAKING THAT APPOINTMENT.

WHETHER HE WAS ILL ADVISED, AND WHETHER HE SHOULD TAKE SOME FORM OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT APPOINTMENT.

SO, NOW, IT IS RICOCHETING OFF INTO VERY MODERN DAY POLITICS, HERE, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THIS COULD POTENTIALLY REALLY DAMAGED THE INCUMBENT PRIME MINISTER, SO IT IS VERY MUCH A LIVE ISSUE IN THIS COUNTRY.

>> BUT, THE QUESTION, I THINK, GOING FORWARD, IS THERE ANY ROOM TO THINK ABOUT --IN THE WAKE OF POLITICAL SCANDALS, SOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY, "YOU KNOW WHAT?

WE NEED A SYSTEM CHANGE, WE NEED SOME GUARDRAILS, HERE.

WE NEED TO ESTABLISH CLEAR RULES ABOUT CONDUCT THAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO AGREE TO, AND THAT WE ARE GOING TO THEN HOLD ACCOUNTABILITY FOR. "

AND I AM JUST WONDERING, IS THAT A CONVERSATION THAT IS HAPPENING?

OR, IS IT JUST TOO SOON?

>> I THINK IT'S JUST THE BEGINNINGS OF THAT CONVERSATION.

I THINK, AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED, ONE OF THE ISSUES HERE IS THAT NO ONE HAS GONE TO JAIL.

YOU KNOW?

EVEN EPSTEIN NEVER REALLY PAID FOR HIS CRIMES.

HE DIED IN MYSTERIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES BY SUICIDE, WHILE IN JAIL.

YOU KNOW, OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED, VERY FEW HAVE ACTUALLY ENDED UP BEHIND BARS, SO THERE IS A BIG QUESTION ABOUT THAT, AND THEN THERE IS THE QUESTION OF, WHAT YOU DO WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN NONCRIMINAL, BUT MORALLY REPREHENSIBLE BEHAVIOR?

FOR INSTANCE, IN THE UK, ONE OF THE FOCUSES HAS BEEN WHETHER MANDELSON --WHO IS A LORD, HE IS LORD MANDELSON --WHETHER THE RULES SHOULD BE CHANGED TO MAKE IT EASIER TO STRIP LORDS OF THEIR TITLES.

FOR INSTANCE, IF THEY ARE SHOWN TO BEHAVE BADLY.

SO, WE ARE STARTING TO SEE CHANGES IN THAT SORT OF DIRECTION TO TRY AND HOLD PEOPLE WHO HAVE POWER, TO ACCOUNT.

>> MAX COLCHESTER, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR TALKING WITH US.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

> >> AND FINALLY, THE WILDLIFE PHOTOGRAPHER OF THE YEAR, AS NOTED BY YOU.

INCREDIBLE SNAPS FROM AROUND THE WORLD ARE ON THE PEOPLE'S CHOICE SHORT LIST, INCLUDING A HUMMINGBIRD DRINKING FROM A FLOWER IN PERU, A MOTHER SWAPPED WITH HER YOUNG BABY IN HER ARMS, PROTECTING IT FROM THE RAIN IN COSTA RICA, AND A CROWD IN THE INDONESIAN SEE GRABBING A QUICK RIDE ON THE BACK OF A JELLYFISH.

AND WITH IMAGES SUCH AS THIS, SHOWING A PILE OF CONFISCATED TRAPS IN UGANDA, WE ARE REMINDED OF THE IMPORTANCE OF PROTECTING OUR NATURAL WORLD.

AND THAT IS IT FOR OUR PROGRAM TONIGHT.

IF YOU WANT TO FIND OUT WHAT IS COMING UP ON THE SHOW EACH NIGHT, SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER AT PBS.

ORG/AMANPOUR.

THANK YOU FOR WATCHING "AMANPOUR AND COMPANY" ON PBS, JOIN US AGAIN TOMORROW NIGHT.