♪ announcer: from our studios in new york, this is "charlie rose." charlie: joining me on the phone from iraq, embedded with the curd troops in the fight against isis. tell me what you have seen and heard today. what is the future of this fight? >> all day long what we have seen mostly are these tremendous themrikes, dozens of striking sing. we have a good vantage point

over the entire city. it was relentless last night and from the dawn this morning. airstrike,fter targeting suspected isis positions inside the city itself. peshmergan to that, forces have taken a position on the mountain, where they have been firing artillery at these positions in addition to that. at the same time, we watched as thousands of peshmerga forces moved into the city itself. they were in every vehicle you can imagine. there were people in the back of pickup trucks with machine guns. civilians, volunteers were charging to the front lines to take on isis. they have been fighting all day, small arms fire, machine gun

fire. it is long after dark year. charlie: how long will it take them to take sinjar. is oneng sinjar question, holding it is another. isis was resisting where the major offensives have the gun -- begun. they are facing three specific , car bombsiper fire and truck bombs charging towards these checkpoints, and we are seeing them in the city. in addition, they believe the whole city is booby-trapped. clearing isis out may take a couple of days, maybe not more than that, but clearing the city of the dangers is going to take

much longer. charlie: how effective have been the american airstrikes? >> when you speak to peshmerga they say they could not do it without america and its allies. they would not be able to move against isis forces. soldiers on the ground say that win isis here the jets in the air, they run for cover, hide in tunnels, because they don't want to face it, can't face it. they say they want to die as what willut they know happen with these airstrikes. the opportunity for peshmerga forces to move in on the city. they certainly couldn't take sinjar if not for the help of u.s. airstrikes and its allies. the firsts sinjar step in retaking mosul?

>> that is precisely the question we put to them. sinjar sits right in the middle ,f the isis stronghold in syria and on the other side, mosul. commanders say we will take sinjar first, break the supply lines, then look at other cities, then mosul. if it continues to go the way it is going, learning the lessons they are learning here, how they ul, ahen apply that to mos much harder offensive. question.ne last any possibility that iragi troops will be joining them? .> probably not in sinjar we have seen the wife e.g.,

g,rian-kurdish forces -- yp syrian-kurdish forces. victoriesroud of the they have had against isis, that they will have to work with iraq. seeing both sides of them working when they took control dam, there was tension between these two forces. they will have to find some level of coordination. they can't do it without each other that is for certain. charlie: thank you so much. charlie on the ground in iraq. we will be right back. ♪

♪ charlie: turning to politics and the 2000 16 campaign, it is a big week for debate. republican candidates met on tuesday, while democrats face off saturday. joining me is the chief white house correspondent for cbs news , and i pleased to have him on this program. every weekend is.e the election campaign let's begin with the democrats. , issues,bout trends

and changing poll numbers. >> the trends are in hillary clinton's favor. will be a coming up pivotal moment in deciding whether this race is effectively if theredemocrats, or is another act that needs to play out. it will be crucial for bernie sanders. hillary clinton leads nationally, i had in iowa, new hampshire, and south carolina. is this race over? bernie sanders will have to tell ande watching the debate democratic activist there is a reason to keep their minds open, that they're all to be an alternative to hillary clinton. martin o'malley will make that same case. no one is closer to hillary clinton than bernie sanders. it will be the degree to which martin o'malley and bernie sanders make this case, that she may have moved to the left on some issues, but is that authentic?

does she believe the things she is saying? why is that important? because the democrats begin to make the argument against hillary clinton that she would do anything or say anything to win the nomination. they will be playing into the hands of whom? the republicans. that will be one of the central tardis against hillary clinton. that she is inauthentic to her core. i will be interested to see how far down that road bernie sanders and martin o'malley go. charlie: are they in fact prepared to take the gloves off? >> they are. since joe biden did not enter the race, and hillary clinton had a good begun of weeks, she has to consolidate her lead and all the early primary and caucus states, this race may fall into ull that bernie

sanders may not have another shot. on saturday, he will have to and really try to pick apart the places -- saytions she has taken, and to democrats, give me a longer second look. evidenceis there any that there is much that divides the two of them other than an attitude about wall street? >> an attitude about wall street, certainly. it is all about degree, how much would you decrease regulation on wall street, bring to account those within the larger banking structures who have not been brought to account for actions taken that led to the great reception, differences there. there might be differences in their approach on gun control. hillary clinton likes to say she is more aggressive than bernie

sanders. bernie sanders in his political career was captive if not to the in our rake, those who sympathize with gun rights in vermont. that is to areas where they could draw a contrast. one way is to say if you want someone who is saying the same thing i said 20 years ago, look at me. hillary clinton cannot do that. she cannot claim that kind of consistency and authenticity. bernie sanders is saying the ago,thing he said 20 years the democratic party has moved in his direction, so he resonates in ways that he has not before. bernie sanders spent years and years on the outer hinterland on many of these key issues, now he is not. he is central to the conversation.

charlie: let's turn to the republicans. we saw the difference is beginning to emerge at the debate on immigration. where is that republican race right now? >> republican race is still dominated by two clinical outsiders to the entire political conversation republicans have had for the past 20 years, donald trump and ben carson our leaders here in iowa, leading in new hampshire, and leading in south carolina. if you add up their support in those three states and look at the numbers they have nationally, their supporters constitute roughly 50% to 60% of -- likely primary and caucus turnout. that is substantial, not only in raw numbers, but in that republicans have become so sick of what they consider to be -- it's not fraudulent,

unproductive establishment figures that they sent to they are looking so far out of the mainstream that they're looking at donald trump and ben carson. remain?t that is the question republicans are asking in all states. many republicans who thought trump and cars and would not that inld have told you august, september, october, they are now making a reassessment. i was talking to activist, conservative republicans, they all believe in iowa that the pecking order is likely to be on caucus night, donald trump, ben carson, marco rubio, and maybe ted cruz. everyone else is possibly not part of the conversation. charlie: why do so many people -- thatthat this race this may end up as a race between marco rubio and ted cruz. ? is that asmption

voters get closer to making an ultimate decision, though they may like donald trump, admire are not goingey to imagine them being the nominee of the party or potential next president of the united states and they will peel away. that support will have to land somewhere. if you talk to conservative believes in iraq, many ted cruz has positioned himself certainly here to be the inheritor of people who peel away if they do from trump and carson. and many who thought jeb bush was going to be the front runner and remain the front runner in this race no longer believe that , and they look at marco rubio as the most attractive alternative to jeb bush and the likely recipient of what ever establishment vote doesn't go for jeb bush. so if you assume, and this is a huge assumption that has no basis in fact up until now that carson and trump will collapse, that vote has to go somewhere,

much of it will go to ted cruz, and some to marco rubio, and then he will clean up the remainder of that establishment vote. that is the working. -- working very. charlie: there was much talk about ben carson's biography. has that subsided? >> it has tapered off. it will never completely subside , because ben carson's biography is a crucial part of what he brings to the table. find some things very admirable about ben carson's biography. they are drawn to it. so a candidate who is not driven entirely by his biography, but largely, sees that as a source of strength, will always have to deal with his biography. subsidenever completely, but it has tapered off. the one thing that ben carson ,as done is blame the messenger

that is the message that tends to work with republicans, the media is the supposed aggressor or enemy in these presidential campaigns. ben carson has effectively turned that around to make the media as much of the issue as the holes in his berkeley -- his biography, which were not substantial. no one doubts that ben carson rose from poverty, had a tough existence, went to yell, succeeded, became a world renowned new row surgeon. not the whole biography itself. charlie: finally, let me turn to immigration. there were some differences there. you had jeb bush point out that this mass deportation that donald trump talks about, if it came to a reality, you would see high fives in the clinton campaign, because they knew those latino and hispanic voters would roll to the democrats. say based on would

my conversations here, i think this is the toughest issues for the republicans to reconcile. at the grassroots level, many republicans believe that illegal immigration is a crime that has to be prosecuted and cannot be forgiven. the fundamental ideological orientation to the issue, and there is no movement from that. anything short of deportation in their minds constitutes amnesty, and amnesty is impermissible in this conversation, and yet republicans will tell you all the things i just said and in the next breath acknowledge that in a general election that that is a perilous message because latino voters will not respond to it. democrats indicate that you have got to bring the latino vote back into the fold, as george w. bush did in 2000 and 2004. they are of one mind on the issue. of a not a mind on the

strategy. it has proven difficult for many candidates to sort this out, and i think it will be among the most important conversations in the republican party. charlie: thank you very much. cbs news white house correspondent. hope we can do this again. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

♪ here,e: frank gehry is

one of the most prominent architects of our time. his use of unusual materials are considered to change the direction of architecture. designss most famous are the walt disney concert hall in los angeles, just to name a few. is a country bidding editor for vanity fair magazine. he has written the first authorized biography of frank terry. -- frank gehry. new york times called it an informative, start late -- startling journey into architecture. i am pleased to have both of them at this table. debt, and i in your want to say it publicly, when i was being honored in washington for a nice award, you flew across the country to speak on my behalf and i am deeply indebted.

me at this table and when ever have had control of airwaves every markable series of conversations. i am very proud to call you my friend. thank you, sir. this,e: let's start with why a biography of frank gehry? to do a biography because it was a different thing to do. i had never written one before. it was a way to push myself in a different direction. frank has had the most , the connection between his life and work is an intriguing one. that has some of the drama of a novel, and that is what i wanted to try to do

while still explaining his architecture. ofrlie: it is a portrait architecture in the 20th and 21st century. paul: he is the character who bridges them. in many ways, he is a traditional architect, farther on the cutting edge than anybody , but is planted in what architecture has always been, beautiful objects carefully crafted, one-of-a-kind. charlie: is he more than any other man one who defines himself as an artist as much as an architect? paul: he shows us that those words are not inconsistent. he is a real architect. he cares about where the toilets thehow things work, function. he proves it is not a zero-sum game with art. the ability to be a great work of art and function. oris not an either

situation. frank: my friend called me a plumber right here at this table. he is a great sculptor. charlie: it's not about you. it's about architecture. anything that has function can possibly be art was his argument. the tradition is that from way back that artists became architects. the tradition is they started as painters and sculptors, and the company for their careers -- paul: michelangelo. frank: became an architect. architect of all is

called the architect of heaven, so there must be something. writee: is it easy to about because there were models? letters, and writer.ank is not a he is a talker and thinker. there was not a huge archive of written things. of interviews, many of them yours. the film by sydney pollack. i did my own interviews, hundreds of hours with frank and dozens of other people's, but he is not a guy who kept a diary, unless he has held it back from me for all these years. he is not a big letter writer. he is an easy talker. charlie: he is a collector of friends. forwards.ave written paul: the beginning of chapter

nine, i quoted at length from a talk you game. -- gave. the pritzker prize i wrote under duress. charlie: you weren't about to turn it down, were you? paul: you got up at 5:00 in the morning and wrote it in your hotel room, right? also well known for your buildings and sense of light and space and time. you are also popular. you are celebrated. you are famous. that doesn't set well. you are ambivalent about that? i am insecureause as i continue to work. i see you that way.

each newroach , newture, new problem come to conquer, you can't in overly confident or you blow it. and so there is a kind of healthy insecurity. i am doing a house for a lady now in northern california, which is a new thing. i have sleepless nights and i dream about this thing, and i can't get it. i'm suffering, suffering to the point of looking in the mirror and saying, "do i really know anything?" charlie: have you ever started projects and think that i want to do this, i am inspired to do this, but i don't know if i can, and then finally say no, this is

something i can do, want to do? paul: as you know me, i back out before i get that far. charlie: what is that about? frank: there is a lot about that in the book, pulling out of something or turning back at the last minute. one of the ways that insecurity expresses itself, the better way and the healthier way is when he pushes through it -- paul: the new york times, you made me see that once -- there were other circumstances involved. frank: there is always a reason, but the question is do you keep going? paul: usually before i sign on, not ongure that we are the same wave -- so much of what i do depends on the partnership with the client. i really listen to them. frank: there is a self-selecting process.

a traditionalants georgian house is not going to go to you in the first place. charlie:i mean, they have to wak gehry, there is an and. of people. , the: some of them facebook project, zuckerberg, is someone not really interested in architecture. own thing.n with his he is focused and he is brilliant. charlie: what did he say to you? frank: he came, he saw my house. charlie: your office. frank: he came with his wife. he saw my office and he said, i love this. -- he said, i want 10 times this. charlie: