>> i am mark halperin. >> i am john heilemann. with all due respect mark zuckerberg, if you are looking for someone to give away billions to, we have always liked you. ♪ mark: this looks like a battery gummy bear. john: happy national pie day. in our curriculum tonight's psychology with donald trump,

forensics with ted cruz, and extra to credit with chris christie. but first a book report by jeb bush. in the aftermath of the paris attacks, in the blink of an eye the 2016 presidential race has been transformed into a national security election. just watch this new broadcast from jeb that will begin airing tomorrow. it endeavors mightily to make the former florida governor look like the most commander in chief candidate in the field. >> i opened my hand to release the grenade and it exploded. >> this is no reality show. this is serious business. >> this is about the livelihood of our kids and grandkids. this commander and chief requires training wheels. >> we need jeb bush. john: also today john mccormack was there with camera in hand as he jumped hillary clinton for her reluctance to say she would send american troops to fight isis. >> they do not believe it is a

threat to our national security. i do. he would work to create a coalition led by america in the air and on the ground is well. the president -- secretary of defense announced that they are increasing special operators in syria. that is boots on the ground. i'm not quite sure what she is thinking. she is trying to avoid all this political stuff. john: is this all about paris or is something else driving this? mark: they have been carrying this for months. this might be where donald trump is most full. and on domestic policies there

are no real big differences. russia, and a more are different for each. john: as we have moved later into the obama administration of the greatest older abilities of his record or on foreign policies. the world is on fire all over the middle east. there is no question that this is the galvanizing event. we could still be talking about immigration and other things. finally there are such a deep , schisms in the party over for policy that have been tapered over by saying obama, obama, we will not have a real debate. mark: trump is a national security leader in the minds of his followers because he is tough and plainspoken. these other guys are trying to addition and when the fight to say i'm the one who is ready to be commander-in-chief and a traditional sense. that is the most important contest going on in the party. there is another man who is now dominating. it is now being fought out on foreign policy terrain.

last night between campaign events in iowa, our colleague got some time to talk to ted cruz who went to the farthest he is gone so far in attacking rubio. >> with libya, president obama and hillary clinton led the effort to topple gadhafi. they led the nato bombings against qaddafi. you asked about senator rubio. senator rubio emphatically supported hillary clinton and toppling qadhafi a in libya. i think that made no sense. in syria, obama and hillary clinton and senator rubio are repeating the same as stakes -- the same mistakes they made in libya. mark: we will talk more about that conversation later. for now, ted cruz is hitting rubio from the left and the right in terms of the politics and policies of this. has he threaded the needle

between nonintervention and neoconservative? >> that clip that we played is reflective of what his comments are more broadly. if you read those comments, that can be rand paul. i get that he is trying to thread the needle of trying to be strong but right now i was , struck by this interview and by previous things he said. about how far into the restraint corner, noninterventionist corner he is putting himself. mark: it is very similar to a george bush said before 9/11 when he was a candidate in 2000 , which was a more humble foreign policy. his argument is intellectually interesting which is that , intervention overseas has made us weaker. intervention in libya has made america weaker. i think that marco rubio is a much more classical neoconservative, america cross-strings abroad. america's strength abroad.

i do not know that ted cruz can win this argument if the debate is in the united states senate. if it is with the republican electorate i think -- >> i think the ted cruz voters like a donald trump and they like this muscular projection. i think there is this argument about how do you project strength. i agree with you that intellectually you can make a argument that a majority of strength is better served by restraint. i do not know that will appeal to the kind of voters that he is appealing to. mark: talk radio, fox news i think there are some voices in the corner that say you need some restraint in terms of civil liberties and in terms of american use of force abroad. this is not over and cruise is -- and ted cruz confident he is in the right position. john: finally, chris christie's recent campaign resurgence has been that he has been casting himself as the national security candidate for months. way back in july, chris christie put out this ominous tv ad in new hampshire.

>> president obama gave away the store to the iranians. he negotiated so badly that you would not let this president by a car for you at the dealership. know know they are lying to the american people about how the deal is going to work. i would have walked away from the table. that is what ronald reagan did when he walked away from mikael gorbachev. i'm the only one this race that has some part of the responsibility. japan post john: that is an old ad, but there's relevant news that is driving the story forward. at cheer he won the backing of a leader he went on morning joe to summarize the endorsement. >> the chris christie endorsement came from looking all the candidates and looking at the viable ones at picking one that we thought have the best chance of stopping trump, hillary, and isis.

>> in that order? >> that is the way you have got to do it. john: there are no republicans running for president right now with relevant military experience. lindsey graham may be the possible exception to that. this election may become a national security election. is chris christie well-positioned or poorly positioned to thrive in the environment? mark: he is well-positioned. serving on national committee at armed services committee in congress. jeb bush has this new ad out. marco rubio talks about foreign policy. but chris christie has this language and toughness and some , of it will be experienced as a u.s. attorney. he did not dominate the field for the union leader endorsement is what he is looking for. a guy who understands the threat and will respond aggressively but has governing experience. john: in the world of the line

lion the one eyed man is , king. he can at least make a plausible claim. in the end of a christie is going to succeed it is the temperamental strength. the brawlers, we are talking about that on the show for a while now, but i do think that all these republicans are going to have the same problem when they go up against hillary clinton. she has to deal with the donald trump foreign policy, but in terms of her resume and qualifications and knowledge of the world she is headed , shoulders above all of them. mark: in the end i think national security will sustain them for a while. but eventually they're going to have to talk about something else. it will be fascinating at this last debate in a couple of weeks how much they ask about national security. it is front and center every day now. john: as you know, i have been a chris christie skeptic for a long time. but the fact that he has done so much detailed work on domestic policy allows him when he needs to to be in a stronger position more broadly.

mark: up next, we will tell all when we are back in just 60 seconds. ♪

mark: in political media circles, the conventional wisdom now is that bernie sanders is so far out of the race that the only relevant news he has generated this week was when he got his hernia operation on hillary clinton is in a monday. -- is a different story. put out an infrastructure spending plan, the most expensive for her campaign. and her new e-mails were released by the state department, including some hilarious revelations like that time she cannot figure out what channel she could watch

homeland. the e-mails were never far from her mind. when she was secretary of state, she referred to mitt romney as mittens. she was endorsed by 13 of the 14 female senators in washington. one notable absence, elizabeth warren. she sat down with charlie rose for an interview. the full interview airs tonight on pbs. but wait there is more. she released a new radio ad on african-american radio stations highlighting her mother's biography. but wait there is still more. in this afternoon, she appeared in montgomery, alabama to honor the 60th anniversary of the day rosa parks refused to give up her seat on a bus. to an audience of prominent african-american leaders, she talked about prison reforms and race relations. >> thousands of people were jammed in the streets, and inside the church when dr.

martin luther king jr. steps to the pulpit. to go back and read what he said that night, he spoke about her integrity, about citizenship, about fairness under the law. and then he started talking about love. love, he said, is one of the pinnacle parts of the christian faith. [applause] >> and there is another side called the justice. [applause] >> i love this. especially as a recovering lawyer. [laughter] >> justice is really love in calculation. mark: before the bell rings, and events,iñata of news

which piece of news matters the most her chances of being president? john: not only because it is the last one, but if she is the nominee for her success or failure rises or falls with the coalition. can she get out african-american voters and hispanic voters and get large percentages of them akin to what president obama did? if she can do that, she is the next president of the united states. it matters a lot on election day. mark: the other thing i would offer is the infrastructure plan. she is proposing big spending plans. she has not enunciated in -- enunciated spending cuts yet. the day of reckoning is coming for her to talk about how she will raise taxes high enough or cut spending enough to not swell the deficit and to say to the american people like her husband did, i have a plan to cut the

deficit substantially and be done substantially. john: i wonder whether she is ever going to make that deficit cutting, that fiscally responsible clinton vision. she might get forced into it. people forget that before barack obama came on the scene they had a incredible holdover african-american voters in this country. they embarrass themselves in some way. she has to get back to this place where she can get large numbers of black voters to come out and get 95% of them like barack obama. if she does that she can be , president. mark:, did you see donald trumps latest laugh? ♪

>> all they do is show these little snippets. they do whatever they can. to not telling you more jokes. i am not going to kid. [boos] john: that was the donald at a rally in georgia last night. today his campaign manager came , to our studio to talk about how team trump is preparing for the iowa caucus. we asked why the candidate thinks no one has a sense of humor anymore? >> he said many times that he does not feel that the mainstream media will play the full script of what he has said.

you see that and i will when he was talking about dr. carson and he is seen that with some of the super pac ads that have come out with specific snippets. take his words and totality, look at what i have said and then decide on your own if that is accurate or not. john: that does not answer the question. one of the jokes that he has referred to? >> the jokes about ben carson and the stories he is written about this a legend stabbing taking place. legend -- a legend he showed that on the stage in iowa and the media took that out of context. they only showed a portion. john: and seemed like he was genuinely challenging the biography. that is not a joke. that was saying that person would make those things up. >> this was written in the biography. he was joking about that. he demonstrated what that would look like, and the media took

that out of context. and i want to be very clear about this. mr. trump has been clear on the 9/11, and in new jersey. there was a washington post story written 14 years ago which has never been refuted by the author to say maybe he did not get it right. storywas a new york post written by a well-established author saying that there was celebrations taking place in the mainstream media does not want to work that. the market people know that there are people in this country who were happy that 9/11 took place. john: the story from the washington post said that there were celebrations of some number of people that were being investigated and the story did , not say that there were thousands, and the story did not say there was proven reports. it was being investigated. not that the reporter had witnessed them. not that they had been proven. >> the reporter should not have that he cannot

validate. he described it as a tailgate party. john: that is not what he wrote great what he wrote was that there were investigations of allegations of such a thing. many writers write about things they have not witnessed. the new york post wrote the same story that people were , celebrating. john: he has no first-hand understanding of this whatsoever. he heard about it on the radio. where is the accountability for mr. trump? >> he's referencing what he saw on the radio and on the tv. why isn't the mainstream media being held accountable? >> the mainstream media is being held perfectly accountable. he was asked this question yesterday morning. it was 2001, three broadcast networks, multiple cable networks, the center of the universe in terms of media. there was no internet that had existed. we had not seen video. how can it be that thousands of celebrating in new jersey and there is no video of it that has surfaced anywhere? where is the video?

why is there no video. just explain that to me how that could be true. >> is not incumbent on me to disprove something he said. john: i am asking why the video is not here? control the television stations or the mainstream media. mr. trump said he saw and which means it was available at the time. we have heard radio interviews. multiple outlets have reported that the result is taking place. so where's the accountabilities from these pulitzer prize winning authors who said i do not have first-hand accounts? john: we will move off this topic. i understand your posture but we will not get anywhere on the topic. it seems that in recent interviews he has put back in play the question of whether or not he may run as an independent or not. >> he says he was to be treated fairly, fairly by the party, and the gop establishment and making

sure that if the super pac and those campaign that are run by other candidates are going to attack me that they should step in or i will have to respond in kind. that is the right thing to be able to do. >> what would constitute unfairness? >> here is what we saw -- last week the former chairman challenges our ability to be on the ballot. the hearing took 67 seconds to decide that he absolutely meets the criteria. this week, we saw the current chairman of the republican party question his ability to actually win and be part of the selection -- this election process. that is not fairness in the process. what we are seeing is that the gop establishment and the mainstream elite want to make sure that trump is not the nominee. they are using every resource possible to keep him off the ballot or dissuade people from voting for him. that is not fairness. john: you have just described incidents that you consider unfair. right?

mr. trump's standard is that if you treat me fairly i will not run as an independent. you say he has not been treated fairly? >> when you have the chairman of the party -- >> i'm not disputing that. i am asking you a question. >> i think it leads it to us. what he said was i want to be treated fairly. saments to be treated the -- with the same respect as every candidate. no other candidate was challenged on his eligibility which took 67 seconds to solve. it was an issue of them trying to keep trump off the ballot even though they know it was a ruse. john: you say that these are good examples of things you guys consider to be acts of unfairness on the part of the party? >> it is the responsibility of the republican party and the executive committee to step in and say all candidates should be treated fairly and everyone should have a fair shot. if we have a single candidate singled out, we will step into those local parties and say we will withhold your money. john: if these kind of incidents

continue, this is the kind of things he is talking about if , these continue, and the national party does nothing about it, that would be enough to allow him to justify going back on his pledge only running as a republican and an -- and consider an independent run? >> but the pledge. he signed the pledge and will run as the republican. john kasich said i do not know if i can support donald trump if he is the nominee. he signed the exact same pledge. where is the accountability or -- where you go to a state and they do not want to provide access to the ballot lost? john: i am not trying to be clear about what he is saying. these are examples of things that he considers unfair and therefore if they continued he might run as an independent? that's what you're saying, right? >> here's what we said. he is the clear front runner in this race for the republican

nomination and is running as a republican. if the party was to use their resources as we have seen they -- in new hampshire to keep trump off the ballot there are , recourses which has the opportunity to pursue right now he is running as a republican and will continue to run as a republican. he has been a front runner for the last five months. john: up next, i ask is can pay -- i ask donald trump's campaign manager whether they plan to hold an upcoming debate appearance ransom for $5 million to charity. we've only right back with that. -- we will be right back with that. ♪ sure, tv has evolved over the years.

it's gotten squarer. brighter. bigger. it's gotten thinner. even curvier. but what's next?

for all binge watchers. movie geeks. sports freaks. x1 from xfinity will change the way you experience tv. john: and now the scintillating

conclusion of our conversation with donald trump's campaign manager. here is how he responded when i said how serious was trump about saying that cnn needs to make a nation to charity before he appears in the debate. thoseple tune in debates to see what he is going to do. >> we saw this on cnbc, the use this to generate more revenue in a single night than they have in the history of their network. john: is he threatening not to participate? >> his participation allows the networks to make more money. let's take the money and give it to a worthy cause so that the greedy mainstream media does not profiteer. john: previously he that it would be a good idea. in this case he is saying that he does not give to the veterans that he might not participate in

the debate? >> it is the right thing to do. john: he is not threatening not to participate? >> i think the network should do this. that is a fair thing to do. john: if cnn does not give $5 million to a veterans group in accord with his wishes, are you saying he will not been participate in the debate? >> that is not what i'm saying at all. >> this is not a condition for his participation? >> once we see the criteria who is going to be on the stage then we make our decision. >> you might still threatened to not participate. >> it depends on what the criteria is, who is on the stage and what the polling numbers look like a criteria that debate. these three long questions, four-minute long openings? that decision has not been made yet. john: i want to talk about the black ministers meeting yesterday. most people viewed this as having been a blunder on the campaign's part to say that there were endorsements coming out of that meeting. >> they could have been phrased appropriately where a private

meeting was taking place and a number of those ministers they based on those conversations and comfort level with no support his campaign. that's what took place. john: you got out a little over your skis on that. >> there was a miscommunication between the leadership of the coalition and the campaign. and what we saw was an amazing meeting that took place. john: a number of pastors came out saying they challenge mr. trump over his record and incendiary language. reporting of what they said after the meeting. is anything going to change? is he going to apologize, change his tone at all? do you take any of that to heart? >> i think he is who he is. he will not change. what we had was a very clear and honest dialogue about the problems that the communities are facing. the that can be helpful. john: there are ways in which he

has not handled himself in a way that is inappropriate. >> there are hundreds of people who made endorsements following that meeting. there are always going to be other people who have other ideas and what to talk about other issues. that is how this works. john: he said he received many endorsements after that. how many as many? >> in excess of multiple dozens of endorsements. john: multiple dozens means more than 24 or 36? >> more than that, i would guess. i do not have that number. we will work with the coalition to announce all that. they said that we want to go back and pray. they want to think about what the thing to do is they decide we will let you know we will endorse mr. trump. the dialogue has begun which nobody else has started. john: you are saying that the group has to decide whether they

want to endorse him as a totality. >> every individual is a group. it is like a union. the union can endorse anybody they want. that does not mean that anybody individual cannot endorse someone else. every individual who is in that meeting has the opportunity to make up their own mind. but the coalition itself has been very supportive. john: at some point we can then expect whatever group decides collectively your campaign to roll out thousands of endorsements from the individuals in the group who have all endorsed mr. trump? >> when he believes the coalition is ready they will release the names of those have endorsed his campaign. john: how soon do we think that might be? >> that be up to mr. scott. john: mr. trump has been the front-runner in almost every poll in iowa for many months. tell me about what you are doing. iowa is a different kind of state.

it is a caucus state very , different from a primary state. it is different from what you have to do to get people to show up on a cold night in february. i know you guys have a ground game in iowa. talk about what you guys are doing to convert is pulling -- his polling strength into actual votes. >> first and foremost, we went out and hired the man who ran the campaign for rick santorum. he was the last victor in iowa. his dedication to iowa is very serious. we built an immense team. every time we are in iowa, we will be back there to get verbal to follow events he had the opportunity to collect data of everyone who is coming because they registered to come to the event. they go out and they train individuals who are coming to these events on what it means to participate in the caucus. we find a location where they have to register to participate and then our numbers are so massive because he has yet

opportunity to talk to so many people. we have had the opportunity to five caucus delegates in almost every precinct. we can expand on that so that in february our team will be in place for the next 60 plus days to make sure we will be successful on election night. john: what percentage of mr. trump's vote will be people have never caucused before? >> it could be as high as 50%. there is a whole bunch of people who have either been disenfranchised or those who vote in every single election. those are not the ones voting for mr. trump. they are so upset that the country isn't winning anymore, want to make the country great again. they are reengaged in the process. these are not just people who are 55 plus, these are brand-new voters who were not prepared to vote or did not have eligibility. the demographics of the individuals are supporting

trump, you see those people who are truly the blue-collar workers who are working very hard every day to make their lives better. mr. trump's message is resonating with. john: a couple of things i want to ask your view on after listening to that interview. first of all, this question of him running as an independent. he seemed to be saying that he has already been treated unfairly and is experiencing unfairness. how did you read what signals he is trying to send to the gop establishment and to the electorate on the question? mark: trump's chances of winning the nomination does not have -- does not depend on winning the establishment over. he will fight tooth and nail to stop him. it is smart politics for him to basically continue to waive that option out there, to try to people from -- the settlement would be a bigger nightmare scenario is trump running as an independent.

john: if that actually were to transpire, donald trump became the nominee of the party, and much of the establishment decided that it could not support the guy do you think he , will run as an independent? mark: i think you becomes the republican nominee and the establishment runs someone else as an independent. john: do you think that is a plausible scenario? if trump is the nominee, will there be an independent candidate to challenge him? mark: there are some parts of the establishment that will just not be comfortable with him because they're not comfortable with him as president. it is one of the most fascinating things going on right now in american politics which is can they stop him, how do they stop him, and then what do they do about it? john: we have a good story on this in the new york times right now. all believe he must be stopped, but they are afraid to try to stop him. out are trying to figure it

in a quiet way, what can be done and who will do it. mark: it is not a two-man operation, but those two guys do a lot of this. sports metaphors and politics are often overused but i will use one. they have a big lead and it is pretty close to the start of the fourth quarter. if they blow the lead, they are going to look foolish because they have a big lead and they are in command right now. it will be very hard for them to blow this leave unless they make the stakes. and they do not make mistakes that hurt them. they make mistakes -- john: he basically admitted that they screwed that up. mark: on the 9/11 video stuff it , is a mistake because no one believes this account in the press and politics. but it does not hurt them. as i said, they are sitting on a ding it out. john: take us return in the sense that it continues to drive this establishment that is uncomfortable withdrawal. it heightens it and enhances it. it may draw donors into the fray. mark: the 9/11 thing for a lot of trump supporters is that he is fighting with the new york

times. john: but again, your inflaming your opposition, and i think they be bringing them up. it does not matter what trump does, right? mark: you will not win them over at this point. there's not a member of the establishment who would like him as the nominee unless ted cruz rises up, and then maybe they will. john: do you think there will be multiple dozens of black pastors who endorse him? mark: i do not rule it out. john: but you're not ready to endorse it as of yet? mark: i will wait for the announcement. john: i will be fascinated to see if that turns out to be true. thank you for coming in here and putting up with me for a long time. up next we have a prizefight. , ted cruz versus marco rubio. part of our exclusive interview. that is after this. ♪

mark: one of the most pressing questions in american politics today is who's going to win the feared between ted cruz and marco rubio. fued between ted cruz and marco rubio. i want to play the part of the interview where you asked senator cruise when he asked conservatives if they should trust marco rubio on immigration. he paused for 10 seconds and

then he told you this. man, i like and respect marco rubio. >> he is a friend, a very talented communicator. primary voters are fed up with what i call campaign conservatives. people who talk a good game on the trail but have not walked the walk. >> is he one of them? >> that will be a decision for the primary voters to make. mark: why have these guys going after each other now? who the audience they are trying to reach with these attacks? they both had been adhering to not11th commandment, attacking a fellow republican. >> a few weeks ago the gloves came off between ted cruz and marco rubio. this is simply the latest directed against rubio.

they've been talking about national security, surveillance, but on the issue if immigration, he sees this as an issue to disqualify rubio. that is a constituency they are both competing for. they are both competing in a major way for conservative voters, the voters that brought them to the senate. the tea party wave in 2010 which helped rubio defeat -- mark: most of the time the tea party is often oversimplified. we think of it as economic conservatives who advocate smaller government. this is not a fight about smaller government. this is a fight about national security and immigration. why are they fighting with each other about this? >> they are fighting about immigration because ted cruz wants to make it an issue. he voted against the gang of eight immigration reform bill that had a pathway to citizenship in 2013. marco rubio is one of the co-authors of that. that is the later contrast that

he wants to highlight. marco rubio wants to talk about national security and foreign policy because he is a major hawk. he has been very well-liked by the sort of neoconservative, hawkish republican constituency. the senator is using that and the fact that he voted against curtailing metadata and surveillance programs under the patriot act. rubio wants to highlight that an accused ted cruz of being weak on national security. mark: let me stick with this immigration issue. it is confusing and confounding to me. senator cruz when he is asked to he would do about the 11 million undocumented immigrants has avoided that question. he has also avoided the question of how what ever his solution is doesn't fall under the category of amnesty. talk about how he is handling those questions and what he said to you when you ask them about -- asked him about them.

>> that is a very important point, and it is fascinating how he is handling this because the message he is trying to drive home is that he will be in border security present. he will be doing everything he can to stop illegal immigration and that will be his one, number two, number three priorities. the question of what to do people here in the country illegally is a confounding question. there is no easy answer. you can't do massive deportation and send them home. it is very extensive -- expensive. donald trump has criticized because it is extremely expensive, and extremely impractical. he wants to say he does not want to discuss or have a conversation about what to do with people who are here until the border is secure. so i asked him what counts as a secure border? what will it take for you to decide that the border is secure? will illegal immigration comedown to zero will have to be perfect on operational control? the problem there is he is boxed in. he cannot support legalization because that would turn off the conservative voters he needs. he cannot call for mass deportation without facing a backlash from people who think it is expensive or inhumane. he would not answer the question

either. marco rubio has also said would -- has also not specifically said would it take to secure the border. they were both vague on that. john: who would you say is more eager to keep this fight going? does one side what to stop and focus on their own campaign or attacking somebody else? >> i would say that ted cruz is more comfortable on the attack than marco rubio. i think being on the attack just suits ted cruz a little more. mark: thank you. your interview is on bloombergpolitics.com right now. the fight is something and it will continue. up next, remembering the record of ronald reagan's administration, after this. ♪

john: the way of ronald reagan is immortalized by republicans today, you would almost forget of the embarrassment of aids. vanity fair has found a way to remind everyone that aids was not always taken seriously. a new short film uses humor. it is the perverse humor of the reagan press secretary in a cringe worthy cause. it is called when aids was funny, and uses audio recordings of the press briefings that are never been heard before. gayt is known as the plague. [laughter] >> it is a pretty serious thing.

one in every three people that gets it dies. >> i don't have it. do you? you didn't answer my question. i have no personal experience here. i checked thoroughly this morning with the doctor and he said no. [laughter] >> the centers for disease control -- >> can i ask a question? >> an estimated 300,000 people have been exposed to aids. will the president take steps to protect armed forces and food and medical services from those who run the risk of spreading aids?

in the same manner of typhoid fever. is the president concerned about this subject? it isn't always a joke. is he going to do anything? >> i have not heard him express anything. >> he has expressed no opinion about this epidemic? >> i have not asked him about it. >> would you ask him? >> have you been checked? >> i didn't hear the answer. john: it was a shameful time during the reagan administration when aids first of called in america. luckily subsequent thisinistrations took

crisis seriously and we are in a much better place. >> you can tell it was also reflective of the press course attitudes ofiling the time. it is phenomenal that that was just a generation ago when attitudes were just ignorant. john: we will be going to an event tonight. they have done an incredible job to spread antiviral drugs around the world. it has brought us to a place where the possibility of the end of aids is within sight. that is a huge bipartisan and philanthropic triumph that i think a lot of people bought back in those days would never be possible. world aids day, that is what we had to say about that. we will be right back. ♪

john: we are on tv at 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. eastern. we are live 24/7 on bloomberg politics.com. you can check out our campaign tracker which has a bunch of coverage of the climate summit. tomorrow, our special guest making a rare television appearance. until then, sayonara. ♪

rishaad: it is wednesday. this is "trending business". i am rishaad salamat. ♪ rishaad: live in sydney and mumbai, but here is what we are watching. the australian dollar strengthening again and helping exports expand. the central bank's decision to keep rates on hold. 300,000 cars recalled in india, some unique to that market .

mark zuckerberg and his wife will give away all of their fortune in celebration of their baby daughter. he says that society has an obligation to invest in the future. follow me on twitter. that is my handle. having a look at what is going on. traders on lunch break in tokyo. some negativity and sentiment creeping in. toit has gone from mediocre worse over the last half hour. that is for mainland and hong kong markets. we were looking at gains earlier on. that has been pulled back entirely. chinese shares falling for the first time in three days. move fo a negative