♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." john: good evening. i am john hockenberry filling in for charlie rose. we begin overseas with the seemingly shrinking caliphate known as isis. you probably know it as isis. iraqi forces have taken all but the western city of mosul. the last major isis stronghold in the country. u.s.door in hundreds of marines and their artillery are joining local forces in preparation for an assault on the isis capital. is it safe to hope this is the beginning of the end of isis? with me is michael weiss, a columnist for "the daily beast" and co-author of "isis: inside the army of terror."

the book has been updated and reprinted. i'm pleased to welcome him to the program. >> it seems like mosul is still in transition. >> part of the ambition is to prevent isis from reconstituting itself or fortifying the city. a lot of these guys are fleeing from mosul because it is a spent force and they will lose the city in a matter of weeks. the goal is to squeeze both ends of the balloon at the same time. raqqa i fear will be a more difficult fight only because it is the de facto capital of their caliphate, but the forces are ready to retake it. necessarilyill not be welcomed in as liberators. the organization, whether the -- or the umbrella group, the syrian democratic forces. they are largely kurdish, and

almost wholly kurdish in military dominance. they are not meant to exert political will for a reason, which is to encourage the building of their own state in northern syria, and doing so with the backing of american firepower and jets overhead. the deployment of this military force, a couple of hundred marines, army rangers in syria, they will be fighting isis, qqa,ng indirect fire into ra but actually they are really more there to keep the peace between the two u.s. backed organizations on the ground. the kurds and sunnis. you have operated -- operation euphrates shield which the turks mounted several months ago to fight isis. they have cleared out territory in northern aleppo and the headquarters of isis' foreign intelligence wing. but really, the turks intervened

to stop the kurds from building their safe let. -- statelet. the kurdish paramilitary force mounting this campaign is essentially a syrian offshoot of the kurdistan workers party. they have been at war with turkey for 40 years. the turks see them as a graver threat than isis in the long-term. there are so many inherent contradictions. it is almost embarrassing to say. american military forces are+++

being deployed to keep two american allies from going to war with each other more than they are to help wage the fight against isis. john: is that because the u.s. deems it important for the u.s. to be there at a military mediator, or have the turks demanded this as a condition of being part of this coalition or supporting this coalition? michael: the turks wanted to go into raqqa themselves. they wanted to lead a garrison of mostly sunni arab rebels. a lot of these people have been peeled off from the free syrian army. a lot have been trained by the pentagon under the program which ended in calamity several months ago. now the turks have been blocked by the syrian democratic forces which have taken the area. american forces have been redeployed to hold the turks at bay. erdogan's ambition is being undercut by the pentagon. according to everything reported in the last several weeks, trump is doing obama's policy on steroids. rely on the kurds, or the kurdish vanguard, and don't wait long enough to build up sunni arab military forces to march into raqqa. i and others who study this week that is brought with complications.

you do not use a minority to liberate a majority. it is middle east 101. the reason the iraqis have learned from their mistakes is the force they have been using to march into mosul, these are not the shia militias. the guys that have been accused of ethnic cleansing and human rights violations. groups trained up by the iranian revolutionary guard corps, for instance. mostly these are elite counterterrorism units , professionalized military divisions of the iraqi army that consist of sunni, shia, christian, and other minority groups. these guys are not going in to help iran plant its flag. they do not see this as a continuation of the iran/iraq war. that is working in mosul. in syria, any accounting for the demographic and sectarian tensions in that country seems

to have gone out the window. right now we are saying let's get the job done quickly. the kurds are very good at fighting isis. they are a trusted and reliable proxy. we will worry about the political aftermath later. ,y problem with this is political aftermath is all. militarily you can defeat organizations like isis. we did that in 2010 when it was known as al qaeda in iraq. it is what comes next you have to worry about. john: let's think about what comes next. there are two pieces of that. number one, are americans aware the u.s. is now involved in building not one, but two statelets run by the kurds? one in iraq and another one presumably in syria in some form. secondly, when we were talking about fighting isis, i recall distinctly no boots on the ground. no u.s. boots on the ground. you are talking about hundreds of marines potentially facing isis troops.

the first isis casualty in a u.s. uniform is going to be big news. and big propaganda news for isis. michael: completely. i well recall the debate about whether to go into syria, a state department spokesperson said we do not want to send 18-year-olds to damascus. instead, we are sending 18-year-olds to raqqa. that is a place people have heard of even less than damascus. this will always be a game of mission creep, if you like. the idea america to reduce its footprint or obliterate its footprint in the middle east, i thought this was a fantasy. one of the options i have put forward, and my co-author have outlined in a recent article is america's big mistake in iraq , was not only military withdrawal in a fashion it happened but political disengagement in the country. we washed our hands. we said you are a sovereign power. you deal with the mess. you don't like the sunni tribes we haven't backed and helped to

defeat, go to the green zone and parlay yourself. syria it is much more dangerous state of affairs because the united states has intervened, iran has intervened to such an extent they have built up militias and proxy armies that are running the security profile for assad. assad's army does not exist. even the russians said with a intervened, there are only around 6000 combat ready forces beholden to the syrian arab army. now it is gangsters, proxies, and some russians. it's all -- america in the business of building a russian protectorate in eastern syria while helping the pkk establish a state in northern syria while also essentially leaving assad the 35% of terrain he controls which he considers to be a victory in this war? he will never be completely in control of syria. the country is balkanized. what is america's endgame here,

and what are we doing to protect the bellwether constituency without which isis cannot survive? that is not only sunni arabs but tribesmen who occupy eastern just zero --s the occupy eastern syria and western and central iraq. it pays to think of this not in terms of two nation-states. that border is a sieve and has been for several decades. you are never going to see a cohesive, integrated state of syria come out of the ashes of what is left of isis. john: either isis is done and it means nothing or isis is not done. which would you pick? michael: isis is not done. they have been planning for this. the dearly departed spokesman was the administrator of all of syria. in his last communique in may of last year he said -- it was , implicit in his message -- we are going to lose our state. what we have to do is return to

the desert where we reconstitute ourselves and built up our forces and marshaled resources in the 2008-2011 period after the sunni awakening in iraq and the so-called surge drove us out of that country. they are planning to do that again. if america says you have lost mosul, fallujah, ramadi, now you lost raqqa, we are out of here. guess what? isis 2.0. it may not look exactly the same as it does now. i can tell you i am noticing a transformation i never thought i would have noticed with an organization like this. when it was founded as al qaeda in iraq, it was led by foreign fighters. over time, it underwent an iraqization, taken over by native iraqis, including former members of hussein's

organization. as of 2014, half of the council , the main legislative body of isis consisted of former , saddamists we knocked out of power. those guys are largely dead. now what i am seeing is europeans and central asians, particularly those who speak russian, rising to the fore in the organization. made goodident trump on his promise to defeat isis, but something else will replace it. michael: exactly. and also redouble their efforts to strike the west in the west. they want europeans because they speak the language, they come from the societies, and they understand the strengths and weaknesses of the societies. they know what a soft target is like. they have transgressed through international airports in paris and brussels and berlin. you will see that phenomenon happen. as they lose their caliphate, they are going to branch out. they are already doing this.

they had a province in libya. they have one in afghanistan and russia. these are not places where they exercise command and control. but they are still a going concern in terms of international jihadism. people are still lining up to join them. we are finding what looked to be lone wolf or stray dog attacks , people who sit on the internet and become radicalized, are in fact agents of isis being run by someone sitting in raqqa. they are just being run remotely through the internet and being linked up with other people who have been cultivated and recruited. michael: the battle of -- has: the battle of raqqa begun, but what comes next does not look very pretty. michael weiss, thanks so much. ♪

♪ john: growers in california and alabama may be worried about the shortage of undocumented immigrants to work airfields. but one group stands to been a fit, the private prison industry. the department of homeland security has been asked by the white house to find 80,000 beds for detainees. that would double its current capacity. as tensions go up, so do the prison industry's profits. here to discuss the what the administration's

aggressive new policies mean is the professor that has the research clinic at northwestern university's institute. welcome to the show. let's talk about what we can expect from the aggressive policies from the trump administration. jackie: i think what we will see is a return to the raids and uptick in detentions and arrests and deportations that go back to the bush administration years. right now, detentions were going down since 2012. and now, there will be an uptick. john: i think people are prepared for detentions. but what is not widely known is the infrastructure for dealing with a number of people involved here is on a scale that i do not think many americans are aware of. give us a sense of where people go when they are detained, how

long they stay. and this sounds to me like a shadow prison system. jackie: that is what has been put in place since the early 2000's. it goes back to a law passed under the clinton administration in 1996, the law that increased the possibility for people to be deported who have been in the country for a long time and took away a lot of discretion from immigration judges as well as the ability to appeal decisions. what we have seen is an increase in detentions from around 50,000 in 1995 to 475,000 people a year who are detained under the obama administration in 2012. to accommodate that increase in detention and deportation, there has been a big upswing in the private prison industry which has played a very active role in lobbying to accommodate those kinds of ends. in 2010, congress passed a law requiring the government maintain on average no fewer than 34,000 beds a day in order

to keep people in custody under immigration laws. there is no comparable law requiring people to be locked up absent any particular penalty in the penal system. this is a law that was lobbied for aggressively by the prison industry and is still on the books today. it is outrageous. it is not anything that would be consistent even with conservative values, which would tend to want to limit government. it is something that is -- it is the basis for the kinds of policies that will be allowing the expansion of the attention that detention -- the detention industry going forward. john: let's take it apart. let's look at the question of the relationship with the prison industry. is it the case that there is an incentive for private prisons to take detainees because they get some sort of reimbursement from

the federal government and that money goes into their revenue stream? jackie: right. in order to keep people locked up, ice develops a lot of contracts. about 65% of the people in custody right now are in custody with firms that are privately owned. the balance are in wings of county jails that are rented out by ice. john: this could be in any community. there could be an ice detention center down the street and you might not know it because it is part of an existing prison system or a wholly new facility. how would you know? jackie: there is actually some really good data available through a website run at syracuse university. if people want to find out where the facilities are, that would be a good place to look. they have a number of different interfaces for law enforcement data from the government. one of them has information on immigration detention facilities, including the

private facilities, as well as the places that might be in a local neighborhood. they might be in an office park even, and not have a sign or u.s. flag. many of those are also listed on that website. john: this is not to increase awareness because we consider these people dangerous. it is the case that most, the vast majority have committed no crime. they are just on their way out of the country and in a kind of suspended detention that could be fairly open-ended depending on the speed of the government's detention hearings and the like. jackie: right. to be clear about this, many of the people being held are challenging their deportation orders. they get an order that says ice believes you are not in the country lawfully. and they are allowed in many contexts an opportunity to contest that charge in an immigration court.

the people being held in ice custody are not being held because they have been convicted of any particular immigration crime or any other crime. they are being held because they are challenging a civil order to deport them. they are administrative detainees. they are not there because they have been convicted of a crime. they are being held because they are a flight risk or there may be some factors in the record that would suggest they are a danger to the community. and an additional risk factor is construed as bed space availability. those are three factors ice detention officers weigh when they are trying to decide whether to keep someone locked up or allow them to be free while appealing. many people detained have their orders terminated or have other discretionary release. they are actually not deported. there is a range of different kinds of outcomes. it is also important to point out thousands of people being held in these facilities are

u.s. citizens. these people are completely unlawfully detained and held under horrible conditions. john: let me stop you on that one. they are u.s. citizens because they are caught in a dragnet inadvertently? what would the reason a large number of american citizens would be in this particular system? jackie: these are typically young men of color coming out of the prison system or some other encounter with law enforcement. their claims of u.s. citizenship are disbelieved. evidence that is consistent with deported them is treated as accurate and evidence inconsistent with supporting deporting them is treated as fraudulent on their part. this happens in immigration courts where judges will discredit evidence of u.s. citizenship. john: people will say the discounted fee of individuals who illegally came into the united states does not concern

see --espond and despondency of people who came in illegally does not concern me a lot. they took the risk. they are in this situation. why should i be terribly outraged by this, even if it is at this scale? jackie: i think there are a couple of ways to think about this question. one is about the magnitude of the response to what is a civil infraction. many of the people being locked up are here on visa overstays and so forth, and they have committed no -- they violated no criminal laws. the second question does have to do with the serious question that this country is coming to terms with now. and that has to do with our deportation laws and our borders. i think we are in a moment now that reminds me perhaps of when in the 1850's in the context of there being legal slavery in the south. but in 1850, congress passed the fugitive slave act. that allowed the slave catchers into the north and required

communities they are to return escaped slaves to the south. communities in the north that in the past may not have been so favorable about slavery suddenly had to deal with this question in their communities. this seems very resonant to me about what is happening now. the sanctuary cities and state attorney generals and so forth who are pushing back against the ramped up enforcement of deportation laws. again, i think you're right. i think people especially on the left in progressive communities need to think seriously about their relationship to these laws. are we going to maintain this posture of saying, we want an exception here, here is a nice family, here is a good immigrant family? or are people going to start looking at the long-term consequences of these laws and saying, "you know what having , these facilities all over the country keeping people locked up instead of allowing them to work, removing people from their families and jobs and so forth, there's something really

problematic about that and maybe we want to think more seriously about what it would look like to have open borders," especially in north america to have something more like the european union. i know this sounds like a reach at this point. but if you think about two analogies that might be worth considering. one is that for most of the history of the world, slavery was something that was normal and challenging it, even in the 19th century, seemed a little bit strange. secondly, even movement within a country in the 15th and 16th century was not something allowed. in england until the 17th century and even early 18th century, if you were caught outside the parish of your birth without a pass, you could be whipped. your ear would be seared. if you were caught a third time, he would be executed. -- you would be executed. one of the penalties was being transported to the plantations, which is to say the colonies in america. in that timeframe, people

thought if you allowed free movement, that would be this terrible thing. you would end up with all of the poor people flooding london. flash forward to the 21st century, nobody would think it is a plausible solution or even a problem to say we want to limit the movement from people in mississippi to new york because there are a lot more poor people in mississippi. i know this is a lot to take in. but the system we have right now is really inconsistent with any kinds of liberal values and conservativism with a little c. i think this is something people might want to consider as we contemplate the alternative, which is this ramped up enforcement of the deportation laws and the massive expansion of the prison industry. john: professor, thanks for illuminating us on that. jackie: thank you so much. ♪ ways wins.

especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business.

♪ katie: good evening. i'm katie couric, filling in for charlie rose. tory burch is here. ceo of toryman and burch. her foundation has launched a global campaign called embrace ambition. here is a look at the public service announcement of the campaign. >> i am ambitious. i will not hide it. >> we will not hide it. >> we embrace ambition.

>> women are made to be ambitious. >> i would dream big. >> big. >> without hesitation. >> we'll take risks, not live in fear. >> no longer will ambition in a woman be seen as negative. >> ambition is not a dirty word. >> help women to build empires. >> help more women run for office. >> transform society. >> no judgment. >> take the pledge. >> embrace ambition. >> will you? thee: the proceeds of campaign will go to empower woman entrepreneurs in the united states. we are excited to have tory burch on the program. before we talk about this and credible campaign, that was very exciting. i felt empowered just watching it. i want to ask you how you embrace ambition or did not when you were younger because, in preparing for this interview, i read about how you got into fashion, and it seems to me that you set your sights on a career in fashion after graduating from the university of pennsylvania with a degree in art history.

you came to new york and things kind of fell into place. can you tell us about the early days of your career? all, ieah, so, first of think i was raised in a family that i did not know gender would have anything to do with it. i grew up with three brothers and my parents really taught us that we can do anything if we worked hard, so that was the general feeling. i went to penn and studied art history. i got a job sort of randomly in fashion. i sent a resume to an interesting designer who looked like rasputin. he said i could start but i had to start the week after i graduated from penn. that is how i got into fashion. it was a bit by chance. my mother wore his clothing. it sort of went from there. katie: wow.

he started out in pr and marketing? tory: right, his office was so small. it was me, his partner, and him, learning a little bit about everything. it was a minimalist space. mats on the floor. vodka would start at 10:00 a.m. it was a very crazy beginning to my career. katie: what did you learn in that first job that provided the foundation for you as you moved up into the business? tory: i learned a lot about the industry and how colorful the industry was. he always said people coming and fielding i was sort of as well. i would pretend he was not there. he did not particularly love women. he was trying to cut my hair on and make me not wear makeup, but his clothing was incredible. he would dress celebrities. it was always minimalist. just beautiful fabric. katie: how did you develop your ascetic? i know you started your brand what year? tory: 2004.

katie: by the way, was that a huge endeavor, i mean, how did you say, i'm going to name the brand after myself and i'm going to build an empire? tory: a couple things. i had no design experience and i had never run a business. i was a stay-at-home mom for four years. the job i had left was a very tough decision. i had been offered to be president of a brand from spain and i found out i was pregnant with my third son. i knew i could not do both jobs well. i became a stay-at-home mom and it was during that time that i knew i wanted a career, but i had no idea what it was, so i researched starting a school and then starting this company at the same time, and it really was working on the idea of beautifully made clothing that did not cost a fortune was the beginning. it just went from there. katie: starting a school? tory: starting a school. i had twins and i was thinking it was really hard to get children into schools and there's a need for incredible

schools and i was interested in education, but it sort of did not go anywhere. katie: do you ever wonder what your life would have looked like if you had focused on education rather than fashion? tory: i think there are many ways. i feel like i had so many different ideas, none of which came to fruition and i was so tired of hearing myself talk about the ideas and none of them coming through, so i decided to start working on this company, the idea of this. it was called jack's in the 60's, and it was great looking clothing that were hard to find , and it really was about not spending a fortune, and that was where it started. katie: and the rest of history, as they say, because i think you have done pretty well for yourself. tory: part of the business plan from day one was to start a foundation, and that is something that has always been a driving force for me, and i think, when you ask where i got my style, i was a complete tomboy growing up, but my parents were very glamorous and still are, and i was surrounded by my mom and dad. he should have been a designer.

he designed all of his own clothing. my mom, too. every family dinner, she would have beautiful flowers and the way she just took care and she was into every detail, i really learned from them. katie: i read a sweet story about your dad, who had passed had aassed away, he lighter with charms on it, one of your most special possessions and you made it into a locket or necklace. tory: he was the sweetest man. i would never know who i would be coming home to, and they would come for a couple days and stay six months. they were always taking different kinds of people in. it was like hotel new hampshire, andy warhol meets robin hood. we had this crazy childhood, and it was fun, but always about family and love. katie: your brand has expanded significantly since you expanded

the company. how many stores you have now? tory: we have about 200 globally, about 89 in the u.s. katie: and you started athletic wear? my daughter told me what is called. tory: we call it tory sport. it is a sport line. we call it coming and going. katie: when did you start that company? tory: a year-and-a-half ago. it is still brand-new. katie: how is that going? tory: it is going well. it is really exciting. we are keeping it separate from the main brand. it is exciting. we are really starting to build it. katie: this is a trend. a lot of brands are doing this kind of clothing, which is comfortable. you can go from the gym to the office at times, right? tory: i think it started as a trend, but i think it is here to stay. i think it is a shift in the way

women are dressing we have been . working on it for maybe seven years and i had forgotten how hard a start up is. it is excruciating. we finally got it going. the idea is to marry real function and fashion, and how do you think about the elegance of sport? that is what is exciting. i started thinking of "the royal tannenbaum's tenenbaums," so it has -- it is exciting. we have running, yoga, coming and going. katie: i want to get to your incredible philanthropic work in a moment. as you expand the brand, how do you make sure that you are not expanding to quickly or into many arenas? because i think we have seen some designers in the past kind everywhere, and who helps you measure that an balance that when it comes to expanding? tory: i think it is such an important i think now more than point. ever, there is a philosophy of less is more. i think department stores used

to be in charge, and now the customer is in charge. i think we could be three times the size right now if we wanted to be, but it would not be a healthy company. i personally have been so careful about growth. even though we have had this great trajectory, we don't want to be everywhere. we want to be in the right places and very careful. i think a lot of people open to o many stores, get to o promotional and when we do that, and we have done promotions, we have pulled back into the can really hurt your company. katie: the company is now 13 years old. how has it evolves and what were the most important lessons you have learned? tory: they have been so many. first of all, on some level, i never imagined being on a journey like this, so to feel so privileged to work with the amazing team that i have worked with to build it is extraordinary, but it has evolved where i have learned a lot about design and how to be a ceo, and i think each one, i have learned on the job.

i think patience is something that i have learned. i have always had a bit of it, but my parents told me that i have to buckle my seatbelt, thicken my skin, and i think of negativity as noise. i think that was a pretty good advice. katie: what is the biggest mistake you made along the way? tory: i don't know if i can say it on tv. there is many. there's so many. instinct is good. if you really believe in your vision, i think it is important to follow it. if you have a unique point of view. and when i have not gone with my instinct is when we have gone wrong, and i think the great thing is, with our company, and i think any great company, you have to be flexible and when you make a mistake, react quickly, get out of the mistake, and i keep thinking of grace under pressure. katie: let us talk about embracing ambition, which is such a great campaign, in my opinion, because you are right. i think society and women themselves feel fairly ambivalent about the word

"ambition." how did you come up with that? why did you come up with it? tory: it started with the first article that was written on our company and a friend said we shied away from the word ambition. she was 100% right. i started to think about that a lot. i think that when men are ambitious, it is celebrated, and when women are ambitious, it seems crass or unattractive. women internalize that. i did it myself. i can see why. we need to get rid of it. it is a very harmful stereotype. katie: did you find that in talking to other women, that they felt the same way? that they shied away from the term as well? tory: i think every woman i spoke with headset at some point in their life that they understood what i mean. you know, i was interviewed by a man yesterday and he's like, this doesn't exist. i said, "of course it does." it is rampant, in fact.

if you think about how few jobs that there are of women as ceos -- katie: actually, the number has declined. he was interesting for me to read that in 2014-2013, there were 24 women ceo's. in 2016, 21. tory: of fortune 500 companies? katie: yeah, that number has declined. i was surprised to read it, and disheartening. tory: i think of a woman wants to do that and it is hard, and you have to make those choices, there should be equal rights to do that, and that is sort of, when you think of the word feminism, i think it is misused. feminism is about equal rights. it is not about just liking men. i think men have to be part of the conversation. it is a human right. it is not a favor. it should be a given. katie: women's rights are human rights. tory: but it is. it should be a given. equality for women. it is half the population. katie: i think there is a lot of subtle sexism in the workplace

that really cannot necessarily, you cannot go to hr about it, but it is almost more insidious than blatant sexism, do you agree? tory: i think there is both. i have definitely experienced both. and there is definitely that old man's club mentality. i've gotten a few pats on the back, and when i went to raise i wasfor our company, told to never say social responsibility and business in the same sentence. i thought that was so interesting. now, when he think of millennials, that is what they look for the most. it is so important. katie: i want to talk about feminism and where you think we are today. we saw the women's march following this election. it was a day without women this week. where do you think the women's movement is right now? do you think it has been re-energized and that younger

women are embracing the notion of being feminist? tory: i think it is been reenergized and i'm very hopeful. i was blown away by the women's march. it was extraordinary to see city after city around the world really unite. i think the important thing is not to lose sight of how powerful that message is, and not to make it a partisan issue. to me it is really not one. katie: with any political movement, there has to be forward momentum. as a businesswoman, and as someone who has been so successful in building a brand, what should this movement do in order to become bigger and have impact? tory: i think when i speak to father's and i talk about their daughters, they want equality for their daughters, and whether they are republican or democrat, so if we start to have men be part of the conversation about the equality of women, whether

it is equality of pay or paid maternity, or whatever issue it is, i think it should not be about gender. it needs to be about the quality of work, and women need to have equal rights, so how do we push that forward? how do we keep the conversation going? i think the great thing about now is people are more engaged than they have ever been. katie: it is interesting. i read an essay i think during the campaign about men who want to quality their daughters but not necessarily for their wives. tory: i knew you're going to say that. that's scary. katie: i thought that was interesting and depressing. i think generationally, it is changing. you have three boys, and you were telling me earlier that day they love the fact that you work. they embrace your career. enthusiastically. i think for a lot of kids, our kids ages, i think having mothers who work is a very different experience than our

generation because my mom did not really have a career. she worked at lord and taylor and did some other volunteer work, but she was not a career woman. i think she would have been a great stockbroker. tory: i think the same about my mother. i think she would have been a great architect, my mother. how sad that they had a bit of a miss, because generationally, i think it is differently. it is great to be a role model, you for your daughters, me for my boys. i think it is interesting because when i showed my boys the campaign, i had to explain to them that ambition for women is perceived as different than it is for men. katie: it is interesting. i personally never had trouble with the word ambition. i don't no one i. i always felt like, yes, i'm ambitious, and i'm totally happy and ok with that. tory: well, i think it is great. and certainly, i am now, but i can tell you, we have

entrepreneurs at google who do not want to be perceived as ambitious. katie: really? that is what they want? would you mean? tory: they think that men do not find it attractive, and i think that it is a stereotype, and a harmful one, and i think it is out there. katie: who wants a man who does not find ambition attractive? i think those are the wrong man for powerful women to couple with, if you will, right? tory: i definitely agree. i think that, certainly, when i speak at colleges and you said your daughter is in college, and i spoke at one recently and i was so impressed with how ambitious the students were. i remember when i was in college, it did not seem to be the case. a lot of them did not go and have important careers for themselves. they didn't want it, are they wanted to get married. i think times are definitely

just have to we support the issue and make sure that women have equal pay. i think that is a big one. katie: women are not paid as much as men for the same job and that has been the case for years. at some point, i think most of us feel like that just has to change. tory: i read a statistic the other day, and i kind of remember this, that women could not have a credit card in their own name in 1972, so we come a ways. the thing i am worried about is we go backwards, and that is something that i think the women's march and this movement is so important. it really needs to make us move forward and not go back to the 1960's. katie: i know the trump administration has the fewest number of women in its cabinet in a long time, and i think there are those who feel it is not the most hospitable administration to women in a long time, but i think in a way, it is galvanizing those who, like you, do not want to see women's strides go back, move backwards.

for: i think it is a miss their administration, because women offer a lot. they have a different perspectives. katie: you give advice to a lot of millennials through your foundation. tell me about what you do and what your goals are, because you work with young entrepreneurs. tory: we do, but they are not all young. katie: i don't need to hear that. tory: it is about women entrepreneurs in the united states. it is all kinds of women, and that is what i love most about it. we talk a lot about confidence. i think that is a big thing that women do not have. it is hard for women to ask for a raise. i also have had that. i don't know if you have ever had that. it has been difficult for me. i'm not sure why that is. it is really being the best advocates for themselves, and i think, not in an arrogant way, but men can really represent themselves quite well and i be taughtn need to that more.

katie: why is that? tory: i think it is changing, but i think we need to really be there to change it more. katie: let's talk about pragmatically what you do to help these women because i'm sure some women watching this at home would love to hear your advice for those who want to start a business or do something on their own and just do not know where to start. tory: one exciting thing is i told you earlier, part of the business plan of our company was to start a foundation, and i was very worried that it would ever be perceived as marketing. so we did not want to talk about it for a long time. we ended up launching the foundation in 2009, and it has taken until now to really see impact and scale. i think, with a partnership with bank of america, we have now given out over $25 million in the last two years to women entrepreneurs in the u.s. katie: wow. aboutand we are averaging

half $1 million a month. women have a harder time getting loans. that is just a fact. they pay their loans back. they are dedicated to the communities. they are great investments. katie: can you give me an example because it is hard to visualize some of the women you are helping? can you give me some real-world examples? tory: there are so many. we have one who has a company , a hot dog dogs stand in new orleans and she is amazing. katie: diva dogs? tory: incredible. we have a woman in texas who started on food stamps. she had four children with her husband and they were down and out and she started to make granola bars, and we were able to give her a loan and now, she has a thriving company. women are really courageous. they have courage. they can get themselves out of really tough situations. we have a woman who goes on movie sets and really makes it more green, and shows them how

to do that. there are so many different kinds of business. there was an architect who now designed bras for mastectomy victims. it goes on and on. we had one -- she had a shredding company that was in a car that she would take two offices, they would bring down the documents and shred it on the spot. it is all kinds of industries. a lot of food industries, certainly fashion, and it is really inspiring to me. katie: yeah, i bet it is. does it inspire you to kind of keep going with your business so you can help more women like them? tory: well, certainly, it does. aside from our partnership with bank of america, we also have an education program with goldman sachs, and that is really exciting, and then we also have with our foundational fellowship program. next week, we will have 30 entrepreneurs which we will highlight on our site.

we have to narrow it down to 10 and they each get $10,000 of a grant towards their education for their business and the winner will get $100,000 grant. katie: isn't it ironic that when you first started out, you were advised to never use social responsibility and business in the same sentence? it seems things have changed dramatically, even in the last five years. so many companies now, social responsibility is part and parcel of their mission. it is not about just doing well. it is about doing good. you know, i see that in company after company and i think it is such an exciting development in business. katie: i think people are looking for more, and certainly, there is a bit of a backlash with so much stuff and people want less, but things with more integrity, and things that are doing good, and if we could be role models to companies that think about philanthropy or social responsibility from the beginning and not wait until they are successful 20 years out, it would be a wonderful thing, and it does not have to

be financial in the beginning. it can be just about giving time off for a day to support a charity or any organization. katie: we talked about millennials, i have read a lot about millennials, and they prefer experiences over stuff. they do not want to be burdened by a lot of possessions, so i think it is really important that this social responsibility component exists in business, because they are very socially conscious, i think. mess thatink also the our investors did not think about, it is good for the bottom line. it makes our employees are happy. it is attracting great people to want to work that our business, but it is also great for our customers, so it is a win-win in every way. katie: obviously, you are doing a lot of good, and doing incredibly well, so when you

look at the next 10 years, and sort of what you want to accomplish, you know, how you want your business to iterate, as they say in the tech world, what do you see on the horizon? tory: everyone always told me there is an inflection point in 10 years of the business, and i never really understood what that meant until recently. we have looked at our business, we had this amazing growth, and the first 10 years was super exciting, but we restructured to look at the next 10, and i think him it is about, again, less is more. we are really looking at every product with more integrity, but also, how do we do more good? how do we have more experiences? what does personalization mean? people tolling no one would ever buy online and we launched an e-commerce site. it is interesting how there is a lot of naysayers.

of people whot have different opinions, but when i talk to entrepreneurs about is if you have conviction and drive and you believe in your vision, it is so important to keep your focus. katie: i have to ask you a fashion question because, you know, i think one of your first items were the ballet flats. right? tory: my mother. katie: yeah, and i think everyone knew you had got tory burch flats, and i'm curious because i have always been one of those people who, i do not like labels. i don't like purses that have labels on them. i don't know. it just feels show off-y to me. have you changed that approach in terms of screaming like, "i'm wearing tory burch!" tory: it is funny because our logo was not meant to be a logo traditionally. it was more meant when we first came up with it to be more of a

design element because i too am not one to wear a lot of logos, so it became this kind of crazy thing that we loved and embraced, but over the years, we definitely pulled it back, and we love the logo, but we want to love it in a careful way. we don't want it to be all over the place even though it has done so well and we are so excited, but i totally understand where you are coming from. katie: i wanted to also take a moment to say congratulations because you will be getting married soon. tory: yes. katie: you are marrying a frenchman. tory: a frenchy. pierre. katie: is he in the business? tory: yes. he works and we have six boys together. we are busy. we have a lot of children. katie: i think it is very exciting. i wish you much happiness and continued success because you are doing such great things with your success. it is wonderful how you are paying it forward. tory: thank you so much, katie. i really appreciate it. katie: thanks, tory. ♪

♪ welcome to "bloomberg markets: asia". ♪ david: trouble at toshiba, numbers and the nuclear write-down, results delayed again. the chinese economy showing signs of stability. the car tax hitting retail sales, but activity remains strong. moves closer as theresa

may wins approval to start the process. if you put all those things together, and today we get the have alling coming you these political risks in europe, i guess it is understandable that volumes are not quite there. it is counterintuitive because you are not seeing the selling you normally get. again, the underlying theme across markets the past several weeks has been this reflation trade. i have a cool chart to show you. come along with me now. a misconception when you look at global equities and the reflation trade that it into fits all. this is a chart i made up for you guys. the correlation between the u.s. 10 year yield, one of the best indicators of the reflation trade, 2.61%,