♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin with the unveiling of president trump's plan to overhaul the u.s. tax code. the white house considers this the biggest priority to boost economic growth. proposals earlier were dramatic, called for sharply lower rates for businesses and individuals. it represents a first moved to begin negotiations with congress. i am joined by peter coy of business week and from washington, from the washington

post. what did the president and trump administration announced today? >> they announced major changes to the corporate tax system and the individual tax system. they lower the corporate tax rate, the rate businesses pay from 35% to 15%. also allowed small businesses that pay through the individual income tax system to use that 15% rate as well. they think that will create more hiring, investing, and more money to slosh around in the economy to create more revenue. on the individual side, they proposed eliminating the seven tax racket that currently exist, replacing them with three brackets. and incentivizing people to no longer itemize their deductions and a host of other things they think will help the middle class and low income people. charlie: do most people think this will stimulate economic growth? >> a lot of people believe if

you cut taxes, inevitably people and businesses will have more cash to spend and invest. but if you cut them by this much and it leads to this much of a drop in revenue, one budget forecasters said it would lead to a $5.5 trillion drop in revenue over four years. you could treat such a big hole in the deficit it ends up harming in the long-term. that one page document was remarkable in its brevity. if i wrote a book report in seventh grade, it might not pass muster. a number of intentions. it had been rumored there was more detail about the specifics. for instance, the ability to deduct one state and taxes from federal returns. that is important to people who live in states like california and new york. huge state and local

taxes. that document said we will start doing a listening tour around america to see what people have to say, which seems sensible to me. but in my mind, it was a pretty overt admission that this is just the start of the negotiation. we know from following trump, if you start a negotiation, started the extreme end. the president has said repeatedly we will do health care next and then taxes. at the same time we do health care we will do taxes and infrastructure. the thought was that health care would help pay for taxes. clearly that is not happening anymore. it seems as though this tax plan is not going to achieve what trump said he wanted to achieve during the campaign. he said he wanted to actually help the middle class, there are be no absolute tax cut for the rich, that is what steve mnuchin said.

there is a little bit of help here for the middle class. primarily the change in the standard reduction. you earned24,000 could be tax-free, which is nice. but compare that to the enormous cut that will benefit the rich. they are getting rid of the estate tax entirely, by the way. which is paid almost exclusively by the very richest americans. they are getting rid of the top -- personal tax rate goes down to 35%. the biggest is this idea of allowing pass-through businesses. doctors offices, lawyers offices, partnerships -- there are several types of pass-through businesses that would qualify. right now they pay the personal income tax rate on whatever profits their businesses make. instead of that, they will say it -- pay the same low corporate

tax rate. it creates an enormous incentive for them to restructure their businesses so instead of paying a salary they can claim it as business income and saving on his amounts of money. charlie: donald trump never said he was a deficit hawk. >> no, he did not. hetold the washington post would eliminate the federal debt. not just reduce it, but eliminated within 10 years. >> one thing important to remember, whenever you do tax reform there are winners and losers. this only tells us about the winners. we do not know whose ox will get gored. those are the hard questions i have to answer. charlie: the president has talked about bringing corporate money back home, but has not been brought back because of tax laws and is sitting in banks around the world. what does he propose to do? holiday.poses a tax

a one-time deal, bring your cash overseas into the u.s., even though it is sitting in banks in new york city. but bring it over from there and we will give you a special one-time tax break and get those dollars to work. one thing not specified in the plan, and there are lots of them, there is no mechanism to enforce that if they spend capital goods, investment, employment. that is the main question from a is thes perspective, spending crated by these tax cuts really going to productive capital uses, or will it be used to buy back shares in dividends, like we have seen for the last decade in corporations across the country? charlie: the price of the share goes up. >> it is fascinating, microsoft share count in the last 17 years has gone down 25%. charlie: most of their own is bought back? >> returning money to the

shareholders without creating more jobs. charlie: is this politically feasible? >> i would say not. clearly, this plan is not feasible. it is drilling a hole in the bottom of the lifeboat. it is just going to kill the revenue. said there may be offsets to it, but spending cuts are hard to imagine. remember a month or so ago in trump said he would cut $54 billion in spending to offset $54 billion more in defense? $54howls of outrage -- billion is a tiny amount of money compared to the revenue lost that would come from this. in order to get it done, he would have to show that it would not add to deficits beyond a 10 year window. if he cannot show that, he would

get 60 votes in the senate. he does not have 60 votes in the senate. he is lucky to get the republicans at 52. >> do we remember paul ryan has a deficit hawk? [laughter] >> in days gone by. charlie: if in fact trump had his wishes, where we get the revenue? >> from economic growth. charlie: exactly. that is a neutral economic -- political idea. inhillary clinton was wrong her campaign because she would not even talk about economic growth. that has a basic appeal. weget to 3% growth, which have been way under for a long time, it would be impressive. charlie: what would it be if we got the 3% economic growth? >> presumably we would have more tax revenue to fill the hole. but would taxes spend -- businesses spend as they did

before? charlie: be right back. ♪ charlie: we continue with a look

at president trump's foreign policy as they near the 100 day milestone this saturday. the principles guiding his foreign policy are still unclear. he surprised the world by ordering strikes on syria in

response to president assad's use of chemical weapons. and economic policies as leverage to get president xi to pressure north korea. they have put all options, including military action, on the table as tensions rise with pyongyang. and then there are questions of the trump campaign and russia. a complicated issues with president putin. riskier raidssm, and control to military commanders to make tactical choices. much remains unknown, including the face of the iran nuclear deal and the paris climate change records. joining me to talk about this, ian bremmer, the president of eurasia group. and katty kay, anchor for bbc news america. i am thrilled have both of them back on this program. i will begin with you. what can this president look at thisreign policy and say,

is a clear victory, win, achievement? think the biggest achievement is that he has learned what he did not know. he has learned the world is more complicated than the policies he campaigned on. that is true partly domestically but much more true when it comes to the national stage. he sat down with president xi and realize the north korea situation was more complicated than he realized that he was prepared to admit it was a learning curve. that has influenced much of what he has done and said on the foreign policy stage. he came in with a clear nationalist, populist, america-first ideal, and he shifted on that. he shifted to one of more engagement, more realization he has to engage with america's allies to get results for america. rather than one specific thing

he has done, i would say that is the most important thing, the learning curve that he is gone through and realized he has gone through. disagreement with that from a structural perspective. but he got rid of the transpacific partnership right at the beginning, massive potential trade deal, got rid of it. bombed syria. charlie: they do not have to get rid of it, it never had been achieved. allies inmerica's north america, south america, asia, 40% of the world's gdp was strongly committed to it. he comes in and says it is dead, killed it. different than saying he won't name china a currency manipulator, does not do that. clearly, the u.s.-russia deal on syria, on chemical weapons abrogated or put in place -- 2013, the syrian government uses chemical weapons, he engaged

some strikes. and, his most important meeting of his presidency so far with xi jinping was treated with respect, dignity, and they bought themselves some time. furthermore, by pressuring the chinese on north korea, they have gone the chinese to be repaired to respond with greater pressure against north koreans. there are a lot of places where trump has made big mistakes in foreign policy in terms of handling meetings and phone calls, not knowing what is going on. charlie: even extending into the last week or two as he reaches 100 days? is he still making serious mistakes in terms of phone calls? ian: i think he is still embarrassing himself occasionally and making statements that do not comport with reality. katty: obviously. ian: when he came in place, you inke with both me and katty

the run-up, domestic policy will be hard to move the needle much. but foreign policy could be really volatile. there has been learning as katty suggested, there have not been is crises so far, but he handled issues confident. it isis gone, mcfarlane gone -- is gone. those moves make people who understand foreign policy a little more comfortable. charlie: he listens to mattis and tillerson. tpp, we doition to have trade moves against canada. and we clearly have a more hawkish -- charlie: we have trade moves against canada? think so, there have been

big issues with canadians in terms of dairy farmers that need to be addressed that were not being addressed. soft lumber is certainly not new. if you're going to pick a fight on trade in the run-up to 100 days you do not want to pick on china right now because number one, you bought some time and are waiting on how north korea will play out. also, it could go that way. you pick on candidate with an issue you have leverage on, you can say i have done something. at the same time, it is not a disaster. charlie: nafta remains to be seen. two anonymous sources in the administration saying he is thinking about an executive order to withdraw the u.s. from nafta, that is absolutely not happening. that is stagecraft in the run up to 100 days. it shows pressure on canada, mexico, but no way to do it.

katty: it is unlikely. all the language we have seen shows they want to renegotiate nafta. move,an auto move -- odd it moved the canadian dollar and peso down. share prices were off. thing tolightly rash do if you are not intending to pull out of nafta, to leak to members of the press they are drawing up an executive order that is considering america withdrawing from nafta and also leaking to the press it was drawn under the auspices of steve bannon. you are right, the personnel moves on the national security side are probably one of the other big victories that we have on a more normalized national security team. national security team. aseral flynn was seen

someone whose appointment was curious, to say the least. it shows there are odd things the administration can do. charlie: back to china, do we know what was achieved in that conversation in palm beach, world leaders of the most powerful and important nations in the world getting to know each other, which is a crucial thing to do? the chinese game and made offers in terms of investment in the u.s. that the white house turned down. usy said the problem between is too big, we are not going to take a few billion dollars as a way of solving this and make us look indebted to you. the other thing is the pressure on north korea. the white house went in and said, you have to put more pressure on north korea. if you do not, we will take retaliatory action. whether they can do that under

questionable, but they seem to have got something from the chinese in terms of action against north korea, which is the biggest foreign-policy challenge the president faces. ian: the u.s. had taken taiwan off the table. trump took currency manipulation off the table. they're looking for market access. charlie: back to the one china policy, no longer talking about currency manipulators. ian: they are looking to access to china that the chinese have more in the u.s. the chinese not ready to move on that, but the u.s. says we expect to take north korea seriously. they are increasing their nuclearization capabilities and their cyber attack capabilities, which is dangerous. the chinese never thought obama would escalate. they recognize that trump might. , understandbelieve

that china appreciates and shares the united states idea that something has to be done about north korea, having deliverable nuclear warheads? katty: ishares shares the idea something has to become, -- be done. there is some instability on the korean peninsula. unified koreant a or a holdover of american forces on their border or north korean refugees coming across. reasons, chinaof and america has seemed be cooperating on north korea. but it would be a mistake for this administration to think they have identical purposes. ian: a couple things will happen, you will have an election. the outcome of that, you will have either a left-wing president or center-right moredent, both of whom are

attached to beijing. they have challenges with the u.s. defense position. the second point, wilbur ross, who is not gary cohn, he is clearly more hawkish, a more economic strategist than the markets would like. to work on china to get more market access, come up with a better deal. i suspect that the end of this 100 days when the chinese are getting close to their own chinese leadership transition in beijing, you will not have meaningful cooperation from the north koreans, even though the chinese might he trying to bring it about. and you will not have a significant deal between the u.s. and china that they both think is acceptable on trade. i would advise trump, give them another 100 days. now you have an executive order aluminum,maybe one on

where they are showing they are dumping, giving unfair supports -- toward the end of this year is when i would expect it would be much harder on day 200 to say u.s. and china are on a reasonable path. for them, the nuclear arsenal is an existential issue. kim john glenn sees the country's survival as being based on that. sees the country survival as being based on that. charlie: he did not say anything bad about putin or russia. katty: he did not. as far as my memory serves me, he is not said anything about putin specifically. even since the syria attack. but clearly the relationship. tillerson went to moscow,

putin did not say he would meet with them but at the last minute, did. the message has been sent that they would like to see if there is an ability to engage. the nature of politics in the united states with the ongoing investigation into a number of the people around trump, the conflicts of interest, make it virtually impossible to get a deal done between the u.s. and russia. charlie: where do those investigation stand? the fascinating thing over the last 24 hours, coming out and giving a tough line on the white house, saying we have to get this documentation on general flynn and why he did not give an accurate account of himself and his dealings with russia and turkey when it came to his national security clearance. provide he did not

information he was receiving money from these governments. katty: no, he filled out the forms and they took him at face value. i am not sure how the white house security processes were, they will come under scrutiny. the investigations continue. so far, there is no evidence anybody close to trump, with trump's knowledge, cooperated with the russians to change the outcome of the american election. charlie: no evidence that anyone close to trump cooperated with the russians. katty: two trump's knowledge or jared kushner's knowledge to affect the outcome of the elections. we still do not know if carter page or paul manafort did. but every time the white house appears obstructionist on this issue, as it did today, saying we will not release documents to the intelligence committees, a gives people who suspect there might be something there more reason to think the white house is hiding something.

charlie: people and now will be called to testify in the house and senate, i presume. ian: we will see. they have been slow in rolling it out. top senatorsd the saying he would not give immunity to general flynn. at least on the account of general flynn, they won't give him immunity. these are not going to go away, these investigation. nor the fbi's investigation. this will hang over the white house beyond the 100 days' mark. some things they are doing has not made the story go away. charlie: it seems they're trying to slow it down. trying to doey nothing and this is a reflection of president trump having said he wanted a better relationship with president putin, than having admiration for him personally?

what the white house is trying to hide, if it is trying to hide anything. ian: on the issue of taxes, they clearly do not want -- all they see is downside by actually releasing it. yes, a lot of people are suspicious, but they have the ability to say fake news, biased media, all the rest. we saw today from the treasury secretary -- there are not many. and said we out said before we are making it clear, under no circumstances are we going to release these taxes. we have been transparent on finances. if i was advising, i would say that is a winning strategy. of p -- spicer saying it is too much to give all the phone records of flynn talked to.

it is unreasonable for him to say that, yet it is a reasonable strategy. trump quite popular among republicans, you can say in a democracy you should not be doing it. but that is true with the conflicts of interest ivanka and jared have with their businesses. i do not think he will do it. but thenot go away, real issue is that it will not make traction with russia. the danger is not so much a smoking gun we will find out in six months. the danger is to the extent putin can cause problems for trump, he is likely to. if there is information that iuld be linked -- leaked, suspect it will start coming out. ugly.ll see it get charlie: then we had erdogan in turkey winning that election,

achieving more authoritarian power. what role does he want to play and how does that affect the united states? as with putin, trump has the idea that erdogan is a good guide to be cozying up to. thatwas after everyone won referendum specifically attacking the west. europe, but the west generally. katty: he called them up to congratulate him. there is something about trump's up session with strong authoritative figures. ian: what is erdogan want? i will say he stole the referendum. points.y 1.5 there were shenanigans around and the media, organizing opposition rallies, none of it was allowed.

you now have opposition parties in turkey saying it is not acceptable, we want to go to the tribunal. erdogan has packed those courts, -- he does not want control unless he wins the election. this will be ugly. a lot depends on what the chinese are prepared to do. a strike is not necessarily an attractive alternative. turning to the iranians and the iranian deal, trump said he would withdraw from that deal. he has not talked about that much. has he changed his mind? katty: the iranian deal is another part of the administration's learning curve. he has not talked about it publicly. but we are a long way from the being " theear deal worst deal america ever signed."

he may have said that about nafta, too. the understanding has been during the course of the last it is a deal he would like to renegotiate if possible. it is not clear he can actually do that because there are other countries involved. away from just pulling america straight out of it. essentiallyy are adhering to the deal. the question always raised, what are you prepared to do about iranian behavior? ian: he has been prepared to put additional sanctions to the iranians. they support of, hezbollah, and the rest. it is clearly an administration taking a tougher position toward iran, the saudi's, the sunni

monarchies and egyptians are much happier with trump than with obama. he shook that hand, it was not merkel, right? katty: a fantastic guy, right? ian: what has he accomplished? the support of authoritarianism? goodso has a really relationship with abe, and that is not authoritarianism. it is based on concern about said i am youre buddy, the first that will come to visit you, i am a major head of state, focuses on the strong military, did not hit him on the economic side. the worst visit he had

with angela merkel. he essence called her to talk about north korea to talk about it is part of the learning curve realizing you do need your allies and that the world is more complicated than you might have thought it was. it was reflected in the called angela merkel. charlie: a chinese national in palm beach said to me that trump listened and listened and listened to xi. ian: it reminded me of when trump went to the oval office and visited obama. he suddenly understood the gravity of the situation and needed to change his operating principles. xi jinping coming to mar-a-lago, same thing. after the meeting, the tweets and all of that -- it may not be presidential, but the idea he cannot like a responsible adult when it is truly required is something we should appreciate. katty: foreign diplomats that

have had dealings with the white house, i am hearing them say, the italian visit, it feels like a more normal white house to deal with. people who were going in and out of that building in comparison to how it felt 97 days ago or whatever it is, there is been a noticeable change. there has been a distinct difference. there is still a major issue in staffing, not enough personnel in the state department. but in terms of the dealings. charlie: thank you for coming, great to see you. ♪ charlie: he is a writer and

director of a new film "the circle," it is an adaptation of best-selling novel. emma watson discovers the dark side of the corporation and the seemingly benevolent cofounder, played by tom hanks, here is a look at the trailer. i am a believable -- believer in the perfectibility of human beings. at the circle, we can find your potential.

when we are our best selves, there is not a problem we cannot call. we can cure any disease, and hunger. imagine the human rights implications. the possibilities are endless. payment. >> you got the job at the circle. >> have a drink, have a good time, and stay excited. you are at the circle. you will get the hang of it, believe me, you are doing fine. >> they would think i was there to clean the toilets. but no one really likes you. >> your work has been exemplary. my dad had an episode and i had the help out. >> is that related to his ms? >> he could come onto the circle's health plan. of theare a valued part

circle, we care about everybody you care about. she has only been with us a few months, but she has made quite an impression. may, do think you behave better or worse when you are being watched? we have cameras in place all over the world right now. we used to go on adventures, have fun, and see things, now it is filtered through this. does this seem ok to you? thank you, give us a sense of what it is saying about high-tech companies. >> sure. it is an adaptation of dave eggers' novel, the journey of a woman in a dead-end job, living with her parents, a millennial adrift who gets her dream job working with a hypothetical tech company that subsumes its

competitors. it is about transforming mae from a dream job to a religion to a glass prison of celebrity wins chee becomes the public face of the company. charlie: she goes from step to step to step, from great love or enthusiasm to something less and that? >> she is a surrogate for us, the audience and our own relationship to technology. she is under a magnifying glass because she is working in a tech company. charlie: what was dave e.u. -- dave eggers trying to tell us? a satire, aiting darkly funny book. he was telling us a lot about the world we have created, the recognizes all of the wonderful things technology -- charlie: the idea we can do everything and solve every problem. >> who doesn't like the idea about going to the moon, understanding the mind, during cancer?

why do these exact same companies also have to monitor data, and our monetize it? why is that part of the transaction? charlie: why do they have to be all-knowing? it helps the market to us, be better consumers, that is one thing. when you decided to make this adaptation to film, it was so big and such a success. what of the challenges and what are the risks? james: a great novel like the circle is a big, unwieldy, ambitious collection of challenging ideas, characters, and plots. to literally adapt this film into a book -- book into a film would've made it a miniseries. for me it was focusing on the central journey of the protagonist. her hopes, dreams, wants, fears, and focusing in on those things to focus more on the character than on the company. charlie: did you write the

screenplay on the spec? james: i did, and then dave and i worked together after that. he was a wonderful collaborator from the very beginning. urging was to not be blindly or literally adhering to the book to read is said his favorite film adaptations were ones that respected the themes of the book had their own sense of invention and understood that novels and films are completely different mediums. charlie: is a satire, horror? james: it is satirical, it has a sense of humor, a dark sense of humor. it is a character study, a drama thriller, of the paranoid conspiracy brady. charlie: today it is more appropriate than when it was written. james: when it came out they were calling it orwellian, and strangely that is what has happened in the world in the last year. whether it is revelation about us being surveilled, or what is

happening in the u.s. -- europe. charlie: or fake news. james: it has really shifted. charlie: who plays god and you does not. james: what god you worship? charlie: how about casting? james: we were fortunate to have emma watson as our lead. i love her, i have seen all of the harry potter films. she is someone they have grown up with and i admire choices she has made both in careers, and her own personal -- she is a political figure, a voice of her generation, speaks her mind. she is a wonderful collaborator. and tom hanks was a dream to have. myself, tom thanks is my favorite actor of all time. "big" was the first film i

watched over and over. i was 10 years old, i had to keep watching it. he is america's most trusted person, one of our favorite actors. image ande of that able to play a role like this, a film,ent version of the he would be a mustache-twirling villain. but he plays someone utterly democratizing the world with social justice. he wants to make information available to people equally. but he is perhaps a fundamentalist. you can see why people would follow tom hanks. indeed, the idea is that these are good ideas but he wants to be the messiah that brings them to us. james: his character is someone that in a different generation would've been at the forefront of any protest movement. someone are deeply believes in equality and technology's

ability to bring it to us. he is at the forefront of a company making a lot of money as well, which makes that idealism and utopianism muddy. charlie: and makes you think you are all-powerful. imes: i am not a technophobe, love technology, have plenty of friends at work at tech companies. but there is this sense i have gotten visiting them, it is like being at an undergraduate student protest at times. there is something idealistic that a cynic could say is naive, lacks experience. the difference is, if you are at a company worth billions of dollars, you can really impose your will on the world, for better or for worse. james: there is the threat right there. charlie: let's take a look, this is when she meets with tom hanks and patton oswald for the first time. >> we want to tell you an idea. but before we do, is there anything you want to tell us?

>> i have been here before. >> lies get us in trouble, the things we hide. i know you have been in here before. now that i know your secret, do you feel better or worse? >> better, relieved, actually. a believer in the perfectibility of human beings. when we are our best selves, there is not a problem we cannot solve. we can cure any disease and end hunger. without secrets, without withholding of information, we can find our potential. when you look at this and the idea you're being seen, what was the impact of that on

you? james: it is a great question. one could argue, some of the characters in this film, it makes you your best self. when we have seen these ideas put into practice, i think of theies i have heard about night of the cold war, when they have the greatest collection of data on their citizens known to of theughly 1/3 population were informants to the government. everyone would be on their best behavior. it made them their best selves, makes for a superficial way -- charlie: the lives of others. james: a great film. in terms of making the was there a sense -- what was the risk you are trying to avoid? james: in films that are slightly speculative or deal

with technology, sometimes they strategize the idea of the future. the gadgetsshize when they should focus on the characters and relationships in psychology of the people. if you cannot see yourself in the characters it is just a lot of shiny objects. charlie: you saw yourself as mae . james: absolutely. film from the position of not judging the main character. even if i wildly disagree with their bad decisions, i want to at least give them an opportunity to articulate themselves and empathize with them and try to understand them. in the case of mae it was easy. easy to see myself in the parts of her that her idealistic, but the part of her that is desperately afraid of not making her mark on the world, feeling like she is not connected enough to people around her, the desire to be known, that essential loneliness

she thinks might be cured by being connected more and more, those parts of her i think are very human and a lot of people if they are honest with themselves -- james: are these opinions about technology or human ambition? both, technology can give a platform to who we are, better or worse. it can amplify your humanity, whatever that means. the aspirational qualities that it is use, connectedness, a pseudo-spiritual bent. it is us trying to make better versions of ourselves through technology. charlie: what is the journey from coming in and recognizing there is something about this , toe and not accepting it where you are accepting it and are fully in? what is that transition? she got a dream job.

i do not know anyone in 2017 that would not want to work for a company like this. people i worked with made go to peace corps, but when you have health care for you and your family, free concerts, free food, the best and smartest minds coming in, everyone would want that. mae has really lucked out, won the lottery in that regard. at the noose slowly tightens. there is a doctrine, a pseudo-spiritual bent to it, a colt of thought. a groupthink and a pressure to share more. james: do they pull her away from friendships and family? james: she does it to herself. because why would you want to leave one life is that good at work? that is perhaps one of the great ironies of surveillance and privacy. we have assumed or in the entertainment we have watched it would be the government that is surveilling us, taking our information. but in fact, we have been

complicit and happily, happily given up all of our information to ease our standard of living. charlie: did you seek cap conversations with people who are living in the world that you are writing? james: the primary resource was dave's book. i talked to attend the friends that work at these companies, i visited some of them. there is a scene in the film goes in for her job interview, a series of seemingly schizophrenic questions. b who is your favoriteeatle? would you go on a date with me? how would you explain this two-year grandmother, who does not use technology? it is not the answer but the thought process. inanity of the questions, some of these came from my friends that were to there. charlie: tell me about the worldview of the tom hanks character and mae.

james: mae in the beginning of the film says she is afraid of unfulfilled potential. she has met someone that believes in limitless potential, the ability of technology to just share everything, and that we can meet it together communally. he believes all technology should be shared. it is a very democratic and radical -- charlie: helps you realize your potential. james: a notion born at of desires. by the end of the film she has both adopted that mindset and taken it perhaps to the next level. she does not have the memory we -- have.goal she knows a much different existence under children will know.

what is your moment of awakening? james: she makes a mistake, she is challenged by a friend of hers in the film. a 25-year-old who works with his hands, a hipster who akes deer antler chandeliers, uddite. he called her out on not being honest with herself and she goes out and makes a big mistake, is arrested, and a most guys -- almost dies. she is potentially going to lose her job and then she volunteers to be a guinea pig for the a camera andear document her life, share everything all the time. charlie: this is mae broadcasting her life to millions of people.

>> good morning, everyone. the sun is shining and i definitely need my coffee. we are in my third week of transparency and we're up to 2 million viewers. did i tell you i am not a morning person? viewers -- hihose mom, hi dad. say hello to everyone. >> hi, circle. >> we match. >> this is great, very stylish. goodbye. writer, youery good also did david foster wallace.

the challenge there was? james: obviously he spoke with you, and -- an interview i admire. , there was adapting a desire to get things right. case, davidin that lipsky, a stranger to david foster wallace, had written about his subjective experience in his company as someone who admired, from a place of insecurity, fear him a little. understoodr wallace the game being played because he wrote the exact sort of profile david lipsky did. it was like they were performing for each other. thanas a little younger the other but perhaps one of the life the other person had. onrlie: i get more comments

that interview, it is in the top five of 25 years doing this program. the top five, maybe because of what he meant to them. maybe because he did so few interviews. james: having watched that interview 50 times, what strikes me, you seem to get along so well. at a certain point he begins talking about movies. he was reviewing the film. seems to be a moment of recognition, and my just about to critique the movie? he is a tough reviewer and then apologizes in a midwestern way. you seem to admire the quality of his mind in a way that is wonderful to watch. charlie: great to have you, much success with "the circle." ♪ ♪

betty: looking for a way out? the ecb and boj planning for the long term and questions about quantitative easing. yvonne: stocks in the dollar were little changed among a flurry of policy had lands on everything from nasa to health care. betty: earnings listing tech headlines are high. it rose after hours. both flipping. yvonne: the first 100 days, president trump's list of