♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." trump ispresident heading overseas on a nine-day trip to five countries and three summit meetings. it begins in saudi arabia where the president will deliver a speech about islam. he goes to islam, vatican city, belgium, and back to italy. it is the first foreign trip of his presidency. administration officials are for training -- portraying it as a chance for americans to engage globally. is also a chance for president trump to get away from mounting controversy at home. we turn to ian bremmer and michael hanna. welcome. good to see you again.

what does the president hope to accomplish and what is within the realm of reason? >> aside from creating decent headlines for people that want to see him, that is important by itself, let's remember the biggest success trump has had in his presidency has been the meeting was xi jinping. he would not expect foreign policy to be a big deal. but at the end of dead day -- the day, expectations were low. he said we got along famously and will work together. we will see how long that lasts. the first trip is making, he is going to saudi arabia and israel, the two leaders of to seen allies happiest someone after obama. they will treat him very well and do their best to focus on issues at hand useful to them in a bilateral relationship, whether it is about better security cooperation or major arms deals or showing we are good partners and allies.

they will help to make trump look more presidential. i think if trump can come away wholeot just that but the nine days looking like he is engaging in foreign policy as president, the trappings, the context will be much more of a win than anything he could be accomplishing in the united states. charlie: he's also going to see a lot of leaders from muslim countries. he will make the speech about islam. is it a chance for him to try to make amends for what many people saw was an anti-muslim policy and campaign rhetoric? >> to a degree. the thing to remember is for egyptians,rship and the thing that really matters is convergence on their key priorities. islam that came up during the campaign, that is not high on their list. they care about iran. sisi cares about

other things. clearly, there is this issue of what he can possibly say on this fraught topic he has a long, constipated history on. i assume this will not be a theological discussion. this will be a lowest common denominator kind of speech talking about militant islam, maybe talking about iran as well. >> certainly. this is not going to be talking very much about specifics. i think it will be talking about the fight against isis, dealing with militant islam, talking about moderation. it will not be something that gets into specifics i imagine. charlie: what can he get from this? >> aside from the fact they are a stalwart ally? there is not a lot the saudis have to offer the united states. charlie: how about boots on the

ground in syria? >> not going to happen. the saudis are up to their eyeballs in a failing war in yemen and trying to extricate themselves. part of the problem is trump is starting with countries that tactically want to work with him, but long-term the future of american interests is not in the middle east. america first is about doing less, extricating yourself from failed wars over a long time. this is the fight between steve bannon and h.r. mcmaster and jim mattis in the administration as to what kind of policy you are going to have. the future is china, asia, perhaps the transatlantic relationship, latin america. his first big trip, he is going with the best allies that really like him. one of the reasons they really like him is because they were concerned the united states saw them as history. at the end of the day, the desire of obama to balance iran

against the gulf states was done because obama did not want as much entrenched engagement in the part of the world where the u.s. did not need as much and did not see any wins. if trump is going to say i'm engaged with my friends the saudis, he can get them to buy a lot in terms of american hardware. that is a benefit for american multinationals. if you ask me in 10 years, are the saudis going to have a lot to offer the american strategically? you look at the future of saudi arabia and say probably not. we don't need the energy. the government has enormous problems. they will be lucky if they can maintain domestic stability. they are losing geopolitical influence in the region. charlie: why is that? because they do not need their money? >> because iran is getting stronger. because the saudis have to diversify away from being a petroleum-based economy. charlie: that is the big plan of the deputy crown prince. >> it is incredibly difficult

for them to do given the educational system, the lack of control he has over the royal family, and how late they are starting. if we wanted to bet on anyone in the region individually, he would be a good individual to bet on. but saying the saudis are our friends and we are going to work with a long-term, especially as an american president who sees islam is a problem and threat an way to play to his base, i don't see it as sustainable. this will be a good trip. these will be good meetings. in a couple of years when you have a bunch of saudis and their kids having a harder time with trips to the united states, being in university, t.s.a. shakedowns, this sort of stuff, they feel it is harder for them to operate and travel to america, and god for bid there are terrorist activities from this part of the world against american assets in the region, i

think it will be harder to maintain this as one of the long-term stable relationships the u.s. has. one thing they had against president obama is they did not believe in the iran nuclear deal. >> trump said it was a horrible deal and he would rip it up. he did rip up some other deals like the trans-pacific partnerships. on iran, he chose not to. he said we are pulling out. in the case of the iran deal, he said it is horrible. he has put more sanctions against the iranians but is holding up the deal, in part because i think he has heard from a number of advisors in the u.s. and the region and in israel and in saudi arabia that if you unilaterally pull out of this deal, all you are doing is empowering the iranians because they are already producing more oil. other countries will still do business with them. and they will start producing nuclear capacity. right now, at least inspectors are going in. even rex tillerson said two

weeks ago, so far the iranians are living up to the terms. i think it was intelligent. the same way trump backed away from saying i'm not going to call the chinese currency manipulators. that was smart. he backed away from saying nato no longer makes sense. no longer obsolete. he has also backed away from the idea the nuclear deal with iran is horrible and needs to be ripped up. those thingsl of the foreign-policy establishment in the united states can breathe more easily that policy normalized. charlie: because the israelis and saudis are on the same side , that somehowues these countries may come out of this with additional motivation to do something about israelis and palestinians? >> i think from the saudi

perspective, they would clearly want something to be done. i think nobody is under any illusions now that this is solvable. this is intractable. i think the saudis would like to see small, tangible steps. i do think people have gotten runaway notions about the possibilities of what could happen between the saudis and israelis. as their interests have converged, a lot of interactions have happened. but in secret. there is a lot of intelligence sharing. the national security establishments have gotten a lot closer. they have warmer relations in private. there are real limits as to how far that can get you. i think this administration is thinking a lot about this outside in approach. this is not something that can really change the dynamics of the situation. it is true israel/palestine is not the center of gravity in the region. there are greater concerns. but it still matters and places

real limits on what even autocratic leaders can do, particularly in public. charlie: what we know about the iranian elections? >> they matter but the supreme leader matters more. that is the transition that will determine if iran is a country the west can work with. in honglike a place kong, the only people they get to run for the presidency in iran are self-selected by the guardians council. it is very limited. people like ahmadinejad, the former president. i think we are going to find out shortly whether or not we have a continued reformist in the iranian context who is playing a tough role against the americans and most of the west or we have someone that will start trying to close the iranian economy. i think that will limit their

economic opportunities in the region. either way, iran is the principal antagonist for key american allies in the gulf going forward. that will only continue. the russian issue matters a lot. juste way to saudi arabia, 24 hours ago, trump decides he will order another round of strikes against syrian rebels supported the regime -- supporting the regime. you look at the timing. he announces it when xi jinping is having cake. this time, they announce it on his way over to saudi arabia. the russians immediately say we have a serious problem with this. we condemn this american attack. the closer the americans are getting to promises with the saudis, the more the russians and iranians will have challenges. in russia issue will not go away in any manifestation. the middleope, not east, and not for trump at home in the united states. charlie: macron won the french election.

does that send a message that europe and the european economic commission is stronger than we thought? >> i don't know if i would say stronger. charlie: you cannot win elections by saying you will dismantle it. >> several years back looking at the vote share le pen was able to garner, we would be shocked. this as a kind of looking back moment. these forces are strong throughout europe. they failed in france. but the underlying issues and sentiments are going to be with us, not just in europe. charlie: globalization. wages. >> inequality, falling standards of living, dealing with immigration and the kind of stresses that puts. that is unique in the european

contest, slightly different from our own. those things are not changing. >> i think that is exactly right. the hardest part of trump's trip is going to be dealing with the french and german leadership because as much as he said nato is important, at no point has he said we need a strong europe. the transatlantic relationship matters. was supporting brexit. he was nominally supporting le pen. macron and merkel deeply mistrust and have been very public about it so many of trump's positions on climate or the immigration important alliance since world war ii. trump has a lot to do before he will feel comfortable with these important allies who feel vulnerable with your american relationship. charlie: back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

charlie: investigation of ties between russia and the trump campaign picked up new urgency this week. robert lawler is a former director of the ei -- the f.b.i. on wednesday he was named special counsel. he served in democratic and republican administrations. he was an attorney in private practice and served as chief of staff to robert mueller during his time at the f.b.i. i'm pleased to have him on this program. welcome. describe the robert lawler you know -- robert mueller you know.

>> there is no one i have worked with i admire more than bob mueller. he is an american hero. he is dedicated to the task at hand, cares about getting it right. charlie: what is his new role as special counsel? role, he has been appointed under a provision rarely used. some people remember the independent counsel statute. that was different. thehe end of the day, independent counsel will report to the house of representatives their findings and recommendations of impeachment. this is not as independent. instead, it reports to the now acting attorney general for this matter, rod rosenstein. charlie: the attorney general has recused himself. >> he became the acting attorney general.

under this statute, the special counsel still reports to him but has a degree of independence no other prosecutor would have. charlie: he is handling the justice department's investigation. >> he's acting as a prosecutor handling the justice department's investigation. charlie: he will have available to him all the information the f.b.i. had and anyone else. >> i would expect he would continue to work with the f.b.i. and investigators and get information from other government agencies. he would have the ability to convene a cranny the less grand a grand jury, seek search warrants, do interviews. charlie: we will have a lot of investigations going on. committee,lligence the house intelligence committee. the justice department. and what else? >> it is important to think about what the investigation is and is not. one thing about bob mueller as director and prosecutor is if you give him a mission, he will do it to the best of his

ability. but he is also not going to go outside the lines of that mission. i would not expect at the end of the day for him to do anything not prescribed by the regulation which calls for -- i do think there will be a report but the report will focus around whether or not to bring criminal charges. if there are criminal charges, don't expect him to be talking about anything outside the four corners of the criminal complaint or indictment. charlie: lindsey graham, the senator from south carolina, said this at the meeting with rod rubenstein. he said this seems to be a criminal, not a counterintelligence investigation. do you agree? >> we will see. there is a broad ranging counterintelligence investigation and rightly so because it is important not to lose sight of the fact a foreign power tried to undermine our electoral system. they attacked democracy. not one party or another, democracy.

it is consistent with what russia has been doing for years in europe. we saw them do it before they attacked our democracy and we have seen them do it afterwards in terms of attacking the french elections. that is the threat looming. that counterintelligence investigation needs to proceed. we also need to think about that as a policy going forward, how we protect ourselves if they try to do it again. that is not bob mueller's mission. his mission is to determine whether or not crimes have been committed. wordie: collision is the -- collusion is the word bandied around. >> it is to investigate crimes -- charlie: perjury. >> obstruction, perjury, any other crime that might arise out of that was the mandate in his memo. charlie: help me understand why these investigations will not collide with each other. they need the same witnesses for

the most part. >> we will have to see. i know when i was at the department of justice, we would weigh in with the relevant committee if they were doing an investigation. hold on, don't interview this witness. don't ask for this document because that might undermine our ability to do the investigation and hold someone responsible. we tried to navigate it if it was an important issue where there were clear public policy reasons why congress was holding oversight orar intelligence reasons, so they could proceed but in a way that would not prevent us from seeing if there was a charge to be brought. charlie: what did you think of the memo written by rod rosenstein? >> it is always hard when you are sitting outside and don't have the full set of facts of the person making the decision. i know how hard it can be in those spots. i think it is critical what came out came out. the american people need to

that by that the basis statute and custom has been independent from the political branches. charlie: the president said he was intending to fire him anyway. >> he said he was intending to fire him before the memo was written. he also said one of the reasons was the russia investigation, which is why i think it was the correct decision. you need somebody independent. charlie: he was thinking about the russia investigation when he fired him? >> as soon as he said that, it became vital to preserve the integrity of our institutions to have special counsel take a look at it. cannot be considered responsible for the chain of command after that. charlie: some trump people have suggested what he meant was he expected the russia investigation would be to controversy that has flared up after this. not necessarily that he was

thinking about whether this would stop the russia investigation. is a former prosecutor, i cannot pass judgments from outside. to recuse is based on a real conflict or the appearance of a conflict. at least there was the appearance of conflict, which is why i think it is great washington's indispensable man has been called back into duty again, bob mueller, and is fulfilling that role. there is no one more trusted across the aisle based on a long career as a marine, a federal prosecutor, local prosecutor doing homicides, and f.b.i. director, then bob mueller. charlie: what is his relationship with james comey? >> i've always thought they were friends. they are people steeped in traditions. charlie: not a protége --not mentor/protége? >> no. they are very different people. bob mueller, i will give you some examples.

every worked for him, day, he were a button-down white shirt, red tie, rarely took his jacket off even in the back office. when director comey took over the f.b.i., he made a point in the morning briefing on terrorism his first day as f.b.i. director and i did a double take because he showed up wearing a blue shirt. not the most traditional blue. i had never seen it f.b.i. director out of a white shirt. they have different personalities. mueller,ping, director before he went to congress, would prep with him for hours. he went through the materials carefully. he is not a casual public speaker. director comey is one of the only witnesses i have seen testify before congress who gave

his opening statement without reading it. he did it with no notes. two different personalities. the thing they did have in common is i think they were steeped in justice department traditions and a deep understanding of the special role of the f.b.i. charlie: what did the rank-and-file f.b.i. agents think about james comey, especially after he was fired? >> there is a lot of discussion about that. i respect director mueller more than anyone in the world. he was respected in the f.b.i., but i do not know that he was loved. he is not warm and fuzzy. use often barking. charlie: he had to make hard decisions. >> he was in a difficult time of transition for the f.b.i. as we moved to transform from being primarily a law enforcement agency to one whose job was to prevent acts from occurring like terrorism. director comey when he went

around, he placed a lot of emphasis on improving morale and climate after wrenching change. and he was beloved by the agents. comey was beloved by the agents in the field. charlie: a lot of people did not like him and thought he made a lot of mistakes. in your judgment and observation? >> there may be many who disagreed with some of the decisions he made. i will tell you something else, charlie. one thing comey believes in deeply was measuring how people felt. they put out a climate survey constantly within the f.b.i. i would be curious to see the results. what are the questions comey will have to answer? if you were there is a lead interrogator, what would you want to know? >> there are different aspects. one might be what type of interview or questions would you ask in relation to a criminal

investigation. the other would be the broader mandate of the house and senate about what is happening here between the executive branch and the director of the f.b.i. it would be a different set of questions. i think at the end of the day, it is important to get as much transparency as we can without damaging any sources or methods. the question is so critical to the functioning of our democracy, to make sure people leave this episode feeling they know what occurred and the f.b.i. is going to operate with the integrity it always has going forward. charlie: if you are the chief of staff for the f.b.i. director where you were and the president said i want you guys to go easy on this investigation, would you tell somebody? isn't that a clear obstruction of justice, if there was intent? >> i'm always hesitant to

declare something a crime without doing the investigation. i cannot think of something we would take more seriously, and it did not occur in my tenure, that ifthe president -- the president told the director of the f.b.i. explicitly do not investigate somebody because they are my friend, because it will look bad, whatever the reason. charlie: red flag. >> a total red flag. it is hard to imagine it happened. we will learn more about what did or did not happen later. charlie: we talked about these issues before. turning to the recent cyber attack, it seems to be happening all the time now. >> we did talk about it before. one of the things we talked about was ransomware and the blended threats.

you don't know overseas if it is a crook or nation-state or terrorist group. we are at a moment of great vulnerability. we have not done what we need to do to protect our system. charlie: what is that? >> two thoughts on this. one, we moved almost everything we value from analog to digital space in the last 25 years. we connected it through a protocol never designed to be secure in the first place. we did so without thinking about risk, what bad guys might do. that is why -- charlie: did the bad guys get hold of the protocol? >> they know how the internet works. they know where the gaps are. the capability of nation-states. there is no internet connected system in the world that is safe from a dedicated adversary, the that russia or an organized criminal group. you can do risk mitigation. the stuff connected to the internet, not safe. there was a dramatic example with this wanna cry because it

is not even the best malware. it affected hundreds of thousands of companies. it was not particularly well-designed version of ransomware. they've got to be the world's worst crooks because -- or they had a different intent because they infected all of these people's computers and maximized law enforcement's attention making it likely someone goes after who did it and catches them. >> they made less than $100,000 it seems so far, because if you pay them off with this ransomware, you do not get your data back. people are not going to pay them. charlie: i had asked a number of people, do you think this was the act of a nationstate? other non-nationstate after, and they all said non-nationstate after, and then later, they said north korea. >> i think it was too early to

tell. presidedwe over when i was a justice, there is the sony case about north korea, and in that case, use on north korea attempting to change the content of the movie, but you have also heard the deputy director of the national security say nationstates are bank robbers now and most people think north korea is responsible for the attacks on the banking institutions and the reason they were doing that was to make a buck, not a political point. nowonly are we not prepared , we are about to transform as we move from the internet of things, and connect things like the first pacemakers that literally were put into people's bodies, into their hearts, and they were not encrypted. a 12-year-old could kill these devices that are in people's hearts, and then they try to patch and six the system. as we move toward the internet of things, it is vital that on the front end, we focus on

security by design. we do not just roll it out and then think about the consequences. charlie: we think the north koreans are pretty good. >> the scary thing is, charlie, they are pretty good. they are not that great for you think about how much damage they have caused. charlie: the directions -- russians are considered to be as good as anybody? timothy: >> as good as anyone. the united states and russia israel capable, antenna is getting there. charlie: john carlin, good to see you. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪

i've spent my life planting a size-six, non-slip shoe into that door. on this side, i want my customers to relax and enjoy themselves. but these days it's phones before forks. they want wifi out here. but behind that door, i need a private connection for my business. wifi pro from comcast business. public wifi for your customers. private wifi for your business. strong and secure. good for a door. and a network. comcast business. built for security. built for business.

controversial media titan had been a mainstay of the american media for more than four decades. he is perhaps best known for launching fox news in 1996 with financial backing from rupert murdoch. , a newssly combative network that would combine politics and entertainment, it's loyal right-wing audience made fox news and empire or you will set down as chairman following allegations of sexual harassment. in a statement yesterday, rubric murdoch described him as a brilliant broadcaster who played a huge role in shaping america's media over the last 30 years.

joining me now is gabe sherman, author of "the loudest voice in the room: how the brilliant, bombastic roger ailes made fox news." very interesting piece about roger ailes in today's times. i am pleased to have both of them at the table. let us do this in the beginning. thingsassume all of the that tainted roger ailes' career had not been there. what would be his legacy? politically,hink his legacy is creating this correct moment we live in. he created donald trump wash america by fusing politics and entertainment and making those values paramount to winning elections, so donald trump, sort of one of the tragedies of roger ailes plush life is his downfall life isoger ailes;

a tv manall by putting in the white house. trendcertainly began the mediaide and split the environment where now we have alternative facts and different views of reality. charlie: they were there. >> it was creeping in. death panels would get covered. .irther is a -- birtherism covered by everybody. charlie: the tea party? >> they fostered the tea party. of wherees new kind there was a line, so when sean hannity becomes the face of the tea party, eventually, it is too much for roger ailes, and he can pull them back. roger tried to walk this fair

and balanced line, where they did news and really far right at times opinions. >> that was part of his genius and the propaganda dimension of fox news was knowing where to just push against that wine. they canpull back so answer their critics, especially in the mainstream media to say we are fair and balanced when they were delivering a message all along to their audience. charlie: and the message was? >> the message was that liberals and beliefs were keeping the common man down. the fox audience is the trump voter. charlie: what happens to fox news without roger ailes? >> that is a tremendous question. what has happened since is that bill left because of a similar sexual-harassment suit and then megyn kelly left. so where does this -- roger was too smart to follow one straight formula, but the people who worked for him new how to make it a formula and run

fox as he sought. they are in a reinvention period and it is a big "if." they are now trailing both cnn and msnbc in the audience. i cannot remember a time really since the iraq war that fox news has not been the dominant player in cable primetime. charlie: he had the capacity to create stars in a big way. bill o'reilly and sean hannity and megyn kelly. >> there is the upside of this ailes was a guru and he would take past personalities like bill o'reilly and reinvent them as the avatar of the working man's right. the downside of that is that ailes required ultimate loyalty from his talent, and it really cult ofld -- a personality.

culture oflly this silence that he created that unfortunately led to this pervasive culture of harassment that we only saw come to the public fore after gretchen carlson's lawsuit. i mean, to me -- charlie: he was feeling all powerful? i can do what i want? ofi mean, this was a pattern behavior, unfortunately, that happened throughout his career. i interviewed women on the record who recounted these experiences and you could argue it is a different era, mad men, 1960's era, where public policy in a workplace was different. he thought he was all-powerful, and to me, it is a story of a man consumed by ambition and ofating a cult personality affects where he thought he was untouchable. roger ailes even stood up to rupert murdoch's children. with them. clashed

rupert cited with roger ailes over his family, and that is a testament to the power that ailes had. charlie: he said roger does not have to report to anyone else. >> and he would go to rupert and threatened to quit and say we will give you a new contract. charlie: he was providing a huge percentage of fox's revenue. >> huge, but also gabe's reporting of his book, by all accounts, made roger -- gabe went to tell the story, and roger became very bunkered end. over the years, as he became more bunkered in, what we're hearing now is that roger over the years became paranoid. just was not the same person who created this network. you know, people will debate this for years to come, but things shifted on roger ailes really bad. charlie: before he left, what was his relationship with donald trump? before he lost his job?

>> they were speaking more frequently than people know. one might say that he was pushing his network behind trump. the network part of it was already there. megyn kelly was out there, his biggest star, fighting with trump regularly, and his new people were kind of covering trump in a straight ahead way, but there is no question that his closeness with trump was an issue within the network. >> this comes to jim's point. ailes after his force-out -- after ailes is forced out of fox news, he became a formal unpaid advisor to the campaign and ailes gets in the room with steve bannon, reince priebus, and these guys start looking around and realizes ailes is just telling old war stories and fall, me for his down and the advisors are looking at their shoes and realizing this guy is not adding a lot here. that was the only time ailes was

in the room. he was pushed to the margins of trump world. is some extra interviews i did with roger ailes. i knew him for a long time. most of these are from the early 2000. here they are. [video playing] charlie: tell me what the formula is that has led fox news channel to be considered here to stay? i hire good people. when i left cnbc, and i had started the small channel, "america's talking," 82 people left the system to join me at fox even though there was no network. andthey were good people, so i was able in six months to put together a cable channel because i had very trusted people. five vice president, several people who really do their jobs. i was able to focus on watching

the channel, which is a huge task. we have 30% of the resources of cnn. cnn has 4000 people and we had 1000. it all comes down to people and a vision. ♪ the 1982 painting of a for $110.5 million at sotheby's last night. it became the sixth most extensive work ever sold at an auction. earlier this week, i spoke with the gallery owner, who held a record with his sale of "untitled devil" last year to the same buyer. here is our conversation. let us start with the obvious. how did you go from being a lawyer to a gallery owner? >> well, it has been a long and somewhat circuitous path. when i got out of college, i got

asknow andy and iran around a 20-year-old, thanks to a friend, and she was a dear friend of andy's. the art world was kind of glamorous and exciting for me and as soon as i professionally had the wherewithal, i began to collect, and collect what i knew, and the people and you and the moment i was excited about. charlie: that makes you a collector, but not more. now, you have two galleries. i have rich in two books on collecting. i wrote for the observer for four years, which i enjoyed. the art market is so exciting. charlie: what is the art market like today? >> we have been on a bull run since late 1990's. tear, really.n a when we have the recession in 2008, the lehman crisis, and all of that, it was my perception that we would really take a break for a couple of years.

toause it is usually two three years when the market takes upon, but in this case, 2009 was a weak moment. you could have jumped in and 2010, a basquiat, but by we were back on a tear, and we have been really in a rising art market since 2010. a lot of new people came into the game, a lot of different people came into the game, and prices have continued to move. charlie: how are they different? guest: the prices are higher and we have brazilians, a lot of asians, chinese buyers, indonesians, malaysians, we have europeans andthe american collectors, but i would say the art market has become really globalized in a whole new way. charlie: and stretches across the world in terms of not only who is buying, but where they are buying? they aresolutely, but buying mostly in new york and london. you have markets all over the world, but the asians have been

very strong. at one point, the brazilians were big buyers, but now brazil is a weak economy, so they have tailed off, but china has picked up. this painting sold to an amazing japanese man who became andtuated with basquiat found his dream come true. one of the greatest basquiat's in the world, something he could buy. charlie: what is interesting to me is if you look at the one coming up, and -- what is selling? what do you expect will be? does the art market have -- does it have in a sense the kind of ebb and flow of who is popular? guest: absolutely. the fashion swings are huge. the idea that art is forever is a fantasy. i mean, impressionist and modern is soft and the contemporary market has been on a bull run for over a decade.

fashions change. if you look at basquiat, warhol, the work was virtually unsellable. it reached over $100 million at auction. basquiat has been slowly growing, but back in the 1990's, you could buy it for nothing. relatively. he died in 1988, very sadly, of drug overdose. very young, too. i think he was 28 years old. charlie: has taste evolved, too? [applause] guest: is it really taste or fashion? and what is the difference? charlie: in the end, is art fashion? guest: what is interesting about is a factor of different factors. between the museums, collectors, writers, critics, and the artists themselves, all of this comes into play. there are definitely trends. right now, we have been in a trend for monochromatic art and

away from figurative, for example. but that will in time reversed, and there are always outliers and exceptions to the rule. people like to say it is fashion and dismiss it, but the truth of the matter is everything is fashion. internet stocks valuations are whenon, uber is a fashion in one second, maybe the whole thing could disappear. everything is subject to fashion. this jacket, this shirt, this room. charlie: not this room. [applause] -- [laughter] roger: >> people like to use that to say art is only fashion. charlie: what is art? guest: artist history, it is part of our collective cultural history, so in that sense, it is is forever.at we will always have art and art will always be an important ingredient of our society. charlie: there is also this new term, art advisor. [laughter] charlie: you may be one of the. well? guest: what is an art advisor?

it is kind of like the idea if you need a financial advisor to divers if i your portfolio, so now you need an art advisor to diversify your collection. it is also the idea that you cannot really trust the dealers because the dealers are trying to sell you their stuff, so you need an advisor to go between yourself and all the different gallery and sort of cherry pick what is best for you in your financial portfolio, which is your art investment. the truth is, art advisors have been around. when new people coming to town, into the art market, let us say, they need someone to show them around, and people have come to me for advice, but i do not profess to just strictly stick to art advisory. it has become a booming industry, and it is a bit like the yoga world. there are few legitimate perhaps, who can instruct you and bring you into

the good deals, but for the most part, everyone has hung a shingle, and everyone is an art advisor. charlie: what determines the success of the auction houses? guest: we do not really know now, do we? it is impossible. it is a theater, and the auction is a theater. every option is a theater. .e can see through the numbers we know what sells, what does not sell, but we do not really know to whom. we do not know what deals were necessarily done. payments can, the be slow. some people pay on time. .ome people perhaps never pay but that is the nature of the beast. i mean, this is the art world after all, not the financial world. if you look on wall street, i used to work on the trading desk at oppenheimer and we had sales deals all the time. the thing about the art desk is we could short a deal, chinese it, bet that the deal was going

to fall apart. ownart market has a long market. to put: most people buy on display. i have heard of people who put paintings in storage. guest: absolutely. it is a huge thing now. people buying paintings and putting them in the freeport so they don't pay any taxes. this city is full of foreigners who come in and avail themselves of our markets and our city. charlie: a very good piece of art never goes down. it's of the will be sold to more and more demanding buyers. guest: some have fallen by the wayside. look at the great leaders of the 1980's. they are not in fashion by now. charlie: what determines supply and demand? guest: zeitgeist. there is a zeitgeist and a field. the zeitgeist is a combination of dealers, collectors, and the

real world in life. i do not think that warhol's work was as important in the 1980's as it is now, but the world went in his direction. he foretold the media. foretold the internet, in a sense, the idea that imagery can take us from one place and put in another place, and y, and the importance of marilyn monroe. it grew and grew and grew. after his that. that is -- after his death. that is what made it important, what happened in the future. in a moment, we cannot always know. the future will tell. a very strange man, andy warhol. i am certainly not one of his best friends, but he would just -- charlie: you knew him. guest: i knew him. he would just say "great, wow, wonderful." he was a camouflage figure. always had a camera. once or i met him

twice. always had a camera. guest: when i was a 20-year-old in new york, he was more famous than his work. his work sort of, kind of, has fallen by the wayside. charlie: at that time? but grown significantly since then. people upon him one of the three or four greatest painters of the 20th century. guest: we have + warhol -- we have picasso and we have warhol. the entire art market is made up of picasso and warhol. that is 50 percent of the market. everything else shares the rest. the picasso market is just billions of dollars a year globally, and picasso alone represents, i don't know what the number is. year dependinge on what sells, but can be 20% of the overall market. take a look at damien hirst, 2007. he went to zero.

now, he is crawling back and people are talking about whether or not he's going to make a comeback or not. that is the fashion. charlie: one collective can make an artist, can they not? guest: one collector, yes. someone can come in and invest and collect and make it happen, but other people have to come to the party. charlie: you cannot just do it by yourself? inott: no, francoise p has been a huge collector, a great investor, a very smart man. he can buy all the things in the world and have a show at the whitney, but at the end of the day, lots of collectors have to come in and other galleries have to come in to convince the world that this is art that is here to stay. charlie: what do you expect for what is happening this week? guest: this is going to be an exciting week because we have got one great collection, the

spiegel collection. what is good about this is not necessarily the prices but the freshness. what is fresh is really more and more important, and that is what has changed somewhat. charlie: we have asked this question often. what does it mean to have a great eye? you. think much about it. you look at me like i do not even believe in the idea of having a good eye, because it is all about the market and commerce. guest: it is to understand what the artist was about, what the artist intended, what they were trying to do, trying to express, and the relevance of what that means today. i do believe in a great eye. people with a great eye often do well in collecting. i have done well with my eyes. why do you like it? why do you like this one? i can tell you that is a fake, not right. i just know it. charlie: thank you for coming. it is great to have you. thank you for joining us. see you next time.

♪

yvonne: asia-pacific stocks are seeing rising after wall street was lifted by oil, and global equities at an all-time high. we are watching developments right now in greater manchester. >> that is right. president trump takes his message to israel, saying he sees hopeful signs of middle east peace. >> tuesday will bring the present's budget request. congress will see where the cuts have to be made. anchor: digging deep. rio tinto is the latest to