♪ announcer: from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: we begin this evening with a look events surrounding the trump administration. angela merkel this -- express -- at the u.s. as an ally. this, after trump's refusal to recommit to the parents -- the paris climate deal. trump criticized germany via trade surplus. he blamed fake news for critical news about his administration. the washington post reported,

jared kushner was being investigated by the fbi for a series of meetings he held with russian officials as part of their probe into alleged interference into the election. the new york times reported says -- -- reported this may be mark mazzetti joins us from washington. lionel barber of the financial times joints me. know?what do we what is it we want to know about jared kushner and these conversations he had with the russian ambassador and the how would wer, and like to define them? mark: there are a lot of things we would want to know. what would be the purpose of the conversations? what was discussed? what each person wanted from each other, what the russians were interested in, what kushner was interested in, why was this being done outside of the normal

diplomatic channels? normally, when a president gets elected or a candidate gets elected, there is a system in place during the transition with the state department giving briefings to the president-elect . the apparatus of the state department is available to the president-elect to set up phone calls with foreign leaders. that is the way things normally worked during the transition. in this case, it wasn't just with russia, the trump administration was unique in going around that apparatus. whether it would be to place a phone call with the leader of taiwan and other foreign leaders, they would call in the early days after the election, calling into the switchboard at trump tower to try to reach president-elect trump. why was this done outside normal channels? the heart of this is, what was jared kushner seeking from both

circuit kiss leeco -- sergey k islyak? and what did they want from kushner? charlie: why was mr. gore called -- mr. gorkov their? lionel: we reported -- mark: we reported the meeting and we knew it came after a meeting with the ambassador. when we approached the white house, we asked why was one related to the other? they said that one had but theyed the other, didn't say why. we believe that the meeting with orkov was designed so kushner could have a direct channel to moscow, to seek someone with an ear to vladimir putin.

. is part of it. there is more we would want to know about the meeting. why has this meeting with a russian banker, whose bank is under u.s. economic sanctions, and what would be the reason for not disclosing that on your security clearance form, which jared kushner didn't do? --rlie: did jerod kushner did jerod kushner acknowledgment gulf and was in the meetings? these people had said anything public. a lot of stories are coming out based on people who were in the room or had knowledge. we reported that during the first meeting, the meeting with kislyak, we believe michael flynn was there. we don't believe he was in the meeting with gorkov. charlie: have they acknowledged

that he was in the meeting? i don't know whether anyone has acknowledged it publicly. i don't know if the white house has said that publicly. that is our understanding, our reporting. i have seen that flynn was in the meeting with kislyak. tonel: i would point conversations i have had with the russians and other people watching this from afar late last year. it is important to look at the context. number one, and this, by the way, is independent of any possible collusion with the russians regarding the campaign. i am talking about the international context. particular lee -- particularly economic sanctions imposed on russia as a result of the invasion of crime area, the , andation ofparticular crimea

surrogates of ukraine. the sanctions have been renewed under the obama administration but became more difficult. a lot of people in europe, italy, germany, were against this. the trump administration looking for a reset of relations with putin, with russia. that these conversations, not talking to general flynn or the ambassador, but the russians were looking for a phased reduction in so for example, the first thing that everybody was looking for was an easing of financial sanctions on banks. i would be looking at that if i was trying to explain why mr. gorkov was involved in the back channel conversation with jared kushner. clearly, michael flynn

had conversations with the russian ambassador. sanctions,bout according to some of the reporting. correct? mark: that is correct. the broado look at in geopolitical context and what was happening during this month. we now know that, we certainly know that michael flynn had long-standing relations with russian officials from his time at the defense intelligence agency. he went to moscow in december 2015, and we know that the trump administration was certainly possibly amenable to easing sanctions. we know that at the end of december, flynn talked to kislyak and while he initially said that they didn't talk about anything, we now know that he, that they discussed sanctions and specifically the sanctions, the new sanctions that president obama imposed in late december

about the russian campaign to disrupt the election. this was in the conversation. it was in the mix. if, ind be surprising those conversations with kushner, kislyak, and gorkov, that they didn't come up. if i was mr. gorkov, i would've brought it up. we have to know more about what else was discussed. thelie: you have written fact that there were conversations in the early part of the trump administration about easing the sanctions against russia. mark: right. we wrote that today, that in the early days, there was a draft executive order about lifting sanctions that didn't go anywhere. it was certainly something that early onhe transition thought was something could be -- something that could be done as a way to possibly improve

relations between the united states and russia. it would be high on the agenda of the russians, and if the trump administration wanted to seek other things from the russians, maybe they saw that as a bargaining chip. charlie: is there any evidence so far that the trump administration, through jared kushner or michael flynn or anyone else, was trying to get the russians to help donald trump win the presidency? mark: there is no evidence i have seen. there is no evidence yet that i have seen reported of what we have sort of commonly called collusion, that we know that there were contacts last year, there was question about what those contacts were about. are several investigations going on, not only at the fbi but also on capitol hill, to the fundamental question, was there an effort to help the russians in the campaign to disrupt the

election? that is the heart of the matter. as of yet, we have not seen anything. think it is important to say that these sanctions are really hurting members of the russian elite and their children. they like to travel. they like to open bank accounts, move money around. lifting the sanctions, particularly financial sanctions, would have been looked at favorably by the russian elite. the question is -- charlie: and he would've been one of the people helped by that. lionel: what was mr. trump looking for in return? he surely wasn't offering some kind of blank check. charlie: was he looking for help during the election? lionel: i think the question is -- charlie: i don't mean disrupting the clinton people and all that. lionel: a lot of people think the way the relations deteriorated between russian --

between russia and united states during the obama administration triggered largely by the invasion of eastern ukraine and the annexation of crimea, things could only get better. but that is not what i think this was about. i think mr. trump has a again, we didn't have a long discussion about what mr. trump thought about vladimir putin, but he along with strategists feel there is a way of resetting relations with russia. russia is a very important geopolitical player. why not start again? what were they getting in return? what guarantees on future behavior, conduct? that is incredibly unclear. charlie: has there been any allegations that he has done something illegal, rather than simply being questionable, and secondly, against the precedent of previous administrations?

mark: there is not yet anything to suggest that there was anything illegal about these conversations, about having the meetings. in and of itself, setting up a secret channel, while it is unusual during a transition, is in and of itself not illegal. what would get you there would be, of course, the content of any conversations or anything leading up to that. the answer up to this point is no. charlie: the explanation as to why they would want to do this through the russians at the russian embassy, where they safe from would be surveillance by the united states was --? not confirming that report. that was a post report the other night. we have not confirmed that he ask, that it be

done in the russian facilities. we certainly would think that if this was some kind of effort at the back channel, they would find perhaps some way to do it, to have a conversation that they didn't think was perhaps being monitored. as to the detail, i am not sure. am not sure you feel about that, but we have here in america the washington post and the new york times, a healthy competition in washington to pursue the story without sense and losing.g different people have different stories and it is fascinating. i assume the readers of the beneficiaries of that. lionel: i am certainly reading. reading both papers. it is extraordinarily, isn't it? how the trump administration, the president himself, has a complete disdain for the establishment and the experts. department involved whatsoever.

it is striking. are an expert, spending a lot of time in washington. the president goes to saudi arabia, then he goes to rome, then he goes to brussels, then he goes, i'm not sure come i think that was the order, he goes to sicily, right? he goes to nato and g7. people look at saudi arabia and say that is more of a success than what happened afterwards. thatded up as a headline angela merkel says the united ,tates cannot be considered what is the word she used? a reliable ally, as we have thought about in the past. lionel: if you read the german and watch the tape, it is more nuanced. it is, to a group -- to a degree, this kind of language, but obviously, the thrust of the

message was clear. it came after a pretty bruising encounter, both on a bilateral meeting between the european leaders and the president, and the speech that the president gave at the new nato headquarters, where he lectured the europeans for not spending enough. he also gave the germans a very hard time about their trade surplus. charlie: did he say, bad germans? evill: the word can mean or bad. we will go for bad. he didn't say that to chancellor merkel, he said that to the head of the commission. this is undiplomatic language. the most important thing is this. actually, and i will maybe some of little odd here, charlie, so there with me. what president trump was saying was not so different from what a succession of senior officials

have said, both publicly and european, about deadbeats not coming up to the mark when it comes to spending what they have committed to do, which is 2% of gdp, for the nato budget, including the british. bob gates, five years ago when he was defense secretary, gave a big lecture and said, this alliance is over. tone andrence is, the the way it is delivered is verging on boorish. charlie: this had to do with the paris conference, as well. lionel: we don't know what president trump will do, but if he walks out and decides that america should walk out of the paris climate change accord, that would be a really serious bew, and i think it will bringing the europeans closer to china. china is signed up. america would be close, in this

particular area, to being a pariah, way outside international -- and i think it is striking, when you have companies like exxon, in the they were very skeptical about climate change. they are saying actually, they think america should remain part of the accord. i think this is a backdrop to chancellor merkel's comments, which are, we are right about america first, and europe may need to do sink -- do things more on their own. charlie: and he said he wouldn't commit himself to article five. lionel: the fact that he referred to 2001 when it was invoked, i think that is maybe, he wasn't being so strict. charlie: you seem to be saying the relationship between the united states and europe is moving into a very, very fragile place. lionel: indeed.

.hat is striking, watch this the center is holding in europe. atrybody thought with brexit president trump's victory, this would lead to further fragmentation in europe. n's win in theo french election and merkel's comments on sunday, i think you are seeing, in a paradoxical way, president trump is actually increasing unity in europe. you may well see, if mrs. merkel wins, further integration. charlie: your headline, who united europe? donald trump. thanks so much. we will be right back. stay with us. ♪

♪ charlie: tiger woods was found asleep on the wheel near his home in florida. the 14 time grand slam champion was arrested and charged with driving under the influence. in the officer's account, woods' mercedes was stopped with the brake light and blinker flashing. woods said he had a reaction to prescription medication and alcohol was not involved. woods' breathalyzer test for alcohol with -- was negative. a stunning fall for one of the world's greatest athletes.

at an interview at this table last fall, woods spoke about the effort to get his life back on track. >> i had to be honest with myself, and that is part of going through what i went through. i messed up. i shunned away a lot of things. i didn't communicate with, for instance, elin very well. i learned from it. on the flipside, fast-forward, i'm a better communicator now. i talk to people more. and on a deeper level. i learned a lot. charlie: editor-in-chief of golf world and a senior writer at golf digest, and one of the people who has interviewed tiger woods and knows him well. thank you for joining me. when you saw this picture and heard the news, what was your first reaction? reaction at seeing the picture was shock, because it was such a vivid, incredible sort of stereo typical mug shot of disaster, i guess.

frankly, in terms of the actual episode, i wasn't shocked. not that i expected something, but i felt for a while, and i think a lot of people have, intuitively, that tiger has been struggling and having a difficult life, especially since 2009. he hadn't quite dealt with it, butalthough as he talked about n his narrative, in his interview with you, there was some progress made, but you didn't get the sense that he was truly liberated from it and maybe something was still pent up and these kinds of things manifest. charlie: we all pay a montage -- to his remarkable talent and how distinctive he was. to see him unable to do it for all the reasons we speculate about, you don't want that to be , as i said when i interviewed him, everybody is vested in tiger coming back to be tiger.

it was such a thing to see. >> absolutely. there was excellence there. it is remarkable, how much people, although there is so much negative comment about tiger's life and mistakes, how much in the present, when people are at a golf tournament, they really root for him. there is something about, not just his excellence but there is that lost humanity they want to see come out. i think that is rooting for him as a person to grow and get past this thing. all the time, realizing how difficult it must be because of the position he is in. he is under scrutiny, at the top of the world. everybody is watching. thelways tried to hold image of being perfect. he was anything but. , and again i am speculating, but i think it is one that is still reverberating with him, and i think people just sense that and realize the

battle ahead is a tough one, and he needs our help, in a way. it is a nice collective feeling you get when you watch tiger play in terms of the galleries. i'm not sure if tiger appreciates how much support he has out there. i think he is still wondering, who is thinking what? will i ever get over this? will people ever forgive me? i think he is forgiven, it is a matter of him for giving himself. charlie: should anybody say, he has bottomed out? >> it has been said all over. i don't know. frankly, what has transpired as far as the police investigation on this and the police report, it was not alcohol and i think that would've been more stigmatizing, had it been. there in a dangerous situation. his car was damaged. he could've heard somebody obviously, but i think the public in general is more forgiving with prescription in theossibly being

wrong dosage, a mistake made somehow. i think he has a little leeway to if it had just been a strictly drunk driving thing with alcohol. that is a good thing in terms of him not being to if reviled, bui hope he doesn't feel he can put it aside and never deal with this as far as publicly talk about it, or, and i think his statement tends to say, i've got to do better. he is aware there is culpability here. he has to deal with going forward, getting his mind right so he can play golf again. charlie: you need a mission to overcome a handicap, to overcome an injury, to overcome competition. you really need to feel a sense of overwhelming obsession, and almost being a maniac about winning. >> he was a maniac about winning. he could be a maniac again in a very productive way in terms of his legacy, and any kind of

comeback now would be so memorable. we revere then hogan's memory because of the comeback. tiger could come back more spectacular, more memorable, more noble, almost. he is really overcoming himself more than just injuries. charlie: when i hear you say that, you are suggesting that tiger woods could have a comeback in which he comes to grips and changes himself in terms of whatever his vulnerabilities are. i happen to believe his vulnerabilities are directly tied to his physical health. and his physical health is inexorably tied to his ability to get back to the kind of golf player he wants to be. others believe strongly that it is in his head and all of this there ism whatever and in his head. i think it is a combination.

good news on the physical front, the back fusion was quite invasive and probably a last resort as far as fixing his back. he is not in pain. he is saying that, and we take him at his word, but at the same time, others who have had similar surgeries save the pain disappears. maybe some mobility is lost, but if pain was the big issue with his golf swing and that is gone, i think physically, he is in position to play good golf again. it falls back on the mental challenge as to what happens in the future. charlie: what is it that he did here that is so bad, if in fact, as he said, he took medications that had an impact that he didn't foresee? >> i think just embarrassment. no damage was really done. nobody got hurt, fortunately. else wasno one

involved. >> that we know of. it may be, worst-case scenario, it might show evidence of a drug dependency. that would certainly be a setback for him in terms of his public image and perhaps, but then again, it could end up being a good thing that it is out in the open. i don't mean to suggest i know anything about that, but that foggy state of mind he was in, obviously, if you read the police report. charlie: the police report, tell us what it said before we leave. >> tiger was asleep and he was off the side of the road. the blinker was on and the basicallywoke him up and asked him some questions, and his answers were disoriented . he failed a field sobriety test. he was just kind of out of it. the possibility with that

would've been her friend us had he kept driving. but it does show, if you made a mistake with the medications, he made a big mistake. that is an extreme condition he was in as far as being almost unconscious. charlie: if there is an addiction, it would be to prescription drugs, probably? >> perhaps. we don't know. i know that is difficult to suggest, but certainly, there was intoxication there and it wasn't from alcohol. the cause of it is still to be, i think, sort of determined in the future here. charlie: the interesting thing is, when he talked to me in the conversation of the table, he he said, look. i realize i can't do things physically that i used to do. what i have to do, and i haven't been able to do beyond the physical impairment he had, hopefully that has been corrected, i am not, i don't have the strength come i don't

have the athleticism i once did. therefore, what i have to do is figure out other ways to win. >> be more precise and repetitive, hit the ball more solid. ben hogan lost some speed, but power is not everything in golf. the narrative these days is power, and it helps, but knowing where the ball is going is what it's all about. tiger has always been great about getting the ball around the course. charlie: that is why people use the word sadness. you can go from sadness to somewhere much better. it is not over. thank you very much. it is a sad story, because somehow, we all admire someone who can do something better than anybody we have ever seen do it, and tiger at one point could do that, and he is still young. thank you, as always. >> thanks, charlie. charlie: back in a moment.

stay with us. laura is here, her film on edward snowden won the academy award for best documentary. her new film profiles julian assange. it follows him as he confronts allegations of sexual assault and overseas document dumps. the new york times describes the film as unfinished in a way that is fascinating, frustrating, and understandable. here is the trailer for "risk." >> can i speak to hillary clinton gekko -- hillary clinton? this is an emergency. >> this is, i thought i could ignore the contradictions. i thought they weren't part of

the story. i was wrong. they are becoming the story. >> it is known as a documentary filmmaker. border has become more aggressive. when i got home, my permanent -- my apartment door was open. are they sending me a message? can't believe it. >> [indiscernible] >> the fbi is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. we don't have a problem, you have a problem. charlie: i am pleased to have laura back at the table.

after all the success of the snowden film, did you immediately want to turn to assange as a subject? >> it was complicated. i had begun filming with julian in 2011, so i was filming with wikileaks in 2011 and 2012, than i was contacted by edward's note and 13. i thought it would be one film. there are overlapping teams. once i got in the editing room, i thought, there is no way that a story could have both. know what i would do, then i went back to the footage, because i think julian, i know he is a divisive, polarizing person, but there is no doubt that he is somebody who is kind of changing the landscape of journalism. charlie: in what way? inra: wikileaks was founded 2006. i think he understood, before a lot of people, how the internet

would change global politics, and how it would change journalism. both for better and for worse. when i started filming, it was logs came out and the collateral murder video. for me, as somebody who had been documenting post 9/11 america, i thought was in tort and information we needed to know -- important information we needed to know. seeing the bad manifestations of how the internet can be used to change global politics. i think julian is fascinating. he also understood that, for journalists, the job we do to protect sources, it is not enough to say "i am not going to testify congo because with the powers of surveillance we have, you need anonymous tools. you need to be able to provide a way to give security to sources. he did all these things, and he

created what is called an anonymous dropbox, a source can drop information without saying who they are. that is what they had been doing. now, almost every newsroom in the country has a similar dropbox. charlie: finish this sentence. at his best, he is -- at his worst, he is -- laura: at his best, he is brilliant. he is willing to take risks for what he believes in. , he can bet, he is the indicative, he can be vain. -- he can be vindictive, he can be vain, he can be of that of a trickster. in terms of his publishing, my questions are, his decisions not to redact certain types of information, for instance if we look at the dnc emails.

where he a position received newsworthy information and he claims he doesn't know who the sources. charlie: everybody believes it came from the russians. laura: what comey says in the hearing, where he told the public he was investigating possible connections between trump and the russians, what he says is that the russian government used an intermediary, what they called a cut out, to do the leak. for instance, you could receive a manila envelope tomorrow with trump's tax returns. it is newsworthy. you verify it. that is what they did. there is often a double standard. charlie: does he verify? laura: of course he does. he has never released anything that was proven to be false. he has, which i had criticized him for, is not redacting

personal information that is not newsworthy, in the case of the dnc. he published everything and not everything was newsworthy. the new york times made the same argument, that if a journalist has information that will inform the public and they can verify it is true, you should publish it, which also doesn't negate the fact that we need to look really closely at what happened in this election. , a statevernment says actor being the one that did the hack, deciding who to release two, i am disturbed by that. charlie: this is julian assange discussing the rape allegations against him with his lawyers. laura: i want to clarify the setup. he is not talking about the allegations, he is talking about the political context. you getting your

mind into not using language that sounds hostile to women, or to suggest that in general, women are absolutely [indiscernible] i am not one is, of them. you have to frame the language that helps you to explain that. if you are somebody who thinks that this is all a mad conspiracy, i don't [indiscernible] >> not to say it publicly. , it is a social democratic party general [indiscernible] it is a thoroughly tawdry, radical feminist political positioning thing. it is some stereotype.

>> you stumbled into this mess. >> yes. she started [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] >> she is in that circle of -- >> the fact that somebody is a feminist, even a radical feminist [indiscernible] >> [indiscernible] is a tag team. >> don't use that language, they were running up a tag team. what do you make of that? laura: you asked me earlier his good and bad sides. maintained hisly innocence of these charges. there have been no charges filed. yet, i find some of the descriptions of the allegations

and describing feminist political positioning, to me, that is disturbing. of, it thinks this kind is a conspiracy. i think that is disturbing, but those are more attitudes, and that is one of the things the film touches on, are the questions around sexism and what you hear there, which is disturbing language to describe the women in the case. at the same time, it is important to note that he maintains his innocence. charlie: do you see him as a hero? i wouldn't describe him as a hero. but i do believe he has contributed, that the journalism wikileaks has done has been very important. they revealed important things about some of for instance, the wars in iraq and afghanistan. i made a film about the war in iraq and when they came forward

with the collateral murder video, this is something the public needs to see. that is valuable journalism. at the same time, i disagree with the choice is not to redact -- the choices not to redact and some of the choices they make, which quite frankly, when i was andacted by edward snowden julian asked if i would publish with wikileaks, i said no. we disagree on some of these choices. madeie: over the time he the film, did you change your opinion of julian assange? laura: yes, i changed my opinion. i began filming in 2011 and i had a feeling of optimism and maybe we would have more aggressive journalism, which i think we need. i thought that the arab spring was something that was democratizing, that was spreading. fast-forward to today. ofare seeing a really sort

come i think, a tragic moment, both in terms of our political reality and what is happening -- charlie: did you change your opinion of him? laura: yes. over the course of the filming. charlie: from what to what? laura: we had a number of conflicts. i am not speaking to him. charlie: why are you not speaking? laura: he wanted me to not include things like the scene you showed. i wouldn't remove it, and he , he feels my film threatens him, which i disagree with. we are not on the best of terms right now. but i say that, and i also want to say i defend their work. their work and their right to publish, and i am concerned about the targeting we are seeing right now in the government, because i have been

on a watchlist myself. i have been on the receiving end of those kinds of government targeting. theeally, it is a threat to first amendment, to all journalism. charlie: the film is called "risk." it will air on showtime later the sun -- later this summer. back in a moment. stay with us. ♪

♪ charlie: john wood is here, the founder whichom to read," promotes literacy in developing countries. he started the nonprofit in 2000 after leaving a lucrative job at microsoft. room to read reaches 11 million students and opened one of its many libraries this year. welcome. >> thank you. charlie: tell me what this accomplishes. does it give people who would not have an opportunity to learn to read, the opportunity? oft is the key to the rest your life. >> it is. so many kids are born under the system of the lottery of life. you are born in a low income country to uneducated parents. world change starts by educating children. if you want to change things over 20 or 30 years, there is no

better place to start than with five-year-olds and six-year-olds, get them literate. charlie: what does room to read do and how does it do it? john: we intervene at two different points in low income countries. we try to get kids literate at a young age, in grades 1-3. over 100 million kids today are not enrolled in school. 700 million people are illiterate in the world, two thirds of girls and women. we intervene early with literacy. for girls' education, we try to work with communities were girls are at risk of dropping out of school and not making the transition from primary to secondary school. we try to make sure girls can school through secondary to make key life decisions. charlie: what are you doing with syrian refugees? john: we are working in jordan to help syrian refugee families and refugee families from other parts of the world, like iraq, because jordan has welcomed in

so many refugees, the education system is strange. many communities are teaching two shifts, a jordanian shift in the morning, and refugee shift in the afternoon. we are bringing local language publishing programs into jordan, working with jordanian authors and artists, syrian authors and artists, to produce arabic language readers so kids will have something positive in their life. our goal is to produce over half a million children's books to help kids in jordan. there was a program called let girls learn initiative. what did that do? john: that is in line with what room to read is doing, finding ways that girls in low income countries can be the first in their family to finish secondary school. many times, girls are forced out of school by economic circumstances. many times, they are convinced

to go get married early. they will have children early. we are partners with let girls learn, and we work to make sure these girls are the first in their family to finish secondary school and go on to bigger things. the girls who finished our program have gone on to university, tertiary, full-time employment. it sets the girls on the path where they will be chair -- changemakers. a couple generations ago, many women in the developed world for the first in their family to finish secondary school. , herwoman gets educated wages increased by 15-20 percent. if she gets five extra years of education, her eventual wages will double. educated women have fewer children, healthier families. most importantly, when women in low income countries earn a marginal dollar, they spend it on food, shelter, clothing, education for their children. when men earn a marginal dollar,

no offense to men, we are not as enlightened as to how we spend it. if women are educated, that is a springboard to societal change. charlie: there is a comparison with room to read. you believe it is the biggest education movement around? john: we do, humbly. there is a long way to go, but when our founding team came together, we looked at carnegie. 2500 libraries across the u.s. and great britain, considered one of the most long-term successful philanthropic investments in human history. we said why can't somebody do that for the developing world? thankfully for us, 20,000 communities benefit from our literacy program. we have a long way to go, but 770 70 million people -- billion people in the world are

illiterate. with an investment, we can bring a library and literacy program and impact hundreds of kids. inas a microsoft executive 1990 eight, running marketing in the asia-pacific. i went to nepal, and a headmaster showed me his school. it was like many schools in low income countries, both hopeful but pathetic and sad because they didn't have books or enough desks or spots for students. i asked a headmaster, i said, you have 400 students but no books. he said, we are too poor to affordand it -- education. my thought was, this can't be a hard problem to solve. i have to do something. the headmaster liked me, and was an optimist. he said, perhaps he will come perhaps, youks -- will come back with books. charlie: that was a stimulus with what you were doing. john: i went back a year later. my father was my right hand man.

we sat there and talked about it. the kids had never seen brightly colored children's books. these kids were stage diving onto the books, they were so excited. my father said, you should be proud you have helped a lot of kids. i said, one library is not enough. 100 won't be enough. that is my have the point of saying, if i stay at microsoft, this will be a hobby. the only way to scale is to go full-time. so i jumped out of the microsoft airplane and prayed my parachute would deploy. literacy is a huge issue in low income countries. 98% of illiterate people live in low income countries. they are to -- to poor to afford it but unless you can afford it, you will remain poor. if you have to have -- if you have to build a tall building, you need a deep foundation. we are proud to have worked in

20,000 communities. 11.5 million children accessing our libraries and programs. baseline where education starts. they get literate and become readers and get into the habit of reading. my hope is that millions of kids in low income countries will become readers from a young age. that is important because that is really a hand up, not a handout. read,e: if you can because of the internet, your access to things to read in this age is so much greater than it was when i was growing up. i depended on books coming from a bookmobile, from a library in the town next-door. now, you just go to the computer and you can access all kinds of things that are learning tools. charlie: i grew up in a -- john: i grew up in a small town in pennsylvania. our library launched me on the way to being who i am.

charlie: the library and befriended me became a heroine to me. john: we were only allowed to check out five books per week. i convinced her that it was a low limit. i got to check out extra books. coming from a tech background, what i try to convince my friends is, if children are illiterate, giving them technology is putting the cart for the horse. silicon valley shouldn't forget that with nearly 800 million peopleilliterate, giving them technology is putting the illitd solutions. let's not just throw technology at the developing world. , give themsure kids that baseline level of literacy so they can take full advantage of technology. without literacy, they won't be able to that. charlie: in 2020, that will be your 20th anniversary. millionshope to reach

of students. we have a program that is really, we get requests from governments around the role to say, when can you come in? from rwanda to indonesia, we are getting requests. tohave an -- we going countries -- we go into countries and train people to take our models of local language publishing and research monitoring and evaluation, which the gates foundation has underwritten. accelerator, we can potentially reach millions more additional children on top of what we are reaching for direct programs. charlie: people want to know more about what you do. they can go to your website? john: yes. .org. read charlie: thanks for joining us. we will see you next time. ♪

♪ betty: asia-pacific markets faith a mixed start after banks drag down wall street. treasuries and gold rose one dollar, oil dropping again. yvonne: president trump and climate change, biggest names in business say the u.s. will lose if he abandons paris. betty: germany pivots to asia, strengthen east-west ties and trade. yvonne: apple raises its voice to take on google and amazon.