this is "gps, the global public square." welcome to all of you around the world, i'm fareed zakaria. we'll begin today's show with saudi arabia and justice. the house and senate voted overwhelmingly this week to override a presidential veto. >> the bill on consideration is passed. >> now, 9/11 victim families can sue. does it set a dangerous precedent as president obama claimed. >> can you find a foreign political leader who's all in for donald trump? we did. >> the uk's nigel fahrad. he won the brexit campaign and believes the same forces will

propel trump to the presidency. you'll hear him explain. then, if trump does not win, america will have its first female president. what may hillary clinton expect in that role. you will hear from the female prime minister. finally a farewell to a great statesman, we'll bring you some "gps" moments with shimon peres. >> this is an unexpected compliment. but first, here's my take. most people would agree that donald trump is a strange standard bearer for republicans. he disavows most of its icons. after five previous republican nominees for president, three

will publicly affirm that they would vote for him. i would bet john mccain would not when it gets to the polling booth. yet, amazingly, trump has received about the same level of support of republicans as previous nominees. whether republicans prove to be rational or trin tribal. i'll explain. the last time so many republican leaders defected was in 1964 and pa landslide.er was wiped out in the difference today is the person does not matter, the party does. for months now, many conservative intellectuals have hoped that trump was neither republican nor qualified. it has, on several occasions, most recently, at monday's debate. public opinion polls showed that hillary clinton won by a huge margin.

but when republican and republican-leaning likely voters were asked in an nbc news poll whether the debate had improved their opinion of clinton, 4% said yes. when the same group was asked whether it had worsened their impression of trump, just 6% agreed. these dynamics have reminded me of jonathan's book "the righteous mind." haidt says it's not the careful, analytic reasoning and springs from moral intuition, instinct and tribal affiliation with people we believe share those instincts. we use reason, facts and analysis simply to affirm, to justify our gut decisions. now, if you think this is only true of other people and not you, consider the example of peter teal, a billionaire entrepreneur investor who could founded paypal and funded facebook. he's extremely intelligent,

well-read with mostly libertarian views and strongly supports trump for a truly bizarre reason. he asserts that trump's most significant statement during this campaign revealing his world view was praising the scottish and canadian health care systems. one a nationalized system and the other a single-payer system. he says this is thinking doing ma about government. another interpretation would be that it was a stray comment thrown off the top of his head signifying nothing. most important, after the off-hand reference, trump backed down from his reform of government health care and cited republican orthodoxy.

he has promised to appoint highly socially conservative justices to the supreme court because he's convinced that trump is actually a closet admirer of britain's nationalized health care system. i cannot think of a better example of haidt's thesis that we come to a decision first and reason our way to it afterwards. paul ryan has managed similar acrobatics. the wall, mass deportation, end birthright citizenship, total opposition to the transpacific partnership, he has condemned them and yet says trump is his man. the truth to look for is whether trump is losing support among republicans. that would indicate that

politics is turning into something that's about more than tribal loyalty to a sports team. after all, democracy depends on the ability to look at evidence and argument to use reason and judgment and take seriously our roles as a great republic. for more, go to cnn.com/fareed and read my washington post column this week. and let's get started. ♪ president obama has been in office for 2,812 days n that time, he has vetoed exactly 12 bills. this he can would, congress voted overwhelmingly to overwrite a veto for the first time in his presidency. the law allows the family members of 9/11 victims to sue saudi arabia. the white house called the override the single most embarrassing thing the senate has possibly done in more than

30 years. in return, congress wondered why the administration would stop victims from seeking justice. let me bring in cnn's jeff toobin and the former cia director michael hayden to give us some much needed context here. jeff, let me ask you, what exactly does this law do and how unprecedented is it? >> well, the law is designed very specifically so that the 9/11 family members, victims of the terror attack can sue saudi arabia and at least initially begin a lawsuit alleging involvingme alleging involvement by the government. there are strings likely that will limit the ability of these families ever to recover any money but it is a breach in the wall that has traditionally

forbidden individuals in one country from suing governments in -- of other countries, the concept known as sovereign immunity, an important principle of international law. this is a breach in that tradition and that's why the obama administration is so concerned about it. >> general, what is your sense of the foreign policy impact of something like this? >> well, one thing, fareed, i mean, the saudis could respond, even retail retailiate. it would be just as harmful to the kingdom as to the united states. as jeffrey pointed out, the country on this planet that has most to lose with that principle being eroded is the united states. in fact, people in my old

agency, in the armed forces, who are about the world doing things, i think broad appropriately that doing things that are controversial and things that other nations object to. and now you've put the world on a path in which the traditional protection, sovereign immunity, for those kinds of actions has begun to be eroded. >> jeff, how would a retaliation like that work? you can imagine some iraqi group saying that the united states has been funding, supporting what they regard as terrorists. you know, some group that they are like, maybe the shared government, the kurdish militias and they would try to attach american assets to it. is that kind of thing possible? >> well, that's the worry that the obama administration has put forward. there are many obstacles to any of these lawsuits around the

world but that's the worry, that someone in pakistan will say that the drone strikes are a violation of pakistani law so we are going to sue the united states government and attach their assets. i mean, this has also happened before. i mean, the -- there was cia activity in italy which led to lawsuits against the united states those cases have largely petered out under the doctrine of sovereign immunity but the risk that the united states sees is that because we are active in so many countries, we are the biggest beneficiary of sovereign immunity and we don't want to see it eroded. >> mike, let's just talk for a minute about the issue of saudi government complicity. this is a very complicated issue, isn't it? because the saudi government has

funded doctrines and ideologies that have fueled the groups like al qaeda. but talk about whether the saudi government has specifically assisted, for example, al qaeda. >> far fareed, number one, i would agree that the kingdom made a deal with the devil back in 1979 after the occupation of the grand mosque and they simply said there was going to be no one to our religious right within saudi society and saudi culture. and i think that's led to very dark places for broad saudi foreign and domestic policy. but on this very specific and narrow case, fareed, very good people from multiple points of view have looked at all of the available data and concluded that there is no case that the saudi government or senior saudi officials were involved in any way in 9/11. >> jeff, the --

>> yes. >> well, if i can just add politically what i think is so interesting and significant about this bill is that we live in a time of tremendous political polarization. but democrats and republicans are united on this issue against the obama administration and i think it reveals a deep american distrust of saudi arabia and it's not just that 15 of the 19 hijackers were saudi nationals. it goes to the way that they treat women, what saudi arabia is doing to violate human rights in yemen. this is not an ally that many americans feel comfortable with and that's the real subtext to why congress acted the way it did. >> gentlemen, thank you very much. very informative. next on "gps," many foreign leaders wonder how donald trump has made it this far in the

presidential race, even though many of them won't say it publicly. i wanted to talk to one political leader abroad who is a big trump supporter. we'll hear from nigel farrad when we come back. with heart failure. but today there's entresto®- a breakthrough medicine that can help make more tomorrows possible. tomorrow, i want to see teddy bait his first hook. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto® was proven to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto®. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto® with an ace inhibitor or or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto®. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood.

tomorrow, i'm gonna step out with my favorite girl. ask your heart doctor about entresto®. and help make the gift of tomorrow possible.

100 days ago, britain voted to leave the european union to the astonishment of most people and pollsters. my next guest, nigel farage, was successful in that campaign. nigel farage, pleasure to have you on the show. >> thank you. >> now, donald trump is quite unpopular in britain.

the polls i've seen really -- most people really don't like him. what do you see in him that so many of your countrymen don't? >> well, it's a fair point to say that hillary is not too popular in the uk either. so we've got this election in which the british public think, goodness me, is the best america can do? that's the general view. i think that trump is being portrayed in the british press as being misogynistic. i would just say this to you. we are exactly 100 days on from the big brexit vote that happened here in the united kingdom. and the reason brexit happened was a very large number of people who had not voted in previous elections or, in some cases, had never voted in their lives, went out to vote against the establishment. and i think the appeal that

trump has got in america is to say, look, we've had this strangle-hold for the last couple of decades of big banks, big businesses and big politics who may have done well for themselves but they haven't bettered your lives and that, i think, is the appeal of trump. >> and so every time another prominent newspaper comes out against him, another prominent republican defects, you think it almost feeds the energy that surrounds his campaign because it's fundamentally an anti-elitist populist appeal? >> very much so. and again, the crossover is the parallels with the brexit. as the date of the referendum got closer, there were respected establishment figures lining up to tell us this would be the biggest mistake we had ever made in our lives, the economy would fall off a cliff, it would all be a disaster and people, frankly, looked at that and laughed. i think what people are seeing is an establishment that is too

cozy, is too close. >> do you think that there are sort of hidden trump voters in quite the same way -- in brexit, the polling suggested that the main side, the people who wanted -- in fact, on the eve of the counting, you seem to almost concede because you were reading all of the same opinion polls we were. and yet it won. do you think you could imagine a similar trump surprise? >> i think there were two phenomenons here. i think the first is that on telephone polls, particularly, people are nervous to come across as being too conservative, too socially conservative. so, you know, we've seen in the last few years in britain opinion polls getting it wrong because people aren't quite telling the truth on the telephone. but there's another phenomenon here and, frankly, the polling industry in europe it's almost

bankrupt in terms of its reputation. what i'm talking about is the polling companies find it really hard to find people who are outside of politics and are now coming in to politics. and that's why the opinion polls over brexit were wrong, although i do admit i suffered myself from a bout of 11th hour nerves. >> trump is different from the brexit phenomenon, it seems to me. a lot of people who argued for brexit, yourself included, said we are not right-wing populists. in that same category, we are pro free trade. we like the diversity of life. we welcome interdependence and globalization, we just don't want brussels telling us what to do. and yet the appeal of trump seems to me to be about his

views on immigration, he's very tough on crime, promises to appoint justices like antonin scalia who were very socially conservative. so how do you -- i guess my question is, how are you so comfortable with someone who really, by most of it is policies, is a conventional right-wing populist of the kind that the brexit has told us that they were not? >> well, you're quite right. brexit was actually a very broad church and fundamentally it was about self-government and democracy. you're absolutely right. this american election is a much clearer right/left choice than the referendum was. i would say this. that hillary clinton for me represents the kind of politics that has led us over the last 20 years into an endless series of walls where frankly we've made things worse, not better. and clinton politics is about big business and it's about the rich getting richer.

and i think that trump is part of a phenomenon that is now beginning to sweep the western world simply people won't change and i think on november the 8th, that's what this comes down to. do you want continuity with clinton, things to stay as they are or do you want change? >> you have 30 seconds to give me or to give donald trump advice. you are going to be his guest at the second presidential debate. how can he improve on his performance? >> don't let her get under your skin. whatever abuse she throws at you, ignore her. don't defend yourself. there's no point. there isn't time. what you've got to do, donald, is talk to people sitting at home in their living rooms. don't get involved in a catfight with hillary. >> nigel farage, pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much. next on "gps," this half of the globe has had its fair share of warfare.

but this half now has none. the story behind that amazing statistic when we come back. [quack!] medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so think about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like any standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, they help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide and learn more.

...ad, and my sweethearts handsome,gone sayonara.rance... this scarf, all that's left to remember. what! she washed this like a month ago! how's a guy supposed to move on! the long lasting scent of gain flings.

now for what's what in the world is going on. sudan of worry but those conflicts and more are all on one side of the map. turn the globe and you'll see something amazing. an entire hemisphere armed of conflict. and the last piece of that puzzle was filled in a few days ago. this week, the colombian government signed an historic peace deal with the marxist guerrilla group. with the stroke of a pen, symbolically made out of a recycled bullet more than half a century of fighting between these two groups was ended. the colombian people are expected to end the conflict

which has left some 220,000 people dead and displaced 5 million more. it is, in short, a remarkable achievement if it sticks and even more remarkable is it marks that accomplishment, peace in half the world. now, there are still rebel groups and drug-related violence but 30 years ago, civil wars and insurgencies raged across latin america, from colombia to peru, guatemala to el salvador. an op-ed in "the new york times" noted that, quote, the world's wars are now concentrated almost exclusively in a zone stretching from nigeria to an area containing a sixth of the world's population. far from being a world at war, we inhabit a world where five

out of the six people live in entirely free of armed conflict, end quote. that is an anomaly towards less violence. the conflict shows that there's been a spike in war debts in recent years, though the numbers declined in 2015. but this uptick is due to the syrian civil war, the larger trend is that armed conflict has inclined by 40% since the cold war ended. let's even look at terrorism. the global terrorism database shows that in 2015, there were 12% fewer terrorist attacks than in 2014. 2015 was a horrible world for the western world and one attack is one too many. but western europe, for example, experienced more terror attacks between 1970 and 1994, as quartz

has charted. so it turns out that one of our biggest problems may be one of perception, not reality, particularly amongst americans. for instance, 48% of americans worry a great deal about a possible terrorist attack, according to gallup. the threats are real and they warrant attention. but harvard points to one of bill clinton's famous tag lines. the former president is known to say, "follow the trend lines, not the headlines." next on "gps" -- >> secretary clinton -- is that okay? i want you to be happy. that's very important to me. >> what will hillary clinton face if she were to be the first elected female president of the united states? i'll ask the female president of australia about her experience. it's an eye-opener, that's for certain. you're here to buy a car.

what would help is simply being able to recognize a fair price. that's never really been possible. but along comes a radically new way to buy a car, called truecar. now it is. truecar has pricing data on every make and model, so all you have to do is search for the car you want, there it is. now you're an expert in less than a minute. this is how car buying was always meant to be. this is truecar. ♪

i will not be lectured about sexism and misogyny by these men. not now, not ever. >> that was julia gillard, the speech was made in that nation's parliament and the target was the leader of the opposition, tony abbott. this was perhaps the most public rejoineder ever. >> sexism every day from this leader of the opposition, every day in every way across the time the labor of the opposition has sat in that chair and i've sat in this chair. that is all we have heard from him. >> since resigning as prime minister in 2013, the speaker you just heard, julia gillard,

has been speaking up about sexism in politics. and she tells us how she sees hillary clinton being treated in the presidential campaign. julia gillard, pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much. >> you've always been interested in these issues but they came to a head in a very now famous moment in your prime minesterial career and you you seem to speak of sexism with a great deal of emotion and that's why i think the clip went viral the way it did. was there years of pent-up struggle that came through in that moment? >> yes, i think there was. when i first came prime minister, i thought, you know, it's so obvious that i'm the first woman that i didn't have to walk around saying, did i tell you i'm the first woman? i didn't do that. of course, the fact that i was the first woman was very well-noted. and when i first encountered

some gender treatment as prime minister, i ignored it. i thought, what's going to happen here is everybody will carry on about me being the first woman from positive and negative perspectives early in my prime ministership. the maximum, you know, sexist, are we ready for this will be there in the early days and then work its way out of the system and i'll get treated the way everyone else has been treated. what i actually found is the longer i was prime minister and like most governments, the longer you are there, you deal with controversial issues, lose political skin, the chain didn't start to increase. it became the go-to weapon, the gender insult. so it did get to the stage on that day when i gave what has come to be known as the misogyny

speech. that's when i said enough is enough. it's come to mean for many women, you know, an emblem of what they which they had said in a moment when there was sexism in their life but they either deliberately walked away or took it on the chin or didn't quite know what to say at that moment and woke up at 3:00 in the morning and said i wished i had said. it's come to represent that moment. >> watching this campaign in the united states, do you think hillary clinton is being held to a different standard? >> oh, absolutely. absolutely. i think a different standard in all senses, the nature of the insults against her in what has been a very ferocious campaign, lagging any form of politeness are very often gendered insults. the scrutiny on age questions, i think, has played out differently for her. i think people do see women come

to a different set of conclusions than men aging. i think that there has been this question for her of likability. one of the key issues the campaign wanted to deal with was the widely held perception that hillary clinton isn't likable. i know hillary clinton. she's incredibly likable. and i actually think people have come to that conclude partly through the prism of general derks partly because of these unconscious bias that a woman who is right up there but be a pretty tough sword. so i think that there's lots of levels, a different set of tests being run over hillary clinton than over mr. trump or at an earlier stage of the contest, the other potential candidates. >> you have spent a lot of time in your post prime ministership period focusing on women's education, girls' education. you really still feel there is significant inequalities and

pointed out in a political article that even though you have angel merkel, janet yellen, it's still remarkable of how underrepresented women are in the corridors of power. >> absolutely. when we look around our world today, we can basically number on the fingers of our hands how many senior women leaders we've got. so that's nowhere near sufficient. obviously here in the u.s. we might well see a breakthrough with the election of president clinton. but if we're going to truly have an equal world, we want to be able to look around countries and say that they are led by men and women in roughly equal numbers. to get there, we've got to increase the number of women who are coming in to politics, serving in parliament, serving in positions like secretary of state or treasury or any of the very senior positions and to get there, of course, we've got to

do things in our societies and around the world that give girls an equal chance to boys. when i speak publicly on gender, i joke about, you know, how i got a great quality education but still they teach the girls laundry and sewing but my education was a great one. around the world, we see tens and millions girls that don't get to go to school at all or for a limited amount of years or their education is of much poorer quality. if we've got to have women coming through right around the world to be considered for leadership. >> julia gillard, pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much. up next, climate change, nuclear tests, bikinis and the united nations. we will talk about them all in a moment.

eight months ago, my next guest had what must have been the triumph of her life. hilda was elected president of the martial islands but then had to face reality. the five islands that make up her nation may not have much of a future, not if climate change continues. sea rise is slowly washing away what remains of her territory and what does remain is frequently flooded or rubble by drought. the volatility caused by climate change. it's said that if temperatures rise just 1.5 degrees celsius or under 3 degrees fahrenheit, her nation could sink. so what is to be done?

pleasure for having you on. >> pleasure for having me on your show. >> you might have seen some of the projections. what are the scenarios that you worry about if this climate change problem doesn't get ameliorated? >> well, there are people who say we might be under water in 20 to 60 years. we don't like to think that that will happen, of course. we want to make sure that our country, our nation, our culture remain, you know, for future generations to enjoy and to appreciate. so we're doing whatever we can in our power to look for solutions. >> so what can you do? you're a small country, 72,000 people, let's be honest, you don't have the kind of economic military power that would cause people to pay attention to you. what do you do? >> well, i would like to think

that we have power and come to the world using our moral voice. i don't think the international community would want, you know, cultures and nations like the marshallese people to be wiped off the face of the world. so i think we had hopes, we have hopes that there will be solutions and that we can live through this. >> there's another aspect to the marshall islands that have always fascinated me. you are part of the place where atom bombs were tested. the >> what are the issues that persist from those tests? >> yeah, unfortunately that's

been an unfortunate legacy, nuclear legacy for the people. 67 atomic and nuclear, thermonuclear bombs were detonated between 1946 and 1956, over a 10-year period. loss of land, of course, some islands were designated and are no longer there. people were dislocated or relocated from their lands because the areas that the program was conducted became radiated and con tam natured. on top of that, health issues. we have one of the highest rates of cancers in the world. all kinds of cancers. so what we're seeking from the u.s. is justice for the people

who are relocated for the health of the people. we don't feel that justice has been accomplished and so we continue to seek that. >> is the united states been responsive? >> well, under their -- treaty agreement, they think they settled all of the issues, which you know, in our opinion justice has not been accomplished so we continue to search and look for ways to gain that justice for our people. >> if the sea levels keep rising, you have an escape strategy in a sense because your treaty with the united states allows the marshallese people to come sean live in the united states. you already have what is it, 10,000 people living in arkansas and california. can you imagine a situation where the whole country just ups and leaves and comes to america? >> well, i don't want to think about that scenario.

i'm one of the firm believer that we will remain there because in the absence of living in the marshall islands in the current location we have, we cannot really have a marshallese culture and way of being in a different land. the land is very much connected to our culture and to us as a people. so for us it's very important that we remain there. >> pleasure to have you on. >> thank you very much for this opportunity. >> next on "gps", a look back at the life and humanity and humor of the giant who the world lost this week, shimon peres, prime minister and pizza delivery man. ♪

tomorrow's the day we'll play something besides video games. every day is a gift especially for people with heart failure. but today there's entresto®- a breakthrough medicine that can help make more tomorrows possible. tomorrow, i want to see teddy bait his first hook. in the largest heart failure study ever, entresto® was proven to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant

must not take entresto®. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto® with an ace inhibitor or or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto®. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. tomorrow, i'm gonna step out with my favorite girl. ask your heart doctor about entresto®. and help make the gift of tomorrow possible.

this week president obama nominated the first u.s. ambassador to cuba in more than half a century. after reestablishing diplomatic relations with cuba last year, the u.s. now lacks diplomatic relations with just three countries, they are north korea and iran and what?

is it syria, somalia, lesotho or bhutan. this week's book of the week is his final battle. the last months of franklin roosevelt. with all of the conversation about presidential candidates and their health, this timely book is a fascinating reminder of the extraordinary secrecy surrounding fdr's health, especially in his last year and a half in office. the gripping story of a man at the peak of his power, literally running the world but who's heart was steadily collapsing. you know how it ends but because of the intelligence and empathy of the author and very good writing, you won't be able to put this book down. now for the last look. this week we loflt a giant off the world stage, one of the founding fathers of israel,

shimon peres, a foreign minister, defense minister, three-time prime minister and president. what always struck me about him was his intense intellectual curiosity. the last time i saw him at 92, he was discoursing on the latest advances in neuroscience and how exciting they were. i had the privilege of sitting down with peres on more than one occasion for this program. during our final conversation i asked him about an amusing video he had made looking at possibilities for his retirement. pizza delivery man, comedian. and even sky diving instructor. >> a very good pizza delivery person, i have to tell you. that part i thought you particularly showed skill. >> this is an unexpected compliment. >> i admired him for never for getting the state of israel had

in its creation, a moral meaning, a calling for those that believed in democracy and especially for the jewish people. listen to him on the importance of the two state solution. >> we the jewish people will not -- to govern other people. it stands against everything that we stand for. for me it's a moral test, we think the better the palestinians have it, the better for us. >> it's a cliche but in this case it's true. he's the last of a kind. the correct answer to the gps challenge question is d, the united states has no diplomatic relations with bhutan? why doesn't the united states have relations with a country called the happiest nation on earth? it is bhutan's choice, the kingdom chooses to have no relations with any of the five permanent members of the u.n. security council. the government has embassies in

just five cities around the world. bangkok, brussels and dhaka and kuwait and new delhi. thanks for being part of my program this week. i'll see you next week. >> thank you so much for joining me. we're just two days into the month and we already have what could be the first october surprise of the presidential campaign. the "new york times" saying it received some of donald trump decades old tax documents in the mail. cnn has not been able to independently corroborate the document's authenticity but here are the takeaways from the "new york times" report. trump declared a nearly 1 billion loss in 1995. tax experts say that kind of loss could allow him to